J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11666-018-0779-y

PEER REVIEWED

Wear Resistance of Stainless Steel Coatings on ZE41 Magnesium

Alloy
S. Garcı́a-Rodrı́guez1 • B. Torres1 • A. J. Lopez1 • W. M. Rainforth2 •

E. Otero1 • M. Muñoz1 • J. Rams1

Submitted: 28 February 2018 / in revised form: 15 October 2018 / Published online: 26 October 2018
Ó ASM International 2018

Abstract Stainless steel coatings were deposited by high Introduction

velocity oxy fuel (HVOF) technique on ZE41 magnesium
alloy substrates. Different coatings with different thick- Magnesium alloys stand out because of their low density,
nesses were sprayed on the magnesium alloy without and high specific stiffness and strength (Ref 1). This makes
causing any degradation on its microstructure and without them very attractive to being used in transportation appli-
modifying its mechanical properties. The wear behavior of cations in substitution of other metals such as steels and
the 316L stainless steel coatings was tested using the ball- even substituting aluminum alloys. In particular, the mag-
on-disk configuration technique in dry conditions. Bulk nesium alloys containing Zn and rare earths (RE) have
316L stainless steel and ZE41 magnesium alloys were also improved strength and creep resistance, although they
tested for comparative purposes. In the best conditions, the exhibit poor surface properties and a low corrosion resis-
coatings provided up to 93% more wear resistance than tance (Ref 1). In spite of this, these alloys find many
uncoated ZE41 (at low loads and speeds) and only 11% applications by taking advantage of their moderate cost
below bulk 316L stainless steel (at high loads and speeds). (Ref 2-4).
The number of the layers that formed the coatings brings a The main drawbacks that magnesium alloys exhibit and
change in the predominant wear mechanism through the that also affect the ZE41 alloy as well can be solved by the
appearance of a mechanical mixing layer (MML) that application of coatings. For corrosion protection, different
significantly reduces the wear rate. coatings have been used, such as TiN, TiCN, ZrCN,
metallic oxides, Al, Zn, Cr, Cu coatings (Ref 5, 6). Among
Keywords 316L  Coatings  high velocity oxy fuel  them, plasma electrolytic oxidation (Ref 7) and thermal
magnesium alloys  stainless steel  wear  ZE41 spray coating (Ref 8) are receiving most of the attention,
being this last the most efficient to control both corrosion
and wear behavior because of the wide range of materials
that can be deposited by the available techniques. Alu-
minum and its alloys have been deposited by Cold Spray
(Ref 9), Flame Spray (Ref 10) and HVOF (Ref 11). These
alloys have provided resistance to corrosion and wear to
the Mg alloys, but with the intrinsic limitations of alu-
& B. Torres minum alloys. These limitations have been partially over-
[email protected] come by the use of aluminum composites using the same
1
spraying techniques, i.e., Cold Spray (Ref 12), Flame Spray
Área de Ciencia e Ingenierı́a de Materiales, ESCET,
and HVOF (Ref 13). Although the incorporation of parti-
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, C/Tulipán s/n, 28933 Móstoles,
Madrid, Spain cles improves the wear behavior of the coatings, it limits
2 their corrosion resistance (Ref 14), so that an equilibrium
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University
of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, S Yorkshire S10 2TN, balance must be achieved.
England, UK

