- Email: [email protected]
TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained by pulse current electrodeposition
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Ceramics International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ceramint
Preparation and wear properties of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained by pulse current electrodeposition Fafeng Xiaa, Qiang Lia, Chunyang Maa,∗, Wenqing Liua, Zhipeng Maa,b a b
College of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing, 163318, China College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Hohai University, Changzhou, 213022, China
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating Pulse current electrodeposition Microstructure Microhardness Wear resistance
In this report, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were designed by pulse current electrodeposition (PCE) technique. The influence of plating parameters on morphology, microstructure, microhardness, and wear behavior of the asobtained coatings were investigated by transmission electron microscopy (TEM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), triboindentry, and abrasion testing. Results indicated incorporation of numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared at 4 A/dm2. Average sizes of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were estimated to 45.9 nm and 37.2 nm, respectively. Cross-sectional views of nanocoating obtained at 4 A/dm2 revealed high concentrations of Ti (19.6 at%), Si (12.1 at%), and Ni (53.3 at%). Hence, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 with average microhardness of 848.5 Hv illustrated the highest microhardness when compared to other nanocoatings. On the other hand, wear rate of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 was only 13.6 mg/min, indicating excellent wear resistance. In addition, only some small surface scratches were observed, indicating outstanding wear performance.
1. Introduction Nowadays, metal-based ceramic composite coatings (such as Ni–TiN, Ni–AlN, Ni–Co/SiC, and Ni–CeO2) attracted increasing attention due to their excellent physical and chemical properties, such as good microhardness, outstanding wear resistance, and high thermal resistance [1–10]. These composite coatings can be prefabricated by electrodeposition, electroless plating, and brush plating technology [11–13]. In particular, electrodeposition processes several advantages when compared to electroless and brush plating, including high deposition rates, simple structures, no limitation for reinforcing particles, and reduced electrode losses. Li et al. [14] reported on the synthesis of Ni–B/Ni–W–BN composite coatings via co-electrodeposition. The results indicated that the crystal size of the Ni–B/Ni-W-BN coating was smaller compared to a monolayer Ni–W–BN coating. Alizadeh et al. [15] investigated the microstructure and properties of Ni–Mo/Al2O3 nanocoatings deposited via electrodeposition. They found that a large number of Al2O3 nanoparticles were uniformly embedded in the nanocoatings. Electrodeposition process can be divided into two categories: direct current electrodeposition (DCE) and pulse current electrodeposition (PCE). Li et al. [16] discussed that boron nitride reinforced Ni–W nanocoatings were successfully prefabricated by using
∗
PCE method. Compared to DCE, PCE has been applied in mechanical, petroleum, chemical and military fields thanks to decreased internal stress and porosity of coatings, refined matrix grains, and enhanced plating rates [17–20]. TiN and SiC particles are inorganic ceramic materials with excellent material properties. In particular, TiN nanoparticles possess high hardness and strength with significant wear and corrosion resistance. As such, TiN nanoparticles have been applied as a reinforced phase to fabricate composite coatings with excellent physical and chemical properties [21–23]. By comparison, SiC nanoparticles have excellent thermal stability, and outstanding wear resistance, but suffer from elevated microhardness. There has been numerous papers published reporting on the preparation of Ni–TiN, Ni–SiC, Cu–SiC coatings deposited by DCE and PCE techniques. However, only a few have investigated the prefabrication of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings via the PCE technique. Therefore, this study aims to prefabricate TiN and SiC nanoparticle reinforced metal-based ceramic composites by PCE deposition and to improve the physical and chemical properties of these composites. Besides, the effects of plating parameters on morphology, microstructure, microhardness and wear behavior of the as-fabricated Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings by PCE technique were all examined and the results were discussed.
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Ma).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.12.017 Received 24 September 2019; Received in revised form 22 November 2019; Accepted 2 December 2019 0272-8842/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd and Techna Group S.r.l. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Fafeng Xia, et al., Ceramics International, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.12.017
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 1. Experimental device for preparing Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings.
pure nickel plate (diameter of 30 × 30 × 10 mm) was used as anode and Q235 steel (diameter of 30 × 20 × 5 mm) as cathode. The distance between the two electrodes was kept at 200 mm. The experimental device used to produce Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings is presented in Fig. 1. The device was composed of pulse current source (SMD-100, Handan Dawei Electroplating Equipment Co., Ltd.), heating system (DRB-1000, Boao Electric Heating Equipment Co., Ltd.), ultrasonic agitator (XL-300, Beijing Xieli Ultrasonic Cleaning Equipment Co., Ltd.), and plating bath. The pulse current source was utilized to generate pulse current densities of 2, 4 and 6 A/dm2 at duty cycle kept at 40%. The heating system was used to maintain the plating solution at 45 °C. The ultrasonic agitator was employed to keep dispersed TiN and SiC nanoparticles evenly suspended in the plating solution. A plating solution pH of 4.6 was achieved by either adding hydrochloric acid (10 vol%) or NaOH solution (10 wt%), and plating time was 40 min. After PCE, the electrodes were cleaned by ultrasonic agitation for 10 min to dislodge any loosely adsorbed TiN and SiC nanoparticles. The surface morphologies, cross-sections and microstructures of the as-obtained Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were viewed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM, Tecnai-G2-20-S-Twin) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM, S3400) equipped with IE-300X type energy disperse spectroscopy (EDS). The surface compositions were determined by Rigaku D/Max-2400 X-ray diffraction (XRD) with Cu-Ka radiation (k=1.54 Å). The cross-section compositions of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were investigated by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, INCA X-MAX). The nanohardnesses values of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were measured by means of TI-950 triboindenter at loading force of 1000 μN for 10 s. To examine wear properties of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings, friction and wear tests were performed using MRH-6 abrasion tester (Jingchen Test Instrument, China). To this end, hardened steel barrel (GC15) was run on nanocoating surface at 5 N applied load and 0.1 m/s constant speed under dry sliding conditions at room temperature. The wear testing time was set at 30 min and worn surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were viewed by SEM after testing. The wear rate (V) of each nanocoating was computed according to Eq. (1):
Fig. 2. TEM images of TiN and SiC products: (a) TiN nanoparticles, and (b) SiC nanoparticles.
