4.7 Article

Low cycle fatigue performance of Ni-based superalloy coated with complex thermal barrier coating

期刊

MATERIALS CHARACTERIZATION
卷 139, 期 -, 页码 347-354

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.matchar.2018.03.023

关键词

Inconel 713LC; Thermal barrier coating; High-temperature low cycle fatigue; Cyclic stress-strain curve; Fatigue life curves; Degradation mechanisms

资金

  1. Czech Science Foundation (GACR) [15-20991S]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thermal barrier coatings (TBCs) are widely applied to protect high-temperature components against high temperatures in harsh environments. Nineteen cylindrical specimens of Inconel 713LC were manufactured using the investment castings technique, and 10 specimens were subsequently coated with a novel complex thermal barrier coating (TBC) system. The TBC system comprises a metallic CoNiCrAlY bond coat (BC) and a complex ceramic top coat (TC). The TC is a mixture of a near eutectic nanocrystalline ceramic made of zirconia (ZrO2), alumina (Al2O3), silica (SiO2) and conventional yttria stabilized zirconia (YSZ) ceramic in the ratio of 50/50 in wt%. Low cycle fatigue (LCF) tests were carried out in a symmetrical push-pull cycle under strain control at 900 degrees C. Cyclic hardening/softening curves, cyclic stress-strain curves and fatigue life curves of the TBC-coated and uncoated material were assessed. Fatigue life curves in total strain representation showed transient behaviour. Fracture surfaces and polished sections parallel to the loading axis of the TBC-coated and uncoated specimens prior and after cyclic loading were observed by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to study the degradation mechanisms during high-temperature LCF. TBC delamination was observed at the TC/BC interface, and rafting of precipitates occurred after high-temperature exposure. The microstructural investigations further the discussion of the differences in the stress-strain response and the fatigue life of the TBC-coated and uncoated superalloy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据