123
1616 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

A different approach consists of the deposition of the spraying gun was placed on an anthropomorphic robot
coatings made from a material with larger wear resistance, (ABB IRB-2400/16) to control the spraying distance and
and the use of stainless steel (SS) as a coating appears to be the gun speed over the substrate surface. Oxygen was used
a good alternative. The good corrosion and wear behavior as oxidizing gas (147 NLPM—normalized liter per min-
of stainless steel are well known (Ref 15-17), being its high ute), hydrogen as fuel gas (717 NLPM), dry air as shielding
density and cost its main drawbacks. However, using it as a gas (438 NLPM). Nitrogen was used as transport gas to
coating means that the mass penalty is not great compared feed the feedstock powder in the gun. No device was used
with using the alloy in its bulk form. to cool the samples during spraying. The fixed parameters
Stainless steel coatings have been deposited on steel in the spraying processes were in all cases 300 mm
substrates by Cold Spray (Ref 18) providing continuous spraying distance, gun speed of 250 mm/s and feeding rate
coatings although showing some porosity. Also, amor- of 26 g/min, while the studied parameter was the number
phous Fe coatings have been deposited on magnesium of layers which varied from 1 to 4. These conditions have
alloys using HVOF with excellent corrosion resistance in proved out to be the best ones for obtaining and adequate
sodium chloride solution (Ref 19). The little literature corrosion resistance (Ref 23).
about the use of thermal spray technique to coat magne-
sium alloy substrates with stainless steel demonstrated that Specimen Characterization
the stainless steel coatings provide excellent corrosion
resistance to the magnesium substrates (Ref 20). The main morphological features of the coatings on the
The objective of this paper is to evaluate the possibility cross section, the wear tracks, the worn surfaces in the
of improving the tribological performance of the ZE41 transverse section and the debris formed during the wear
magnesium alloy with stainless steel coatings. For this tests were observed by scanning electron microscopy
purpose, we have deposited 316L SS coatings with dif- (SEM, Hitachi S-3400N) using backscattered electrons
ferent thicknesses on ZE41 magnesium alloy substrates and (BSE) as well as an energy-dispersive x-ray spectrometer
their wear resistance has been tested using the ball-on-disk (EDS, Xflash 5010, Bruker). Metallographic samples were
test in dry conditions and it has been compared with the cut using a SiC disk cutter, mounted in hardened epoxy
wear characteristics of ZE41 and 316L in bulk. The wear resin, ground on emery paper up to 1200 grit and polished
mechanisms involved in each spraying condition have been with diamond paste of 1-lm particle size.
studied. Porosity and the amount of oxides of each sample were
determined using light microscopy (Leica DMR) with
Leica Image Proplus software.
Experimental Procedure Hardness at the cross sections of polished samples was
measured using a Vickers Buehler Micromet 2100 micro-
Materials hardness tester with a load of 0.1 kg for 15 s (HV0.1). The
microhardness values reported are the average of ten
Extruded ZE41 substrates from Magnesium Elektron with measurements for each condition. The hardness of the
the following composition in weight % were used: 4.09 Zn; substrate on the cross section was 65.7 ± 1.5 HV0.1 for the
1.68 rare earths (Pr ? Nd ? La ? Ce); 0.68 Zr; 0.6 O; bulk ZE41 and 213.2 ± 7.3 HV0.1 for the 316L stainless
0.03 Mn; and the rest Mg. The material was received with a steel sheet used as reference.
T5 aging treatment (2 h at 330 °C followed by 10-16 h at The different crystalline phases of the 316L stainless
177 °C). steel powder and the HVOF sprayed coatings were char-
To improve the adhesion of the sprayed coatings, the acterized by x-ray diffraction measurements using X’Pert
samples were sand-blasted with 1-mm corundum particles PRO apparatus with the CuKa radiation by low angle (1°).
and ultrasonically cleaned in ethanol. Austenitic stainless
steel powder (Diamalloy 1003, Sulzer Metco), such as type Wear Tests
316L, was used as feedstock in the thermal spray processes
with a - 45 ? 11 lm particle size distribution. Its nominal Wear tests were carried out under dry sliding condition
composition was (wt.%): 17 Cr, 12 Ni, 2.5 Mo, 2.3 Si, 0.03 using a ball-on-disk tribometer (model Microtest MT/10/
C, the rest Fe. SCM) on the ZE41 substrate and on the different sprayed
coatings. The substrates were ground with different papers
Spraying Process up to 1200 grit, and the counterbody was a 6-mm-diameter
low-carbon steel ball AISI 1010. Specimen and counter-
The spraying was carried out with a HVOF thermal spray body surfaces were cleaned with acetone before the wear
equipment from Sulzer Metco (Unicoat, DJ2600) in which