2. Experiment Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were prefabricated on Q235 steel by PCE method from modified plating solution containing 200 g/L NiSO4 (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 30 g/L NiCl2 (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 30 g/L H3BO3 (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 60 mg/L cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 8 g/L TiN nanoparticles (Hefei Cole Nano-technology Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.99%), and 8 g/L SiC nanoparticles (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.98%) [24]. The diameters of TiN and SiC nanoparticles ranged from 20 to 40 nm. A
V=
M1 − M 2 L
(1)
where M1 and M2 denote the mass of each sample before and after each wear test, respectively. The mass was measured by a lab balance (accuracy: 0.1 mg). L represents the sliding length of hardened steel ball during wear experiments. 2
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 3. SEM images of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
coarse structure. As pulse current density increased to 4 A/dm2, Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform and fine surface morphologies were observed by SEM. However, the grains sizes of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings became larger than those produced at 4 A/dm2 at pulse current density further of 6 A/dm2. Sajjadnejad et al. [27] reported that the microstructure of nickel-based coatings was controlled by electroplating parameters such as pulse current density, pulse frequency, and duty cycle, etc. They found that pulse current density could effectively refine the grain size. In addition, the thicknesses of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings increased from 46.8 μm to 58.7 μm as pulse current density rose from 2 A/dm2 to 6 A/dm2 (Fig. 3a’~c’), demonstrating the effect of pulse current density on the deposition rate of nickel grains. The results are in agreement with those reported by Sajjadnejad [28].
3. Results and discussion 3.1. TiN and SiC nanoparticles Fig. 2 exhibits the morphologies of as-received TiN and SiC nanoparticles. The average diameters of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were determined as 40 and 35 nm, respectively. TiN and SiC nanoparticles were prone to aggregation due to their small sizes [25,26]. In addition, TiN and SiC nanoparticles displayed regular crystal structures in the micro-regions.
3.2. SEM analysis Fig. 3a~c illustrate the SEM surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared at pulse current densities of 2, 4 and 6 A/dm2, respectively. The corresponding cross-section morphologies Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings are displayed in Fig. 3a’~c’. The pulse current density revealed great influence on surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings (Fig. 3a~c). At pulse current density of 2 A/dm2, numerous large-sized grains were formed on Ni/TiN–SiC coating with uneven and
3.3. TEM Fig. 4 shows TEM micrographs of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared at different pulse current densities. The black sections in Fig. 4a~c showed TiN and SiC nanoparticles whereas the white sections 3
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 4. TEM micrographs of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
nanocoating deposited at 6 A/dm2 possessed larger nickel grains structures with serious agglomeration of TiN and SiC nanoparticles. Fig. 5 displays TEM bright-field images of Ni, Ti, Si, N and C elements distributed in spectral area II of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2. Ni, Ti, Si, N, and C elements looked well-dispersed in the nanocoating, testifying of the successful embedding of both TiN and SiC nanoparticles in nickel matrix.
were nickel grains. Some TiN and SiC nanoparticles appeared on Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2, whereas numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles became incorporated at 4 A/dm2. The average sizes of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were recorded as 45.9 nm and 37.2 nm, respectively. The reason for this had possibly to do with the moderate pulse current density, which effectively inhibited TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating. However, Ni/TiN–SiC
4
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 5. TEM bright field image of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at pulse current density of 4 A/dm2.
TiN–SiC nanocoatings [29]. The relationship between electric field force and pulse current density can be expressed by Eq. (2):
3.4. Codeposition mechanism Fig. 6 displays the co-deposition mechanism of nickel ions, TiN nanoparticles and SiC nanoparticles during PCE process, which can be explained by Guglielmi's theory. The nickel ions present in plating solution were first adsorbed on TiN and SiC nanoparticles surfaces. Numerous ion clouds then formed and became suspended in the bath. The nickel ions, TiN and SiC nanoparticles then moved towards the cathode surface under the action of electric field force (F). Meanwhile, hydrogen evolution occurred on the cathode surface. TiN and SiC nanoparticles passed both the electric double and hydrogen evolution layers to become tightly embedded in Ni matrix metal. The pulse current density also showed notable influence on distribution and amount of embedded TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/
F=
I×q σ
(2)
where I denotes the pulse current density, q is the ironic charge, and σ represents the conductivity of plating solution. During PCE deposition of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings, the effect of electric field force on TiN and SiC nanoparticles looked not obvious under low pulse current densities (such as 2 A/dm2), leading to low amounts of incorporated TiN and SiC nanoparticles in the coating. Thus, TiN and SiC nanoparticles did not significantly inhibit the growth of nickel grains, resulting in free nickel grain growth and formation of numerous large-sized grains. By comparison, suitable pulse current 5
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 6. The co-deposition mechanism of the nickel irons, TiN nanoparticles and SiC nanoparticles during PCE process.
and 6 A/dm2. For Ni grains, three strong diffractions peaked were observed at 44.8°, 52.2° and 76.7°, corresponding to (1 1 1), (2 0 0) and (2 2 0) planes, respectively. For TiN nanoparticles, three strong diffractions emerged at 36.6°, 42.6° and 61.8°, attributed to (1 1 1), (2 0 0) and (2 2 0) planes, respectively. For SiC nanoparticles, three strong diffractions located at 34.2°, 41.5° and 59.8° were noticed and assigned to (1 1 1), (2 0 0) and (2 2 0) planes, respectively. In Fig. 7, the diffraction peaks of Ni grains first decreased and then increased as pulse current density rose from 2 A/dm2 to 6 A/dm2. Pulse current densities on the order of 4 A/dm2 could potentially increase the amounts of TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating. Thus, TiN and SiC nanoparticles supplied large numbers of nuclei for formation of Ni grains and restricted sustained growth of Ni grains, leading to formation of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform, and fine morphologies. Therefore, proper current densities can effectively refine Ni grains of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings. 3.5.2. XPS Fig. 8 depicts cross-sectional composition distributions of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. TiN and SiC nanoparticles became completely incorporated in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings. Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 2 A/dm2 showed fewer TiN and SiC nanoparticles than those prepared at 4 A/dm2 and 6 A/dm2 (Fig. 8a). By contrast, high concentrations of Ti (19.6 at%), Si (12.1 at%) and Ni (53.3 at%) were measured throughout the crosssection of nanocoating obtained at 4 A/dm2. At 6 A/dm2, the concentrations of Ti, Si and Ni elements slightly reduced since the elevated pulse current densities promoted co-deposition of Ni irons, TiN, and SiC nanoparticles.
Fig. 7. XRD patterns of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
densities (such as 4 A/dm2) could effectively increase the electric field force and significantly reduce the thickness of hydrogen evolution layer, leading to incorporation of significant amounts of TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating. Hence, TiN and SiC nanoparticles supplied large numbers of nuclei for formation of Ni grains and restricted sustained growth of Ni grains, leading to formation of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform, and fine morphologies. However, substantial amounts of hydrogen bubbles formed at the cathode surface at pulse current density of 6 A/dm2, leading to increased the thickness of hydrogen evolution layer. This, in turn, hindered deposition of TiN and SiC nanoparticles on the cathode surface, reducing the amounts of embedded TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings. This also declined the inhibitory effect of nickel grains, increasing their grain sizes. Overall, these results were consistent with those from SEM and TEM.
