1 / 16

TBC Network Meeting, Nottingham 15 th December, 2008

‘ Mechanical properties of CoNiCrAlY coatings’ Department of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering University of Nottingham S. Saeidi Supervisors: Dr K. Voisey Prof D.G. McCartney. TBC Network Meeting, Nottingham 15 th December, 2008. Aims & objectives.

kert
Download Presentation

TBC Network Meeting, Nottingham 15 th December, 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ‘Mechanical properties of CoNiCrAlY coatings’Department of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing EngineeringUniversity of NottinghamS. SaeidiSupervisors: Dr K. Voisey Prof D.G. McCartney TBC Network Meeting, Nottingham 15th December, 2008

  2. Aims & objectives • Studying the mechanical behaviour of the CoNiCrAlY coating as a function of temperature • Young’s Modulus • Hardness → Yield strength • Studying the presence of different phases in a free standing CoNiCrAlY coating in a range of temperatures (equilibrium conditions)

  3. Top coat Superalloy Thermal barrier coatings (TBC’s) • TBC’s consist of: 1- Superalloy substrate 2- Al rich bond coat 3- Thermally grown oxide layer 4- Ceramic top coat • Final failure is associated with spallation of the top coat • Overall performance and life time of a TBC is closely related to the bond coat behaviour

  4. β MCrAlY bond coat (1) • MCrAlY’s (M=Co, Ni, or both) are one of the most widely use types of oxidation resistant coatings • Depending on composition, MCrAlY alloys typically exhibit a two phase microstructure of γ+β at operating temperatures • γ is a FCC phase and is a solid solution of Co, Ni, Cr, etc. • β is a BCC phase and can be described as (Co,Ni)Al

  5. Al2O3 βDepletion MCrAlY bond coat (2) • β phase acts as Al reservoir, thus cyclic oxidation life of the coating is directly related to the amount of β phase • Microstructure of MCrAlY’s depends not only on composition but also on the spraying process (e.g. HVOF, LPPS, etc.) • MCrAlY’s are capable of developing a thermodynamically stable, slow growing and adherent oxide scale (i.e. alumina) • The Al2O3 layer inhibits continued ingress of active oxygen and other species

  6. Overview of presentation • Young’s modulus of as-sprayed and annealed HVOF and VPS free standing coatings as a function of temperature • Hardness of HVOF and VPS free standing coatings as a function of annealing temperature • Yield strength of HVOF and VPS free standing coatings extracted from hardness values (as a function of annealing temperature)

  7. Annealing procedure • HVOF & VPS free standing coatings have been annealed in vacuum at the temperatures & times below followed by water quenching: • 4 hrs at 1100°C • 24 hrs at 1000°C • 90 hrs at 900°C • 840 hrs at 800°C

  8. Experimental methods • 3-point bending technique was used for Young’s modulus measurements (using a DMA machine) • Free standing coatings • Sample dimension of 2x15mm • Minimum of 3 runs for each set of temperatures • Vickers microhardness was used for hardness measurements (average of 20 indents with a 300gf load)

  9. Phases

  10. Young’s modulus as a function of annealing temperature (1) • Properties of thermally sprayed deposits differ from those of fully dense material • Features such as pores, un-melted particles, micro cracks, etc influence the mechanical properties of the coatings • Elastic modulus of isotropic, homogeneous material is related to the volume fraction of the phases present and their respective elastic moduli • Elastic modulus of anisotropic, non-homogeneous and porous material is affected my microstructural features.

  11. HVOF VPS Young’s modulus as a function of annealing temperature (2) • Annealing of the coatings enhances cohesion between the individual Lamella through diffusion and sintering effect • Porosity↓=> Modulus↑

  12. Hardness as a function of annealing temperature • Hardness has great dependence on microstructure • Hardness for HVOF > VPS • Hardness is related to temperature & speed of particles when they impact on substrate • T↓ & V ↑ for HVOF => hardness ↑ (compared to VPS) • Well distributed fine β particles in HVOF increase the hardness compared to VPS (no β particles) • Annealing => Hardness ↓ due to the coarsening of the β phase & stress relieving

  13. Yield strength as a function of temperature Sprayed by Plasma torch σy= 9.81HV/3

  14. Conclusions • Determined temperature dependence of ‘E’ of VPS & HVOF coating • Increase in temperature decreases the elastic modulus • Elastic modulus remains approximately constant than decreases with T (this fits some previous published work and appears to be characteristic of sprayed coatings) • Annealing increases the elastic modulus • Enhance cohesion between individual lamella • Hardness measured for HVOF & VPS as a function of annealing temperature • Annealing decreases hardness • Hardness decrease appears insensitive to annealing temperature • HVOF has a greater hardness compared to VPS • Due to lower T and higher particle velocity • Presence of β particles in HVOF and not in VPS

  15. Future Work • Nano indentation • Hardness determination of each phase • TEM • More precise composition of each phase (before and after annealing)

  16. Thank you

More Related