123
J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1617

test to avoid the presence of humidity and non-desirable mechanical features of the coatings, as well as the name
films as grease on them. codes used. All the coatings were homogeneous and
Wear tests were carried out with two different loads of 2 completely covered the surface of the substrates. There was
and 10 N, with a speed of 0.16 and 0.04 m/s for a total total continuity between the coating and the substrate, and
wear length of 200 m, because it was previously ascer- the coating followed the surface roughness. The thickness
tained that a steady-state wear regime was achieved for this of the coatings varied from 100 ± 18 lm for the one-layer
distance. The different coated systems were tested, as well coating to 318 ± 20 lm for the four-layer coating. The
as an uncoated magnesium alloy and a 316L stainless steel weight increase that these coatings added was between
3-mm-thick sheet. The wear testing machine recorded 0.039 and 0.26 g/cm2. Although SS3 and SS4 samples have
continuously the friction coefficient and the penetration of the same thickness, the difference in the mass gain, higher
the ball in the coating. Specimens were weighed before and for SS4, suggests that SS4 is a more compact coating than
after the tests with a 0.01 mg balance to measure the mass SS3. This is due to the effect of the impact of some par-
loss. ticles on others so the density of the coating layer is
With these values, the mass loss measurements were gradually enhanced by accumulative deformation resulting
obtained and the wear rate was determined. To evaluate the from all approached particles over the layer (Ref 22).
wear mechanisms of the different manufactured compos- Moreover, these values indicate that the mass added by the
ites, the Archard’s law (Ref 21) was applied: stainless steel coating is not high because of the reduced
V W thickness of the coating. Finally, some oxides were
¼ K ¼ kW ðEq 1Þ observed in the coatings with a volume fraction of about
L H
5% for all the coated systems.
where V is the wear volume, L is the sliding distance, being Comparing the microstructure of the ZE41 magnesium
the coefficient V/L the wear rate, W is the applied load, H is alloy before and after the spraying process (Fig. 1g and h,
the hardness of the sample, K is the Archard’s law constant respectively), it can be observed a refinement of the
and k is the specific wear rate. microstructure of ZE41 magnesium alloy to a depth of
about 20 microns below the interface ZE41-coating after
the spraying process. This occurs due to the plastic defor-
Results and Discussion mation during grit blasting and the subsequent recrystal-
lization caused by the heating during spraying and due to
Sprayed Coatings the effect of the spraying process.
X-ray diffractograms for stainless steel powder and SS3
Figure 1(a) and (b) shows the top view of the surfaces of stainless steel coating sprayed by HVOF (Fig. 2) revealed
the coatings with different number of layers, and in both that in the powder only the austenite phase (c) is present. In
figures it can be seen that the flat surface observed in the the SS3 coating diffractogram, in addition to these peaks,
coatings is constituted by the addition of individual dro- new diffraction lines appeared. These lines correspond to
plets. The images selected represent the most different the ferrite phase (d) and have been caused by the thermal
conditions obtained, i.e., the one-layer coating (Fig. 1a) history of the sprayed particle during flying and depositing,
and the four-layer coating (Fig. 1b). It can be observed that according to other authors (Ref 22).
the droplets in the one-layer coating have a spherical shape On the other hand, it can be observed that the hardness
while in the multilayer coating the steel droplets are of the coatings is in all cases above 300 HV0.1, reaching a
strongly deformed and have the typical splash splat shape. value of 432 HV0.1 for the four-layer coating. It is impor-
The shape of the droplets is determined by the temperature tant to consider that after spraying, the substrate hardness
and by the mechanical behavior of the coating–substrate was not significantly affected by the heat applied during the
system. In the one-layer coating, the steel droplet is spraying procedure, as it can be observed in the in-depth
sprayed on top of the magnesium alloy, which has low dependence of the hardness of the coated substrates
temperature and low hardness; as the number of layers (Fig. 3), which maintains the 65 HV0.1 value measured
increases, the temperature of the system increases and the without coating. The area immediately below the coating,
droplets are sprayed on top of previously sprayed hard instead, is work hardened by grit blasting and by drop
stainless steel; for these reasons the shape of the drops impact so a little increase in the hardness value is observed.
changes, becoming more deformed. This fact is related with the refined grains in the
Figure 1(c), (d), (e) and (f) shows the cross-sectional microstructure.
SEM micrographs of the different sprayed coatings with These figures also evidence the large hardness differ-
the conditions indicated in the experimental section, and ence between the substrates and the coatings, as the coat-
Table 1 resumes some of the morphological and ings are 5 to 6 times harder than the substrates used, and