3.6. Microhardness test The effects of pulse current density on microhardness values of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities are displayed in Fig. 9. Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 with average microhardness of 848.5 Hv clearly depicted the highest microhardness than other nanocoatings. By comparison, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating obtained at 2 A/dm2 depicted an average microhardness of only 699.2 Hv. According to previous studies [30–32], microhardness of nanocoatings should not only depend on content of TiN and SiC nanoparticles but also on distribution of nanoparticles throughout the coating. High contents and uniform distributions of TiN and SiC nanoparticles existed in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained at 4 A/dm2, leading to dispersion–hardening effect and high microhardness. Besides, TiN and SiC nanoparticles independently possessed microhardness values, further improving the microhardness of the coatings.
3.5. Microstructure 3.5.1. XRD Fig. 7 presents the XRD patterns of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced at different pulse current densities. Ni, SiC and TiN phases were all present in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained at 2 A/dm2, 4 A/dm2, 6
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 9. Effect of pulse current density on microhardnesses of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings.
Fig. 10. Wear rates of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
nanocoating prepared at 2 A/dm2 showed maximum wear rate of 27.1 mg/min. Nevertheless, wear rate of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 was only 13.6 mg/min, indicating Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with excellent wear resistance. 3.7.2. Worn surface morphology Fig. 11 displays the worn surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. Numerous deep grooves and pits appeared on worn surfaces of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2, demonstrating nanocoating surface with serious wear state. By contrast, only small scratches were displayed on nanocoating surface deposited at 4 A/dm2, testifying of outstanding wear performance. However, pulse current densities around 6 A/dm2 induced some large-sized grooves on nanocoating surface.
Fig. 8. XPS cross-sectional profiles of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
3.7. Wear test
3.7.3. Friction coefficient Friction coefficient curves of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at various pulse current densities are displayed in Fig. 12. Among all three nanocoatings, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 had the smallest average friction coefficient of 0.49. The nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2 had the highest average friction coefficient with a value of
3.7.1. Wear rate Fig. 10 illustrates the wear rates of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. The wear rates of all three nanocoatings slightly enhanced during wear testing. Ni/TiN–SiC 7
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 12. Friction coefficients of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
Fig. 11. SEM images of the worn surface of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/ dm2.
0.76. TiN and SiC nanoparticles contents and microhardnesses of the nanocoating are the main factors that ensure the friction coefficient of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings [33]. When the coatings TiN and SiC nanoparticle content was increased, numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles were separated from the nickel matrix under the action of friction during wear tests. This reduced the friction coefficient by changing the friction mode between the Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating and the steel barrel from sliding to rolling.
Fig. 13. Abrasion diagrams of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, and (b) 4 A/dm2.
TiN–SiC nanocoating with poor wear resistance. However, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 showed uniform and fine microstructure with large amounts of TiN and SiC nanoparticles (Fig. 13b), effectively prohibiting any deep damage of hardened steel barrel on nanocoating surface. Therefore, only some small scratches were observed on Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating surface deposited at 4 A/dm2, revealing superior wear resistance.
3.7.4. Wear mechanism Fig. 13 illustrates the wear mechanisms of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. The wear resistances of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were mainly affected by microhardness and microstructure of each coating. Inappropriate pulse current densities (such as 2 A/dm2 and 6 A/dm2) during PCE induced few TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings (Fig. 13a). The microhardness values of both nanocoatings were small. Hence, hardened steel barrel could easily tear down large pieces of coating, leading to Ni/
4. Conclusion (1) At pulse current density of 4 A/dm2, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform and fine surface morphologies were observed by 8
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
SEM. Some TiN and SiC nanoparticles appeared on Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2, whereas numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles became incorporated at 4 A/dm2. The average sizes of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were recorded as 45.9 nm and 37.2 nm, respectively. (2) Ni, SiC and TiN phases were all present in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained at 2 A/dm2, 4 A/dm2, and 6 A/dm2. Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 2 A/dm2 showed fewer TiN and SiC nanoparticles than those prepared at 4 A/dm2 and 6 A/dm2 (Fig. 9a). By contrast, high concentrations of Ti (19.6 at%), Si (12.1 at%) and Ni (53.3 at%) were measured throughout the crosssection of nanocoating obtained at 4 A/dm2. (3) Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 with average microhardness of 848.5 Hv clearly depicted the highest microhardness than other nanocoatings. By comparison, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating obtained at 2 A/dm2 depicted an average microhardness of only 699.2 Hv. (4) The wear rate of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 was only 13.6 mg/min, indicating Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with excellent wear resistance. In addition, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 had the smallest average friction coefficient of 0.49. However, the nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2 had the highest average friction coefficient with a value of 0.76.
