Comparison of Mechanical and Electrochemical Properties

of High-Pressure Cold Spray and High-Velocity Air Fuel

Depositions
Arbegast Materials Processing and Joining (AMP) Laboratory
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
Michael Carter
Research Scientist II
Arbegast Materials Processing and Joining (AMP) Laboratory

Grant Crawford, PhD

Director, Arbegast Materials Processing and Joining (AMP) Laboratory
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology

Barat Jasthi, PhD

Department of Materials and Metallurgical Engineering
South Dakota School of Mines and Technology

CSAT 2019
Odeum Convention Center, Worcester, MA
June 26, 2019

1
AMP Lab - SD Mines
 Introduction
• Why compare HVAF and Cold Spray?
• HVAF, like high-pressure cold spray, uses super-sonic particle
velocities and solid-state processing to produce coatings with
no theoretical build thickness limitations.

Advantages Disadvantages
• Renewable fuel source • Substrate limitations (material and
– Compressed Air thickness)
• propane
• propylene • Requires extra path planning
• natural gas • Oxidation
• propane-butane
• MAPP gas
• Higher gas temperature
– 1900oC vs 1100oC
• Higher deposition rate
– 33kg/hr processing capabilities
without decrease to properties

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Objective
• Investigate the additive manufacturing capabilities of
HVAF.
• Compare mechanical and electrochemical properties
of HVAF and high-pressure cold spray.
• Investigate the possibility of using similar predictive
modeling from cold spray to improve HVAF
properties.

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Experimental Procedure
• Deposit coatings using optimized parameters with
HVAF and cold spray using the same materials (Cp-Al
and 410L/CrC blend).
• High-pressure cold spray samples were deposited at
SDSMT using VRC Gen III Cold Spray System and
HVAF samples provided by Kermetico.
• Model resulting spray parameters based upon the
Bonding Mechanism and Criterion critical velocity
model1 for cold spray and the resulting η values.
• Evaluate Coatings
Ø Microstructure
Ø Hardness
Ø Adhesion
Ø Coating Tensile Strength
Ø Abrasion Resistance
Ø Corrosion Resistance

1) Assadi H, Gartner F, Stoltenhoff T, Kreye H, Acta Materialia, 4

Volume 51, Issue 15, 3 September 2003, Pages 4379-4394 AMP Lab - SD Mines
 Deposition Parameters
Cp Al Deposition Parameters
Parameter Cold Spray- Cold Spray- HVAF
Nitrogen Helium
Gas 380oC 350oC 500oC
Temperature
Particle Velocity 660 m/s 1000 m/s 900 m/s
η value 1.2 1.5 1.4
*Note: Due to feeding issues, particle size was different for AL HVAF Spray (-100 mesh)

410L/CrC Blend Deposition Parameters

Parameter Cold Spray- Cold Spray- HVAF
Nitrogen Helium
Gas 600oC 500oC 900oC
Temperature
Particle Velocity 680 m/s 950 m/s 900 m/s
η value 1.2 1.4 1.4

AMP Lab - SD Mines

Optical Metallography Cp Al Nitrogen

• Each technique resulted in

coatings with low porosity.
• All coatings demonstrate the
traditional “splat”
microstructure.
200µm

HVAF Helium

200µm
AMP Lab - SD Mines
Metallography 410L/CrC Nitrogen

• SEM BSE used to increase contrast

between matrix and ceramic
particles within coating.
• Each technique resulted in coatings
with low porosity.
• Each technique has resulted in a
coatings with the carbides well
dispersed throughout the matrix. 20µ

HVAF Helium

20µ 20µ

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Porosity and Coating Composition
1.8
• Porosity measurements were
1.6
1.4
performed in accordance to MIL 3021.
1.2 • All coatings exhibit low porosity (<2%).
Porosity %

1 • Reduced porosity for helium cold spray

0.8
and HVAF specimens likely due to
0.6
0.4
increased particle velocity (increase in
0.2 η).
0
Cold spray Cold Spray HVAF (Al) Cold spray Cold Spray HVAF
Nitrogen Helium (Al) Nitrogen Helium (410L/CrC)
(Al) (410L/CrC) (410L/CrC)

• Carbide content observed in the Coating Area Fraction of CrC(%)

410L/CrC blend coatings increased 410L/CrC Cold Spray
30.2 ± 3.1
Nitrogen
with an increasing η.
• Suggests that deposition efficiency 410L/CrC HVAF 39.5± 2.1
for ceramic particles in blended 410L/CrC Cold Spray
38.1± 2.5
Helium
MMC coatings is related to particle
velocity. *Measurements performed at 180x magnification use
SEM BSE. 10 measurements performed on each
specimen. Error bars represent one standard deviation.

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Coating Microhardness
85
• Vickers microhardness was 80

performed on the deposited 75

70
coatings.