123
1618 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

Fig. 1 SEM-BSE micrographs:

plane view of the surface of the
coating (a) SS1, (b) SS4, and
cross sections of (c) SS1,
(d) SS2, (e) SS3, (f) SS4
coatings. OM images of SS4
sample showing details of ZE41
microstructure (g) before
spraying process and (h) after
spraying process

they are even harder than the 213.2 ± 7.3 HV measured one hand, the formation of ferrite phase, in particular the
for the laminated AISI 316L used for comparative pur- acicular ferrite, increases the mechanical properties of
poses. This is due to the way in which the HVOF coatings steels (tensile, impact and bending properties and micro-
are deposited. hardness) (Ref 23, 24). On the other hand, the spraying
The increase in the hardness of the coating can be process generates a tensile quenching stress due to the
attributed to a synergistic effect of several factors. On the rapid cooling and solidification of molten droplets and

123
J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1619

Table 1 Morphological and mechanical features of the coatings

Coated sample Number of layers Thickness, lm Dm/area, g/cm2 Hardness (HV0.1) Oxide content, vol.%

SS1 1 100 ± 18 3.9 9 10-2 328 ± 25 4.9 ± 0.8

SS2 2 240 ± 13 10.7 9 10-2 349 ± 29 5.1 ± 0.9
SS3 3 309 ± 18 17.6 9 10-2 392 ± 31 4.3 ± 0.8
-2
SS4 4 318 ± 20 26.1 9 10 433 ± 35 5.4 ± 0.6

Fig. 2 X-ray diffractograms for (a) stainless steel powder and (b) SS3 stainless steel coating

123
1620 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

Fig. 3 Microhardness profiles across the substrate/coating interface of (a) SS1, (b) SS2, (c) SS3 and (d) SS4 coatings

because the contraction of the solidified splats is restricted about 30 to 40 m in which the friction coefficient was not
by the adherence to the substrate. In addition, more thermal stable. From there, it kept constant during the rest of the
stress appears when the system cools to room temperature test.
due to the difference in the coefficients of thermal expan- Figure 4 represents the wear rates of the different HVOF
sion between the coating and the substrate. stainless steel coatings, of the uncoated ZE41 substrates
Finally, the high velocity impact of the partially molten and of the AISI 316L stainless steel plate. It can be
stainless steel particles against the substrate induces a observed that the coated systems present a higher wear
peening stress that has a compressive component (Ref resistance than the uncoated magnesium alloy in all con-
22, 25) associated with the formation of dislocations. As ditions used, showing values that are close to those of the
the number of deposited layers increased, as shown in 316L bulk steel.
Table 1 and Fig. 3, the microhardness values observed also In all systems, there is a strong dependence of the wear
increased, reaching 328 HV and 433 HV for the three- and rate on the applied load, showing larger wear rates at 10 N
four-layer coatings, respectively. Other authors reported loads than at 2 N. However, there is a different dependence
similar findings for type 316L stainless steel and argued on sliding speed in the different systems. The wear rate of
that the greater microhardness was attributable to peening the ZE41 alloy is sensitive to the sliding speed, and it
and the consequent work hardening (Ref 22, 26). increases by 2.5 times at low speeds, while all the coated
systems and bulk stainless steel are much less sensitive to
Wear Testing sliding speed.
The coatings have a specific wear rate (Fig. 5) that at
The coatings were tested using the ball-on-disk configu- low speeds is very close to that of the AISI 316L steel,
ration. In all tests, there was an initial sliding distance of being much smaller than that of the magnesium alloy. The

123
J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1621

Fig. 4 Wear rate of the coatings and substrates at 10 N and 2 N load and at the sliding speeds of (a) 0.04 m/s and (b) 0.16 m/s

Fig. 5 Specific wear rates of

the coatings and substrates at
10 N and 2 N load and at the
sliding speeds of a) 0.04 m/s
and b) 0.16 m/s

difference decreases at greater sliding speeds. Apart from The measured friction coefficients show different results
this, the behavior of the coatings shows that, in most cases, for the different samples tested at the velocities and loads
the larger the number of layers in the coating, the better the used (Fig. 6). For the ZE41 magnesium alloy, it was not
wear behavior of the system. These results are expected as possible to measure the friction coefficient at high speeds
thicker coatings should behave more similarly to the bulk and low loads because the value was unstable. It is worth
material than thinner ones; they are capable of better dis- considering that at low speeds, the friction coefficient for
tributing stresses and better accommodating large strain the uncoated magnesium alloy is much smaller than for the
values. stainless steel coatings and bulk material. This behavior has