[8] Y. Chen, Y. Hao, W. Huang, Y. Ji, W. Yang, X. Yin, Y. Liu, X. Ling, Corrosion behavior of Ni-P-nano-Al2O3 composite coating in the presence of anionic and cationic surfactants, Surf. Coat. Technol. 310 (2017) 122–128. [9] B. Li, Electrochemical deposition of Ni-Co/SiC nanocomposite coatings for marine environment, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 12 (8) (2017) 7017–7030. [10] Z. Xu, Y. Chen, Characterization of nano-sized SiC-Ni composite fabricated by electroless plating method, J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 13 (2) (2013) 1456–1460. [11] B. Li, W. Zhang, W. Zhang, Y. Huan, Preparation of Ni–W/SiC nanocomposite coatings by electrochemical deposition, J. Alloy. Comp. 702 (2017) 38–50. [12] Q. Fan, Y. Gao, Y. Zhao, Q. Yang, L. Guo, L. Jiang, Fabrication of diamond-structured composite materials with Ni-P-diamond particles by electroless plating, Mater. Lett. 215 (2018) 242–245. [13] S. Qi, X. Li, Z. Zhang, H. Dong, Fabrication and characterisation of electro-brush plated nickel-graphene oxide nano-composite coatings, Thin Solid Films 644 (2017) 106–114. [14] B.S. Li, W.W. Zhang, D.D. Li, Y.X. Huan, J. Dong, Microstructural, surface and electrochemical properties of a novel Ni–B/Ni–W–BN duplex composite coating by co-electrodeposition, Appl. Surf. Sci. 458 (2018) 305–318. [15] M. Alizadeh, A. Cheshmpish, Electrodeposition of Ni-Mo/Al2O3 nano-composite coatings at various deposition current densities, Appl. Surf. Sci. 466 (2019) 433–440. [16] B. Li, D. Mei, T. Xia, W. Zhang, W. Zhang, Fabrication and characterization of boron nitride reinforced Ni-W nanocomposite coating by electrodeposition, J. Alloy. Comp. 777 (2019) 1234–1244. [17] L. Wu, J.E. Graves, A.J. Cobley, Mechanism for the development of Sn-Cu alloy coatings produced by pulsed current electrodeposition, Mater. Lett. 217 (2018) 120–123. [18] M. Shourgeshty, M. Aliofkhazraei, A. Karimzadeh, Study on functionally graded ZnNi-Al2O3 coatings fabricated by pulse-electrodeposition, Surf. Eng. 35 (2) (2019) 167–176. [19] R. Mohan Reddy, B.M. Praveen, CM Praveen Kumar, Corrosion behaviour and characterisation of Ni-Nb2O5 composites prepared by pulse electrodeposition, Surf. Eng. Appl. Electrochem. 53 (2) (2017) 179–185. [20] M. Aghazadeh, M.G. Maragheh, M.R. Ganjali, P. Norouzi, Preparation and characterization of Mn5O8 nanoparticles: a novel and facile pulse cathodic electrodeposition followed by heat treatment, Synth. React. Inorg. Met. Org. Chem. 47 (7) (2017) 1085–1089. [21] F. Xia, W. Jia, M. Jiang, W. Cui, J. Wang, Microstructure and corrosion properties of Ni-TiN nanocoatings prepared by jet pulse electrodeposition, Ceram. Int. 43 (17) (2017) 14623–14628. [22] B. Li, D. Li, W. Chen, Y. Liu, J. Zhang, Y. Wei, W. Zhang, W. Jia, Effect of current density and deposition time on microstructure and corrosion resistance of Ni-W/TiN nanocomposite coating, Ceram. Int. 45 (2019) 4870–4879. [23] A. Hefnawy, N. Elkhoshkhany, A. Essam, Ni-TiN and Ni-Co-TiN composite coatings for corrosion protection: fabrication and electrochemical characterization, J. Alloy. Comp. 735 (2018) 600–606. [24] F. Xia, W. Jia, C. Ma, J. Wang, Synthesis of Ni-TiN composites through ultrasonic pulse electrodeposition with excellent corrosion and wear resistance, Ceram. Int. 44 (2018) 766–773. [25] M. Ebadi, W.J. Basirun, Y. Alias, Influence of magnetic field on the electrodeposition of Ni-Co alloy, J. Chem. Sci. 122 (2) (2010) 279–285. [26] P. Colomban, G. Gouadec, Raman spectroscopy of nanostructures and nanosized materials, J. Raman Spectrosc. 38 (6) (2007) 598–603. [27] M. Sajjadnejad, H. Omidvar, M. Javanbakht, Influence of pulse operational parameters on pure nickel electrodeposits: Part II. Microhardness and corrosion resistance, Surf. Eng. 33 (2) (2017) 94–101. [28] M. Sajjadnejad, H. Omidvar, M. Javanbakht, A. Mozafari, Textural and structural evolution of pulse electrodeposited Ni/diamond nanocomposite coatings, J. Alloy. Comp. 704 (2017) 809–817. [29] B. Bahadormanesh, A. Dolati, M.R. Ahmadi, Electrodeposition and characterization of Ni-Co/SiC nanocomposite coatings, J. Alloy. Comp. 509 (2011) 9406–9412. [30] F. Xia, J. Tian, C. Ma, M. Potts, X. Guo, Effect of pulse frequency on microstructural, nanomechanical and wear properties of electrodeposited Ni-TiN composite coatings, J. Appl. Phys. 116 (23) (2014) 234301–234306. [31] F. Xia, J. Tian, W. Wang, Y. He, Effect of plating parameters on the properties of pulse electrodeposited Ni–TiN thin films, Ceram. Int. 42 (11) (2016) 13268–13272. [32] C. Ma, M. Jiang, F. Xia, Preparation and characterization of Ni-TiN thin films electrodeposited with nickel baths of different TiN nanoparticle concentration, Surf. Rev. Lett. 24 (5) (2016) 17500631-175006317. [33] C.A. León-Patiño, J. García-Guerra, E.A. Aguilar-Reyes, Tribological characterization of heat-treated Ni-P and Ni-P-Al2O3 composite coatings by reciprocating sliding tests, Wear 426–427 (2019) 330–340.
Declaration of competing InterestCOI The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Acknowledgement This work has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51974089, 51674090), Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China (Grant No. LC2018020), Innovative and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students in Heilongjiang Province (Grant No. 201910220060). References [1] X. Li, J. Feng, Y. Jiang, H. Lin, J. Feng, Preparation and properties of TaSi2-MoSi2ZrO2-borosilicate glass coating on porous SiC ceramic composites for thermal protection, Ceram. Int. 44 (16) (2018) 19143–19150. [2] C. Ma, W. Yu, M. Jiang, W. Cui, F. Xia, Jet pulse electrodeposition and characterization of Ni-AlN nanocoatings in presence of ultrasound, Ceram. Int. 44 (5) (2018) 5163–5170. [3] S. Tamariz, D. Martin, N. Grandjean, AlN grown on Si(1 1 1) by ammonia-molecular beam epitaxy in the 900-1200°C temperature range, J. Cryst. Growth 476 (2017) 58–63. [4] H. Zhou, W. Wang, Y. Gu, X. Fang, Y. Bai, Study on the fabrication of Nano-SiC/Ni-P composite coatings with the assistance of electromagnetic-ultrasonic compound field, Strength Mater. 1 (2017) 1–8. [5] C. Wang, L.D. Shen, M.B. Qiu, Z.J. Tian, W. Jiang, Characterizations of Ni-CeO2 nanocomposite coating by interlaced jet electrodeposition, J. Alloy. Comp. 727 (2017) 269–277. [6] F.F. Xia, W.C. Jia, C.Y. Ma, R. Yang, Y. Wang, M. Potts, Synthesis and characterization of Ni–doped TiN thin films deposited by jet electrodeposition, Appl. Surf. Sci. 434 (2018) 228–233. [7] M. Wu, W. Jia, P. Lv, Electrodepositing Ni-TiN nanocomposite layers with applying action of ultrasonic waves, Procedia Eng. 174 (2017) 717–723.
