| Literature DB >> 31181823 |
Luanxia Chen1,2, Zhanqiang Liu3,4, Bing Wang5,6, Qinghua Song7,8, Yi Wan9,10, Long Chen11,12.
Abstract
Eutectic aluminum-silicon alloys present high frictional coefficient and a high wear rate due to the low hardness under sliding friction conditions. In this paper, the eutectic aluminum-silicon alloy was textured firstly by micro-milling operations. Then, the micro-textured specimen was subjected to anodizing to fabricate alumina films. The surface topography, surface roughness, and bearing area ratio of micro-textured and anodizing micro-textured specimens were measured and characterized. For the anodizing micro-textured specimens, the surface roughness and superficial hardness increase compared with those for micro-textured ones. Tribological tests indicate that anodizing micro-textured samples present lower friction coefficient of 0.37 than that of flat samples of 0.43 under dry sliding conditions. However, they exhibit higher friction coefficient at 0.16 than that of flat samples of 0.13 under oil-lubricated conditions. The difference between the friction coefficient of anodizing micro-textured and flat samples under dry and oil-lubricated conditions is ascribed to the influence mechanism of surface roughness, bearing area ratio curves, and its relative parameters on the tribological performance of testing samples. The dry sliding friction coefficient has a positive correlation with bearing area ratio curves, while they present negative correlation with bearing area ratio curves under oil-lubricated conditions. The synergy method treated with micro-milling and anodizing provides an effective approach to enhance the dry sliding friction property of eutectic aluminum-silicon alloys.Entities:
Keywords: anodizing; bearing area ratio curves; friction; micro-textures; superficial hardness
Year: 2019 PMID: 31181823 PMCID: PMC6600993 DOI: 10.3390/ma12111862
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Framework structure of this study.
Chemical composition of ZL019.
| Element | Si | Fe | Cu | Mg | Ni | Al |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Content (%) | 11.1 | 0.77 | 0.45 | 0.51 | 0.31 | Residual |
Cutting parameters of fabricating micro-textures.
| Cutting Amount | Spindle Speed (r/min) | Feed Rate (mm/min) | Axial Depth of Cut (μm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | 20,000 | 60 | 10 |
Testing parameters of nanoindentation.
| Testing Materials | Maximum Displacement (nm) | Spacing (μm) |
|---|---|---|
| ZL109 | 400, 800, 1000, 1200 | 20 |
| Nodular cast iron | 200, 400, 1000, 1200 | 20 |
| Aluminum oxide | 120, 140, 200, 220, 240 | 10 |
Figure 2SEM and enlarged morphology of (a,b) flat; (c,d) micro-textured; (e,f) anodizing micro-textured specimens.
Figure 3Cross-sectional SEM morphology of anodized (a) ZL109; and corresponding EDS line scan of (b) Al; (c) O element.
Figure 4XRD for ZL109 (a) before; (b) after anodizing.
Figure 5Cross-sectional view of a single micro-texture before and after anodizing.
Surface roughness of test samples.
| Surface Roughness (μm) | F | M | AM |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.92 ± 0.05 | 0.89 ± 0.05 | 1.81 ± 0.05 |
|
| 1.1 ± 0.1 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.1 |
|
| 0.38 ± 0.05 | 0.09 ± 0.05 | −0.05 ± 0.05 |
|
| 3.2 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.1 | 6.3 ± 0.1 |
|
| 2.8 ± 0.1 | 2.7 ± 0.1 | 4.6 ± 0.1 |
|
| 1.4 ± 0.1 | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 3.9 ± 0.1 |
|
| 0.9 ± 0.1 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 3.8 ± 0.1 |
|
| 4.8 ± 0.4 | 5.0 ± 0.4 | 14.0 ± 0.4 |
|
| 13.1 ± 1.5 | 10.6 ± 1.5 | 14.2 ± 1.5 |
|
| 91.7 ± 1.5 | 89.2 ± 1.5 | 88.3 ± 1.5 |
Figure 6Bearing area curves of (a) flat; (b) micro-textured; (c) anodizing micro-textured samples.
Nomenclature and definition of bearing area ratio parameters.
| Material Ratio Parameters | Definitions |
|---|---|
|
| Average height of the protruding peaks above the roughness core profile |
|
| Average depth of the profile valleys projecting through the roughness core profile |
|
| Depth of the roughness core profile |
|
| The height difference between the load area ratio of 2.5% and the load area ratio of 50% |
|
| Level, in percent, determined for the intersection line which separates the protruding peaks from the roughness core profile |
|
| Level, in percent, determined for the intersection line which separates the deep peaks from the roughness core profile |
Figure 7Load-unload curves dependence on the indentation depth for (a) ZL109; (b) nodular cast iron; and (c) aluminum oxide; (d) nanoindentation hardness.
Figure 8Frictional coefficients varying with running time under (a) dry sliding; (b) oil-lubricated conditions.
Figure 9SEM micrographs of flat, micro-textured, and anodizing micro-textured specimens (a,d,g) and EDS element mapping data of (b,e,h) Al, (c,f,i) Fe.