Fig. 6 Friction coefficient for

the coatings and substrates at
10 N and 2 N load and at the
sliding speeds of (a) 0.04 m/s
and (b) 0.16 m/s

123
1622 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

been associated with the promotion of oxidative wear, comparison with the results obtained for SS1 sample. So,
which avoids the formation of a metal–metal contact, but as previously shown, wear for the SS2 sample is in general
that enhances the wear rate of the substrates [26, 27]. It has lower than for the SS1 sample for all conditions tested. In
been also observed that the friction coefficient values for addition, although changes in speed do not produce chan-
SS1, SS2 and SS3 samples at low speeds and loads are ges in wear at high loads, at low loads the increase in speed
similar and higher than the value obtained for SS4. produces an increase in the wear rate and in the width of
Although SS3 and SS4 samples have the same thickness, the wear track. The analysis of the wear surface of the
the difference obtained in the friction coefficients is samples shows a similar morphology to that obtained for
attributed to the difference in the density of the two coat- the SS1 samples. At low loads and speeds (Fig. 8b), the
ings. When the applied load increases, the friction coeffi- predominant wear mechanism was the oxidative one. In
cients and the difference between them decrease. The this case, the oxides have the shape of continuous platelets
friction coefficients measured at larger speeds are lower in some areas (marked by arrows in Fig. 8b) with a big
than at lower speeds. size, which could partially avoid metal–metal contact. As
shown in Fig. 8(g), oxide clusters adhere to the counter-
Wear Mechanisms Characterization body; thus, oxidized debris onto both surfaces might be
very sticky, decreasing the wear rate through physical
The worn tracks have been observed to identify the main separation of the metallic surfaces, but, at the same time,
wear mechanisms present in the coatings. For the one-layer increasing the friction coefficient. The applied load has a
coatings, there is a strong difference in the size of the wear much larger effect than the sliding speed used as it pro-
path, being much wider at the highest load than at the motes abrasive wear (Fig. 8c and h) and even some
smaller one (Fig. 7a). This is in agreement with the wear delamination (Fig. 8d). These two mechanisms produce the
values measured that were much larger for the higher load. detachment of the material, so an increase in the wear rate
The SEM images of the one-layer system show great is produced. For the highest speeds, also some material
dependencies of the wear mechanism with the load and the from the counterpart was incorporated into the coating
sliding speed used during the test, although the effect of surface (marked by arrows in Fig. 8e and f) so the adhesion
changing the applied load is bigger. At low loads and was the predominant mechanism for these conditions.
speeds (Fig. 7b), little wear was observed and it was The three (Fig. 9)- and four (Fig. 10)-layer coatings,
mainly related to some local oxidation of the coating that SS3 and SS4, respectively, show the same width of the
appeared as oxidized particles on the surface of the sample wear path (Fig. 9a and 10a, respectively) than SS1 and SS2
(marked by the arrow). There was also a minor presence of samples, at all conditions tested, except at the most
abrasive wear, which appeared as faint grooves parallel to aggressive conditions, i.e., at 10 N and 0.16 m/s, where a
the sliding direction, but this mechanism was not able to reduction in the width of the wear path was observed,
remove the oxidized particles present on the surface of the indicating improved wear resistance. This is also in
coating. Finally, some material seemed to be detached from agreement with the wear rate values obtained for these
the path. The detached areas had a shape and size similar to conditions, where a reduction in the wear rate was obtained
that of the sprayed particles, indicating the presence of for the three- and four-layer coatings. The observed fea-
delamination by brittle fracture along the boundary of tures in the wear paths were very similar in these two
poorly bonded particles during the spraying process. These systems. Abrasion was present, but its effect was not crit-
two mechanisms persist when the load increases (Fig. 7c), ical. No material seems to have detached: this indicates that
although abrasion is the most relevant mechanism. the coating is very hard, protective and well adhered. Some
At higher speeds, oxidation and abrasion mechanisms material from the ball was incorporated into the coating
appeared, both with more relevance at low loads (Fig. 7d) (marked by arrows in Fig. 9e and 10b and c), being this
for which delamination also remained, characterized by the mechanism more relevant than in the coatings fabricated
formation of cracks during the wear process that are per- with a higher number of layers. Under all conditions tested,
pendicular to the sliding direction (Fig. 7e, marked by the presence of oxides on the surface of both samples
arrows). At the highest load and speed (Fig. 7f), partici- suggests that the oxidative wear is the predominant
pation of plastic deformation of the coating particles was mechanism. Moreover, the morphology of these oxides,
also observed (marked by arrow in Fig. 7g), as well as continuous in some areas, results in the formation of a
delamination of zones where the coating material seems to stable mechanical mixing layer (MML), which avoids
have been deformed and submitted to fatigue phenomena metal–metal contact, decreasing the wear rate and the
(Fig. 7g). friction coefficient. At the mildest wear conditions (2 N;
The analysis showed that the wear paths of the two-layer 0.04 m/s), the presence of an MML was observed in the
coating (Fig. 8) are, in general, narrowed (Fig. 8a) in cross section of the wear track (Fig. 11), confirming that