9
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Ceramics International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ceramint
Preparation and wear properties of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained by pulse current electrodeposition Fafeng Xiaa, Qiang Lia, Chunyang Maa,∗, Wenqing Liua, Zhipeng Maa,b a b
College of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing, 163318, China College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Hohai University, Changzhou, 213022, China
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating Pulse current electrodeposition Microstructure Microhardness Wear resistance
In this report, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were designed by pulse current electrodeposition (PCE) technique. The influence of plating parameters on morphology, microstructure, microhardness, and wear behavior of the asobtained coatings were investigated by transmission electron microscopy (TEM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), triboindentry, and abrasion testing. Results indicated incorporation of numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared at 4 A/dm2. Average sizes of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were estimated to 45.9 nm and 37.2 nm, respectively. Cross-sectional views of nanocoating obtained at 4 A/dm2 revealed high concentrations of Ti (19.6 at%), Si (12.1 at%), and Ni (53.3 at%). Hence, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 with average microhardness of 848.5 Hv illustrated the highest microhardness when compared to other nanocoatings. On the other hand, wear rate of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 was only 13.6 mg/min, indicating excellent wear resistance. In addition, only some small surface scratches were observed, indicating outstanding wear performance.
1. Introduction Nowadays, metal-based ceramic composite coatings (such as Ni–TiN, Ni–AlN, Ni–Co/SiC, and Ni–CeO2) attracted increasing attention due to their excellent physical and chemical properties, such as good microhardness, outstanding wear resistance, and high thermal resistance [1–10]. These composite coatings can be prefabricated by electrodeposition, electroless plating, and brush plating technology [11–13]. In particular, electrodeposition processes several advantages when compared to electroless and brush plating, including high deposition rates, simple structures, no limitation for reinforcing particles, and reduced electrode losses. Li et al. [14] reported on the synthesis of Ni–B/Ni–W–BN composite coatings via co-electrodeposition. The results indicated that the crystal size of the Ni–B/Ni-W-BN coating was smaller compared to a monolayer Ni–W–BN coating. Alizadeh et al. [15] investigated the microstructure and properties of Ni–Mo/Al2O3 nanocoatings deposited via electrodeposition. They found that a large number of Al2O3 nanoparticles were uniformly embedded in the nanocoatings. Electrodeposition process can be divided into two categories: direct current electrodeposition (DCE) and pulse current electrodeposition (PCE). Li et al. [16] discussed that boron nitride reinforced Ni–W nanocoatings were successfully prefabricated by using
∗
PCE method. Compared to DCE, PCE has been applied in mechanical, petroleum, chemical and military fields thanks to decreased internal stress and porosity of coatings, refined matrix grains, and enhanced plating rates [17–20]. TiN and SiC particles are inorganic ceramic materials with excellent material properties. In particular, TiN nanoparticles possess high hardness and strength with significant wear and corrosion resistance. As such, TiN nanoparticles have been applied as a reinforced phase to fabricate composite coatings with excellent physical and chemical properties [21–23]. By comparison, SiC nanoparticles have excellent thermal stability, and outstanding wear resistance, but suffer from elevated microhardness. There has been numerous papers published reporting on the preparation of Ni–TiN, Ni–SiC, Cu–SiC coatings deposited by DCE and PCE techniques. However, only a few have investigated the prefabrication of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings via the PCE technique. Therefore, this study aims to prefabricate TiN and SiC nanoparticle reinforced metal-based ceramic composites by PCE deposition and to improve the physical and chemical properties of these composites. Besides, the effects of plating parameters on morphology, microstructure, microhardness and wear behavior of the as-fabricated Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings by PCE technique were all examined and the results were discussed.
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Ma).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.12.017 Received 24 September 2019; Received in revised form 22 November 2019; Accepted 2 December 2019 0272-8842/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd and Techna Group S.r.l. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Fafeng Xia, et al., Ceramics International, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.12.017
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 1. Experimental device for preparing Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings.
pure nickel plate (diameter of 30 × 30 × 10 mm) was used as anode and Q235 steel (diameter of 30 × 20 × 5 mm) as cathode. The distance between the two electrodes was kept at 200 mm. The experimental device used to produce Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings is presented in Fig. 1. The device was composed of pulse current source (SMD-100, Handan Dawei Electroplating Equipment Co., Ltd.), heating system (DRB-1000, Boao Electric Heating Equipment Co., Ltd.), ultrasonic agitator (XL-300, Beijing Xieli Ultrasonic Cleaning Equipment Co., Ltd.), and plating bath. The pulse current source was utilized to generate pulse current densities of 2, 4 and 6 A/dm2 at duty cycle kept at 40%. The heating system was used to maintain the plating solution at 45 °C. The ultrasonic agitator was employed to keep dispersed TiN and SiC nanoparticles evenly suspended in the plating solution. A plating solution pH of 4.6 was achieved by either adding hydrochloric acid (10 vol%) or NaOH solution (10 wt%), and plating time was 40 min. After PCE, the electrodes were cleaned by ultrasonic agitation for 10 min to dislodge any loosely adsorbed TiN and SiC nanoparticles. The surface morphologies, cross-sections and microstructures of the as-obtained Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were viewed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM, Tecnai-G2-20-S-Twin) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM, S3400) equipped with IE-300X type energy disperse spectroscopy (EDS). The surface compositions were determined by Rigaku D/Max-2400 X-ray diffraction (XRD) with Cu-Ka radiation (k=1.54 Å). The cross-section compositions of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were investigated by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, INCA X-MAX). The nanohardnesses values of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were measured by means of TI-950 triboindenter at loading force of 1000 μN for 10 s. To examine wear properties of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings, friction and wear tests were performed using MRH-6 abrasion tester (Jingchen Test Instrument, China). To this end, hardened steel barrel (GC15) was run on nanocoating surface at 5 N applied load and 0.1 m/s constant speed under dry sliding conditions at room temperature. The wear testing time was set at 30 min and worn surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were viewed by SEM after testing. The wear rate (V) of each nanocoating was computed according to Eq. (1):
Fig. 2. TEM images of TiN and SiC products: (a) TiN nanoparticles, and (b) SiC nanoparticles.
2. Experiment Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were prefabricated on Q235 steel by PCE method from modified plating solution containing 200 g/L NiSO4 (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 30 g/L NiCl2 (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 30 g/L H3BO3 (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 60 mg/L cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.9%), 8 g/L TiN nanoparticles (Hefei Cole Nano-technology Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.99%), and 8 g/L SiC nanoparticles (Daqing Tongda Co., Ltd. Purity of 99.98%) [24]. The diameters of TiN and SiC nanoparticles ranged from 20 to 40 nm. A
V=
M1 − M 2 L
(1)
where M1 and M2 denote the mass of each sample before and after each wear test, respectively. The mass was measured by a lab balance (accuracy: 0.1 mg). L represents the sliding length of hardened steel ball during wear experiments. 2
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 3. SEM images of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
coarse structure. As pulse current density increased to 4 A/dm2, Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform and fine surface morphologies were observed by SEM. However, the grains sizes of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings became larger than those produced at 4 A/dm2 at pulse current density further of 6 A/dm2. Sajjadnejad et al. [27] reported that the microstructure of nickel-based coatings was controlled by electroplating parameters such as pulse current density, pulse frequency, and duty cycle, etc. They found that pulse current density could effectively refine the grain size. In addition, the thicknesses of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings increased from 46.8 μm to 58.7 μm as pulse current density rose from 2 A/dm2 to 6 A/dm2 (Fig. 3a’~c’), demonstrating the effect of pulse current density on the deposition rate of nickel grains. The results are in agreement with those reported by Sajjadnejad [28].
