4.7 Article

Work hardening and the scratch resistance of Ni-Co alloys using a rapid prototyping approach

Journal

WEAR
Volume 510-511, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.wear.2022.204493

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [IC160100036, AC74806]
  2. ARC Laureate program [FL210100147]
  3. Australian Research Council [IC160100036, FL210100147] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the effect of work hardening on material removal and scratch resistance in a series of Ni-Co alloys. The results show that work hardening significantly affects the resistance to penetration and scratch hardness. This has important implications for predicting scratch resistance using material properties and developing scratch resistant alloys using additive manufacturing techniques.
The propensity of a material to work harden can impart increased resistance to wear. The present study examines a series of Ni-Co alloys that display different hardness and different tendencies for work hardening to better understand the role of work hardening in material removal during scratching. It is found that work hardening has a significant effect on the effective hardness i.e. the resistance to penetration during scratching. It is in this determination of the scratch hardness that work hardening plays its most important role in the present material. For a given value of static hardness, the scratch hardness and hence resistance to scratching -is higher when the work hardening rate is higher. This has important implications for the prediction of scratch resistance using material properties. The work also shows the utility of the concept of scratch ductility in determining material removal during a scratch event and in the use of additive manufacturing techniques to facilitate rapid prototyping in the development of scratch resistant alloys.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available