123
J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1623

Fig. 7 (a) Width of the wear tracks of SS1 sample. Worn tracks observed for the one-layer coating (SS1) in the different wear conditions tested,
(b) 2 N; 0.04 m/s, (c) 10 N; 0.04 m/s, (d) 2 N; 0.16 m/s (e) magnification of d, (f) 10 N; 0.16 m/s, and (g) magnification of f

123
1624 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

123
 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1625

b Fig. 8 (a) Width of the wear tracks of SS2 sample. Worn tracks the wear rate decreases due to the formation of MML in
observed for the two-layer (SS2) coating in the different wear SS4 coatings. However, in the SS3 sample for the same
conditions tested, (b) 2 N; 0.04 m/s, (c) 10 N; 0.04 m/s, (d) magni-
fication of (c), (e) 2 N; 0.16 m/s, (f) 10 N; 0.16 m/s. Optical wear conditions, the oxides formed are not able to form a
microscopy of the counterbody after SS2 wear test, (g) 2 N; continuous and protective layer, resulting in a higher fric-
0.04 m/s, and (h) 10 N; 0.04 m/s tion coefficient.

Fig. 9 (a) Width of the wear tracks of SS3 sample. Worn tracks in the different wear conditions tested, (b) 2 N; 0.04 m/s, (c) 10 N; 0.04 m/s,
(d) 2 N; 0.16 m/s, and (e) 10 N; 0.16 m/s

123
1626 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

Fig. 10 (a) Width of the wear tracks of SS4 sample. Worn tracks observed in the different wear conditions tested, (b) 2 N; 0.04 m/s, (c) 10 N;
0.04 m/s, (d) 2 N; 0.16 m/s, and (e) 10 N; 0.16 m/s

For comparative purposes, ZE41 magnesium alloy and being an evidence of oxidative wear, they cause a reduction
316L SS have also been tested. The ZE41 showed much in the friction coefficient observed for this condition.
larger wear than any of the coated systems at all test Increasing the load also promoted the abrasive wear
conditions, which resulted in wider wear tracks (Fig. 12a). mechanism as deeper grooves could be observed in the
At low loads and sliding speeds (Fig. 12b), abrasive wear substrate (Fig. 12b); however, less oxidation was present
was present as grooves in the sliding direction of the on the surface, indicating that the oxides formed were
counterbody, indicating that the hardness of the magnesium removed from the surface, causing an increase in the
alloy is much lower than that of the counterpart. In addi- friction coefficient measured. At larger speeds, oxides
tion, oxides were observed on the surface and, apart from areas appeared on the surface (marked by arrows in

123
J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1627

Fig. 11 Cross section of the worn tracks of SS4 coating tested at 2 N and 0.04 m/s conditions