3. Results and discussion 3.1. TiN and SiC nanoparticles Fig. 2 exhibits the morphologies of as-received TiN and SiC nanoparticles. The average diameters of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were determined as 40 and 35 nm, respectively. TiN and SiC nanoparticles were prone to aggregation due to their small sizes [25,26]. In addition, TiN and SiC nanoparticles displayed regular crystal structures in the micro-regions.
3.2. SEM analysis Fig. 3a~c illustrate the SEM surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared at pulse current densities of 2, 4 and 6 A/dm2, respectively. The corresponding cross-section morphologies Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings are displayed in Fig. 3a’~c’. The pulse current density revealed great influence on surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings (Fig. 3a~c). At pulse current density of 2 A/dm2, numerous large-sized grains were formed on Ni/TiN–SiC coating with uneven and
3.3. TEM Fig. 4 shows TEM micrographs of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared at different pulse current densities. The black sections in Fig. 4a~c showed TiN and SiC nanoparticles whereas the white sections 3
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 4. TEM micrographs of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings prepared with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
nanocoating deposited at 6 A/dm2 possessed larger nickel grains structures with serious agglomeration of TiN and SiC nanoparticles. Fig. 5 displays TEM bright-field images of Ni, Ti, Si, N and C elements distributed in spectral area II of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2. Ni, Ti, Si, N, and C elements looked well-dispersed in the nanocoating, testifying of the successful embedding of both TiN and SiC nanoparticles in nickel matrix.
were nickel grains. Some TiN and SiC nanoparticles appeared on Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2, whereas numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles became incorporated at 4 A/dm2. The average sizes of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were recorded as 45.9 nm and 37.2 nm, respectively. The reason for this had possibly to do with the moderate pulse current density, which effectively inhibited TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating. However, Ni/TiN–SiC
4
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 5. TEM bright field image of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at pulse current density of 4 A/dm2.
TiN–SiC nanocoatings [29]. The relationship between electric field force and pulse current density can be expressed by Eq. (2):
3.4. Codeposition mechanism Fig. 6 displays the co-deposition mechanism of nickel ions, TiN nanoparticles and SiC nanoparticles during PCE process, which can be explained by Guglielmi's theory. The nickel ions present in plating solution were first adsorbed on TiN and SiC nanoparticles surfaces. Numerous ion clouds then formed and became suspended in the bath. The nickel ions, TiN and SiC nanoparticles then moved towards the cathode surface under the action of electric field force (F). Meanwhile, hydrogen evolution occurred on the cathode surface. TiN and SiC nanoparticles passed both the electric double and hydrogen evolution layers to become tightly embedded in Ni matrix metal. The pulse current density also showed notable influence on distribution and amount of embedded TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/
F=
I×q σ
(2)
where I denotes the pulse current density, q is the ironic charge, and σ represents the conductivity of plating solution. During PCE deposition of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings, the effect of electric field force on TiN and SiC nanoparticles looked not obvious under low pulse current densities (such as 2 A/dm2), leading to low amounts of incorporated TiN and SiC nanoparticles in the coating. Thus, TiN and SiC nanoparticles did not significantly inhibit the growth of nickel grains, resulting in free nickel grain growth and formation of numerous large-sized grains. By comparison, suitable pulse current 5
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 6. The co-deposition mechanism of the nickel irons, TiN nanoparticles and SiC nanoparticles during PCE process.
and 6 A/dm2. For Ni grains, three strong diffractions peaked were observed at 44.8°, 52.2° and 76.7°, corresponding to (1 1 1), (2 0 0) and (2 2 0) planes, respectively. For TiN nanoparticles, three strong diffractions emerged at 36.6°, 42.6° and 61.8°, attributed to (1 1 1), (2 0 0) and (2 2 0) planes, respectively. For SiC nanoparticles, three strong diffractions located at 34.2°, 41.5° and 59.8° were noticed and assigned to (1 1 1), (2 0 0) and (2 2 0) planes, respectively. In Fig. 7, the diffraction peaks of Ni grains first decreased and then increased as pulse current density rose from 2 A/dm2 to 6 A/dm2. Pulse current densities on the order of 4 A/dm2 could potentially increase the amounts of TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating. Thus, TiN and SiC nanoparticles supplied large numbers of nuclei for formation of Ni grains and restricted sustained growth of Ni grains, leading to formation of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform, and fine morphologies. Therefore, proper current densities can effectively refine Ni grains of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings. 3.5.2. XPS Fig. 8 depicts cross-sectional composition distributions of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. TiN and SiC nanoparticles became completely incorporated in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings. Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 2 A/dm2 showed fewer TiN and SiC nanoparticles than those prepared at 4 A/dm2 and 6 A/dm2 (Fig. 8a). By contrast, high concentrations of Ti (19.6 at%), Si (12.1 at%) and Ni (53.3 at%) were measured throughout the crosssection of nanocoating obtained at 4 A/dm2. At 6 A/dm2, the concentrations of Ti, Si and Ni elements slightly reduced since the elevated pulse current densities promoted co-deposition of Ni irons, TiN, and SiC nanoparticles.
Fig. 7. XRD patterns of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
densities (such as 4 A/dm2) could effectively increase the electric field force and significantly reduce the thickness of hydrogen evolution layer, leading to incorporation of significant amounts of TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating. Hence, TiN and SiC nanoparticles supplied large numbers of nuclei for formation of Ni grains and restricted sustained growth of Ni grains, leading to formation of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform, and fine morphologies. However, substantial amounts of hydrogen bubbles formed at the cathode surface at pulse current density of 6 A/dm2, leading to increased the thickness of hydrogen evolution layer. This, in turn, hindered deposition of TiN and SiC nanoparticles on the cathode surface, reducing the amounts of embedded TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings. This also declined the inhibitory effect of nickel grains, increasing their grain sizes. Overall, these results were consistent with those from SEM and TEM.