Hardness, HV
65

• Increases in hardness in Al 60
55
samples follows similar trend 50

to increase in η. 45
40
• Hardness in 410L/CrC blend 35

samples increases with Cold Spray Aluminum

(Nitrogen)
Cold Spray Aluminum
(Helium)
HVAF Aluminum

increasing carbide content.

450
430
410
390
Hardness, HV

370
350
330
310
290
270
250
Cold Spray 410L/CrC Cold Spray 410L/CrC HVAF 410L/CrC
(Nitrogen) (Helium)

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Adhesion Strength
14
• ASTM C633 bond strength
Triple Lug Shear Strength (Ksi)

13

12
testing performed on all
11 samples. Glue failure occurred
10 for each sample indicating
9
adhesion strength exceeded
8

7
glue strength (<10 ksi).
6 • MIL-J-24445A Triple Lug Shear
testing was used to differentiate
Cold Spray Aluminum Cold Spray Aluminum HVAF Aluminum
(Nitrogen) (Helium)

20
the adhesive properties of the
coatings.
Triple Lug Shear Strength, Ksi

18
• Increases in triple lug shear
16
strength increased with
increasing η in all samples.
14

12

10

6
Cold Spray 410L/CrC Cold Spray 410L/CrC HVAF 410L/CrC
(Nitrogen) (Helium)

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Tensile Strength
40

• All samples in accordance to 35

ASTM E8 using sub-size 30

Tensile Strength (Ksi)

Strain Hardened1
25
samples.
20
• All deposited aluminum 15
coatings exhibited tensile 10
O Temper1

strengths consistent with 5

wrought Al. 0

• HVAF and cold spray helium

Cold Spray Aluminum Cold Spray Aluminum HVAF Aluminum
(Nitrogen) (Helium)

exhibited tensile strengths near 40

the yield strength of 410L. 35

YS 410L1
• In all sample types, as the 30

particle velocity increased the Tensile Strength (Ksi)

25

20
tensile strength increased. 15

10

0
Cold Spray 410L/CrC Cold Spray 410L/CrC HVAF 410L/CrC
(Nitrogen) (Helium)
†Yield strength/elongation are not reported; limited ductility precludes accurate
measure of 2% offset yield strength.

1. ASM Handbook, Volume 1-2,2008

AMP Lab - SD Mines
 Abrasion Resistance in 410L/CrC Coatings
35 45

43 • MMC coating are commonly

30
used in wear/abrasion
41
applications.
25
39 • All samples were tested in
accordance to ASTM G65 B

CrC Volume Fraction (%)

37
(2000 revolutions).
Volume Loss (mm3)

20

35
• Abrasion resistance
15
increased with increasing
33
carbide volume/area
31
fraction.
10

29

5
27

0 25
Cold Spray Nitrogen Cold Spray Helium HVAF

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Corrosion Resistance
-900 2.5

-800
2
Ecorr, mV Vs Ref. AgCl

-700
1.5

Icorr, µA
-600
1
-500

0.5
-400

-300 0
Cold Spray Nitrogen(Al) Cold Spray Helium (Al) HVAF Al Cold Spray Nitrogen Cold Spray Helium HVAF 410L/CrC
(410L/CrC) (410L/CrC)

• All samples were evaluated in accordance to ASTM G61 for

potentiodynamic polarization testing.
• HVAF depositions do not show decreases in corrosion
resistance/properties associated with the formation of
detrimental oxides, decarburization or porosity commonly
found in other flame jet processes.

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Summary
• Increase in η values for both high-pressure cold
spray and HVAF exhibited decreases in porosity,
higher triple lug shear strengths, higher tensile
strengths, and improvements in corrosion
properties.
• In most cases, HVAF performed similarly to helium
cold spray and better than nitrogen cold spray.
• HVAF did not display many of the negative effects
(porosity, heat affected zones, oxidation) typically
associated with flame jet deposition.
• Where applicable, HVAF can be a cost-effective
coatings manufacturing supplement to cold spray.

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Future Work
• Need for additional modeling and data in HVAF with
smaller/controlled particle size range and consistent
particle velocity measurement.
• Use EBSD to further investigate grain orientation and
amount of DR/DRC in aluminum.
• Use EBSD to further investigate matrix grain
orientation, presents of adiabatic shear banding, and
amount of DR/DRC in MMC.
• Oxygen content testing of depositions and as
received powders.
• Test different materials types. Limited database for
HVAF materials properties.

AMP Lab - SD Mines

 Michael Carter

Questions?
Research Scientist II
AMP Laboratory SDSM&T
(605) 716-0083
Michael.Carter@sdsmt.edu

Acknowledgements
• Funding for this research provided by the South Dakota Board of
Regents through the Advanced Manufacturing Process Technology
Transition and Training Center (AMPTech) a SD Governor's Office of
Economic Development Center.
• Kermetico for providing HVAF samples.

AMP Lab - SD Mines