Fig. 12d and e). As previously shown, at larger loads the In general, the effect of the one-layer coating is relevant
wear rate and fiction coefficient decrease, suggesting that a as the wear rate is reduced by nearly 80% for the worst
MML was formed, which protected the surface of the ZE41 wear condition. When a second layer is added to the
magnesium alloy. These results are similar to those coating, a decrease in a wear rate is obtained because the
observed in Mg-Al alloys and in the ZE41 alloy in the oxides formed on the surface prevent the metal–metal
previous papers (Ref 26, 27). contact at low loads. When the applied load increases, the
The morphologies of the worn stainless steel plates were failure of the coating is produced due to delamination and
very different from those of the ZE41 as all the features are abrasion, which result in the detachment of material.
less pronounced (Fig. 13). Wear tracks were narrower than Coating with three and four layers improves the wear
those obtained on ZE41, and there were grooves in the behavior because a mechanical mixing layer is formed, as
wear track so that abrasive wear was present. However, the it occurs on the bulk stainless steel. The results suggest that
most relevant feature was the incorporation of material the higher compactness obtained for both thick coatings
from the counterpart into the substrate. The massive pres- increases their microhardness (previously seen in ‘‘Sprayed
ence of oxygen in the surface was also observed on the Coatings’’ section) and improves the wear behavior.
cross section (Fig. 14), indicating that debris particles from Therefore, the number of layers that would be adequate
the 316L plate or from the counterpart oxidized and were for a coating depends on the wear resistance desired and on
mechanically mixed with the steel. For the highest load and the weight increase expected, which is not in any of the
lowest speed, this mechanically mixed layer was continu- cases considered too high.
ous and stable (Fig. 13c), and it appeared with more con-
tinuity and stability than in the other wear conditions.
The wear tracks on the bulk 316L stainless steel were Conclusions
wider than those obtained for the SS3 and SS4 samples.
Nevertheless, the wear rate obtained for bulk stainless steel Stainless steel coatings have been effectively deposited on
under all conditions tested was lower than that obtained for a ZE41 magnesium alloy without significant change in the
the coatings. These results suggest that bulk stainless steel microstructure and in the mechanical properties of the Mg-
inflicts greater adhesive wear to the counterbody. Zn alloy. Coatings have been deposited with different

123
1628 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

Fig. 12 (a) Width of the wear tracks of ZE41 magnesium alloy. Worn tracks observed in the different wear conditions tested, (b) 2 N; 0.04 m/s,
(c) 10 N; 0.04 m/s, (d) 2 N; 0.16 m/s, and (e) 10 N; 0.16 m/s

thicknesses in the 99.8 to 318.4-lm range and show a The wear rate values for the ZE41 magnesium alloys
hardness between 327.5 and 432.5 HV0.1, which is from 5 show a strong dependence on the applied load and speeds.
to 6 times that of the magnesium alloy used. They are The dependence on velocity disappeared for all coated
compact, free of porosity and well adhered to the substrate. samples tested. Moreover, the wear rate values obtained for

123
J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1629

Fig. 13 (a) Width of the wear tracks of bulk 316L stainless steel. Worn tracks observed in the different wear conditions tested, (b) 2 N; 0.04 m/s,
(c) 10 N; 0.04 m/s, (d) 2 N; 0.16 m/s, and (e) 10 N; 0.16 m/s

the coated samples decreased by about 10 times at low oxidation and adhesion and produce in some cases the
speeds and three times at high speeds with respect to the failure of the coatings. For the three-layer and four-layer
bare alloy. coatings, the effect of these mechanisms was not critical
The number of coating layers determines the predomi- indicating a higher protection of the coating system due to
nant wear mechanism. For one-layer and two-layer coat- the formation of a mechanical mixing layer (MML).
ings, the predominant mechanisms were abrasion,

123
1630 J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631

Fig. 14 EDS mapping for the cross section of the worn tracks of a bulk 316L steel