3.6. Microhardness test The effects of pulse current density on microhardness values of Ni/ TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities are displayed in Fig. 9. Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 with average microhardness of 848.5 Hv clearly depicted the highest microhardness than other nanocoatings. By comparison, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating obtained at 2 A/dm2 depicted an average microhardness of only 699.2 Hv. According to previous studies [30–32], microhardness of nanocoatings should not only depend on content of TiN and SiC nanoparticles but also on distribution of nanoparticles throughout the coating. High contents and uniform distributions of TiN and SiC nanoparticles existed in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained at 4 A/dm2, leading to dispersion–hardening effect and high microhardness. Besides, TiN and SiC nanoparticles independently possessed microhardness values, further improving the microhardness of the coatings.
3.5. Microstructure 3.5.1. XRD Fig. 7 presents the XRD patterns of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced at different pulse current densities. Ni, SiC and TiN phases were all present in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained at 2 A/dm2, 4 A/dm2, 6
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 9. Effect of pulse current density on microhardnesses of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings.
Fig. 10. Wear rates of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
nanocoating prepared at 2 A/dm2 showed maximum wear rate of 27.1 mg/min. Nevertheless, wear rate of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 was only 13.6 mg/min, indicating Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with excellent wear resistance. 3.7.2. Worn surface morphology Fig. 11 displays the worn surface morphologies of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. Numerous deep grooves and pits appeared on worn surfaces of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2, demonstrating nanocoating surface with serious wear state. By contrast, only small scratches were displayed on nanocoating surface deposited at 4 A/dm2, testifying of outstanding wear performance. However, pulse current densities around 6 A/dm2 induced some large-sized grooves on nanocoating surface.
Fig. 8. XPS cross-sectional profiles of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
3.7. Wear test
3.7.3. Friction coefficient Friction coefficient curves of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at various pulse current densities are displayed in Fig. 12. Among all three nanocoatings, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 had the smallest average friction coefficient of 0.49. The nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2 had the highest average friction coefficient with a value of
3.7.1. Wear rate Fig. 10 illustrates the wear rates of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. The wear rates of all three nanocoatings slightly enhanced during wear testing. Ni/TiN–SiC 7
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
Fig. 12. Friction coefficients of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/dm2.
Fig. 11. SEM images of the worn surface of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, (b) 4 A/dm2, and (c) 6 A/ dm2.
0.76. TiN and SiC nanoparticles contents and microhardnesses of the nanocoating are the main factors that ensure the friction coefficient of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings [33]. When the coatings TiN and SiC nanoparticle content was increased, numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles were separated from the nickel matrix under the action of friction during wear tests. This reduced the friction coefficient by changing the friction mode between the Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating and the steel barrel from sliding to rolling.
Fig. 13. Abrasion diagrams of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings produced with different pulse current densities: (a) 2 A/dm2, and (b) 4 A/dm2.
TiN–SiC nanocoating with poor wear resistance. However, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 showed uniform and fine microstructure with large amounts of TiN and SiC nanoparticles (Fig. 13b), effectively prohibiting any deep damage of hardened steel barrel on nanocoating surface. Therefore, only some small scratches were observed on Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating surface deposited at 4 A/dm2, revealing superior wear resistance.
3.7.4. Wear mechanism Fig. 13 illustrates the wear mechanisms of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings deposited at different pulse current densities. The wear resistances of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings were mainly affected by microhardness and microstructure of each coating. Inappropriate pulse current densities (such as 2 A/dm2 and 6 A/dm2) during PCE induced few TiN and SiC nanoparticles in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings (Fig. 13a). The microhardness values of both nanocoatings were small. Hence, hardened steel barrel could easily tear down large pieces of coating, leading to Ni/
4. Conclusion (1) At pulse current density of 4 A/dm2, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with smooth, uniform and fine surface morphologies were observed by 8
Ceramics International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
F. Xia, et al.
SEM. Some TiN and SiC nanoparticles appeared on Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2, whereas numerous TiN and SiC nanoparticles became incorporated at 4 A/dm2. The average sizes of TiN and SiC nanoparticles were recorded as 45.9 nm and 37.2 nm, respectively. (2) Ni, SiC and TiN phases were all present in Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings obtained at 2 A/dm2, 4 A/dm2, and 6 A/dm2. Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 2 A/dm2 showed fewer TiN and SiC nanoparticles than those prepared at 4 A/dm2 and 6 A/dm2 (Fig. 9a). By contrast, high concentrations of Ti (19.6 at%), Si (12.1 at%) and Ni (53.3 at%) were measured throughout the crosssection of nanocoating obtained at 4 A/dm2. (3) Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating deposited at 4 A/dm2 with average microhardness of 848.5 Hv clearly depicted the highest microhardness than other nanocoatings. By comparison, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating obtained at 2 A/dm2 depicted an average microhardness of only 699.2 Hv. (4) The wear rate of Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 was only 13.6 mg/min, indicating Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoatings with excellent wear resistance. In addition, Ni/TiN–SiC nanocoating prepared at 4 A/dm2 had the smallest average friction coefficient of 0.49. However, the nanocoating deposited at 2 A/dm2 had the highest average friction coefficient with a value of 0.76.
[8] Y. Chen, Y. Hao, W. Huang, Y. Ji, W. Yang, X. Yin, Y. Liu, X. Ling, Corrosion behavior of Ni-P-nano-Al2O3 composite coating in the presence of anionic and cationic surfactants, Surf. Coat. Technol. 310 (2017) 122–128. [9] B. Li, Electrochemical deposition of Ni-Co/SiC nanocomposite coatings for marine environment, Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 12 (8) (2017) 7017–7030. [10] Z. Xu, Y. Chen, Characterization of nano-sized SiC-Ni composite fabricated by electroless plating method, J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 13 (2) (2013) 1456–1460. [11] B. Li, W. Zhang, W. Zhang, Y. Huan, Preparation of Ni–W/SiC nanocomposite coatings by electrochemical deposition, J. Alloy. Comp. 702 (2017) 38–50. [12] Q. Fan, Y. Gao, Y. Zhao, Q. Yang, L. Guo, L. Jiang, Fabrication of diamond-structured composite materials with Ni-P-diamond particles by electroless plating, Mater. Lett. 215 (2018) 242–245. [13] S. Qi, X. Li, Z. Zhang, H. Dong, Fabrication and characterisation of electro-brush plated nickel-graphene oxide nano-composite coatings, Thin Solid Films 644 (2017) 106–114. [14] B.S. Li, W.W. Zhang, D.D. Li, Y.X. Huan, J. Dong, Microstructural, surface and electrochemical properties of a novel Ni–B/Ni–W–BN duplex composite coating by co-electrodeposition, Appl. Surf. Sci. 458 (2018) 305–318. [15] M. Alizadeh, A. Cheshmpish, Electrodeposition of Ni-Mo/Al2O3 nano-composite coatings at various deposition current densities, Appl. Surf. Sci. 466 (2019) 433–440. [16] B. Li, D. Mei, T. Xia, W. Zhang, W. Zhang, Fabrication and characterization of boron nitride reinforced Ni-W nanocomposite coating by electrodeposition, J. Alloy. Comp. 777 (2019) 1234–1244. [17] L. Wu, J.E. Graves, A.J. Cobley, Mechanism for the development of Sn-Cu alloy coatings produced by pulsed current electrodeposition, Mater. Lett. 217 (2018) 120–123. [18] M. Shourgeshty, M. Aliofkhazraei, A. Karimzadeh, Study on functionally graded ZnNi-Al2O3 coatings fabricated by pulse-electrodeposition, Surf. Eng. 35 (2) (2019) 167–176. [19] R. Mohan Reddy, B.M. Praveen, CM Praveen Kumar, Corrosion behaviour and characterisation of Ni-Nb2O5 composites prepared by pulse electrodeposition, Surf. Eng. Appl. Electrochem. 53 (2) (2017) 179–185. [20] M. Aghazadeh, M.G. Maragheh, M.R. Ganjali, P. Norouzi, Preparation and characterization of Mn5O8 nanoparticles: a novel and facile pulse cathodic electrodeposition followed by heat treatment, Synth. React. Inorg. Met. Org. Chem. 47 (7) (2017) 1085–1089. [21] F. Xia, W. Jia, M. Jiang, W. Cui, J. Wang, Microstructure and corrosion properties of Ni-TiN nanocoatings prepared by jet pulse electrodeposition, Ceram. Int. 43 (17) (2017) 14623–14628. [22] B. Li, D. Li, W. Chen, Y. Liu, J. Zhang, Y. Wei, W. Zhang, W. Jia, Effect of current density and deposition time on microstructure and corrosion resistance of Ni-W/TiN nanocomposite coating, Ceram. Int. 45 (2019) 4870–4879. [23] A. Hefnawy, N. Elkhoshkhany, A. Essam, Ni-TiN and Ni-Co-TiN composite coatings for corrosion protection: fabrication and electrochemical characterization, J. Alloy. Comp. 735 (2018) 600–606. [24] F. Xia, W. Jia, C. Ma, J. Wang, Synthesis of Ni-TiN composites through ultrasonic pulse electrodeposition with excellent corrosion and wear resistance, Ceram. Int. 44 (2018) 766–773. [25] M. Ebadi, W.J. Basirun, Y. Alias, Influence of magnetic field on the electrodeposition of Ni-Co alloy, J. Chem. Sci. 122 (2) (2010) 279–285. [26] P. Colomban, G. Gouadec, Raman spectroscopy of nanostructures and nanosized materials, J. Raman Spectrosc. 38 (6) (2007) 598–603. [27] M. Sajjadnejad, H. Omidvar, M. Javanbakht, Influence of pulse operational parameters on pure nickel electrodeposits: Part II. Microhardness and corrosion resistance, Surf. Eng. 33 (2) (2017) 94–101. [28] M. Sajjadnejad, H. Omidvar, M. Javanbakht, A. Mozafari, Textural and structural evolution of pulse electrodeposited Ni/diamond nanocomposite coatings, J. Alloy. Comp. 704 (2017) 809–817. [29] B. Bahadormanesh, A. Dolati, M.R. Ahmadi, Electrodeposition and characterization of Ni-Co/SiC nanocomposite coatings, J. Alloy. Comp. 509 (2011) 9406–9412. [30] F. Xia, J. Tian, C. Ma, M. Potts, X. Guo, Effect of pulse frequency on microstructural, nanomechanical and wear properties of electrodeposited Ni-TiN composite coatings, J. Appl. Phys. 116 (23) (2014) 234301–234306. [31] F. Xia, J. Tian, W. Wang, Y. He, Effect of plating parameters on the properties of pulse electrodeposited Ni–TiN thin films, Ceram. Int. 42 (11) (2016) 13268–13272. [32] C. Ma, M. Jiang, F. Xia, Preparation and characterization of Ni-TiN thin films electrodeposited with nickel baths of different TiN nanoparticle concentration, Surf. Rev. Lett. 24 (5) (2016) 17500631-175006317. [33] C.A. León-Patiño, J. García-Guerra, E.A. Aguilar-Reyes, Tribological characterization of heat-treated Ni-P and Ni-P-Al2O3 composite coatings by reciprocating sliding tests, Wear 426–427 (2019) 330–340.
Declaration of competing InterestCOI The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Acknowledgement This work has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51974089, 51674090), Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China (Grant No. LC2018020), Innovative and Entrepreneurship Training Program for College Students in Heilongjiang Province (Grant No. 201910220060). References [1] X. Li, J. Feng, Y. Jiang, H. Lin, J. Feng, Preparation and properties of TaSi2-MoSi2ZrO2-borosilicate glass coating on porous SiC ceramic composites for thermal protection, Ceram. Int. 44 (16) (2018) 19143–19150. [2] C. Ma, W. Yu, M. Jiang, W. Cui, F. Xia, Jet pulse electrodeposition and characterization of Ni-AlN nanocoatings in presence of ultrasound, Ceram. Int. 44 (5) (2018) 5163–5170. [3] S. Tamariz, D. Martin, N. Grandjean, AlN grown on Si(1 1 1) by ammonia-molecular beam epitaxy in the 900-1200°C temperature range, J. Cryst. Growth 476 (2017) 58–63. [4] H. Zhou, W. Wang, Y. Gu, X. Fang, Y. Bai, Study on the fabrication of Nano-SiC/Ni-P composite coatings with the assistance of electromagnetic-ultrasonic compound field, Strength Mater. 1 (2017) 1–8. [5] C. Wang, L.D. Shen, M.B. Qiu, Z.J. Tian, W. Jiang, Characterizations of Ni-CeO2 nanocomposite coating by interlaced jet electrodeposition, J. Alloy. Comp. 727 (2017) 269–277. [6] F.F. Xia, W.C. Jia, C.Y. Ma, R. Yang, Y. Wang, M. Potts, Synthesis and characterization of Ni–doped TiN thin films deposited by jet electrodeposition, Appl. Surf. Sci. 434 (2018) 228–233. [7] M. Wu, W. Jia, P. Lv, Electrodepositing Ni-TiN nanocomposite layers with applying action of ultrasonic waves, Procedia Eng. 174 (2017) 717–723.
9