Acknowledgments Authors wish to thank Agencia Estatal de 2009, 203, p 3224-3230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.
Investigación (Ministerio de Economı́a, Industria y Competitividad 03.057
Project MAT2015-66334-C3-1-R), Comunidad de Madrid (Project 11. C. Taltavull, A.J. Lopez, B. Torres, A. Atrens, and J. Rams,
Multimat-Challenge S2013/MIT-2862) and FPI Grant (MAT2012- Optimisation of the High Velocity Oxygen Fuel (HVOF)
38407-C03-01). Parameters to Produce Effective Corrosion Control Coatings on
AZ91 Magnesium Alloy, Mater. Corros., 2015, 66, p 423-433.
https://doi.org/10.1002/maco.201407982
12. K. Spencer, D.M. Fabijanic, and M.-X. Zhang, The Use of Al-
References Al2O3 Cold Spray Coatings to Improve the Surface Properties of
Magnesium Alloys, Surf. Coat. Technol., 2009, 204, p 336-344.
1. W.C. Neil, M. Forsyth, P.C. Howlett, C.R. Hutchinson, and https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.07.032
B.R.W. Hinton, Corrosion of Magnesium Alloy ZE41—The Role 13. B. Torres, C. Taltavull, A.J. López, M. Campo, and J. Rams, Al/
of Microstructural Features, Corros. Sci., 2009, 51, p 387-394. SiCp and Al11Si/SiCp Coatings on AZ91 Magnesium Alloy by
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2008.11.005 HVOF, Surf. Coat. Technol., 2015, 261, p 130-140. https://doi.
2. A. Atrens, G.-L. Song, M. Liu, Z. Shi, F. Cao, and M.S. Dar- org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2014.11.045
gusch, Review of Recent Developments in the Field of Magne- 14. M. Carboneras, M.D. López, P. Rodrigo, M. Campo, B. Torres,
sium Corrosion, Adv. Eng. Mater., 2015, 17, p 400-453. https:// E. Otero, and J. Rams, Corrosion Behaviour of Thermally
doi.org/10.1002/adem.201400434 Sprayed Al and Al/SiCp Composite Coatings on ZE41 Magne-
3. B.L. Mordike and T. Ebert, Magnesium Properties—Applica- sium Alloy in Chloride Medium, Corros. Sci., 2010, 52, p 761-
tions—Potential, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2001, 302, p 37-45. https:// 768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2009.10.040
doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(00)01351-4 15. Y.A. Albrimi, A. Eddib, J. Douch, Y. Berghoute, M. Hamdani,
4. M.K. Kulekci, Magnesium and its Alloys Applications in Auto- and R.M. Souto, Electrochemical Behaviour of AISI 316 Aus-
motive Industry, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2008, 39, p 851- tenitic Stainless Steel in Acidic Media Containing Chloride Ions,
886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1279-2. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci., 2011, p 6 4614-4627. www.electro
5. C. Zhong, F. Liu, Y. Wu, J. Le, L. Liu, M. He, J. Zhu, and W. Hu, chemsci.org. Accessed 1 March 2017.
Protective Diffusion Coatings on Magnesium Alloys: A Review 16. G.T. Burstein and P.C. Pistorius, Surface Roughness and the
of Recent Developments, J. Alloys Compd., 2012, 520, p 11-21. Metastable Pitting of Stainless Steel in Chloride Solutions, Cor-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2011.12.124 rosion, 1995, 51, p 380-385. https://doi.org/10.5006/1.3293603.
6. J.E. Gray and B. Luan, Protective Coatings on Magnesium and Its 17. A.F. Smith, The Friction and Sliding Wear of Unlubricated 316
Alloys—A Critical Review, J. Alloys Compd., 2002, 336, p 88- Stainless Steel at Room Temperature in Air, Wear, 1984, 96,
113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-8388(01)01899-0 p 301-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(84)90043-7
7. R. Arrabal, E. Matykina, T. Hashimoto, P. Skeldon, and G.E. 18. P. Coddet, C. Verdy, C. Coddet, F. Debray, and F. Lecouturier,
Thompson, Characterization of AC PEO Coatings on Magnesium Mechanical Properties of Thick 304L Stainless Steel Deposits
Alloys, Surf. Coat. Technol., 2009, 203, p 2207-2220. https://doi. Processed by He Cold Spray, Surf. Coat. Technol., 2015, 277,
org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.02.011 p 74-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2015.07.001
8. R. Arrabal, A. Pardo, M.C. Merino, M. Mohedano, P. Casajús, 19. S.F. Guo, F.S. Pan, H.J. Zhang, D.F. Zhang, J.F. Wang, J. Miao,
and S. Merino, Al/SiC Thermal Spray Coatings for Corrosion C. Su, and C. Zhang, Fe-Based Amorphous Coating for Corrosion
Protection of Mg-Al Alloys in Humid and Saline Environments, Protection of Magnesium Alloy, Mater. Des., 2016, 108, p 624-
Surf. Coat. Technol., 2010, 204, p 2767-2774. https://doi.org/10. 631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.07.031
1016/j.surfcoat.2010.02.030 20. S. Garcı́a-Rodrı́guez, A.J. López, B. Torres, and J. Rams, 316L
9. Y. Tao, T. Xiong, C. Sun, L. Kong, X. Cui, T. Li, and G.-L. Song, Stainless Steel Coatings on ZE41 Magnesium Alloy Using HVOF
Microstructure and Corrosion Performance of a Cold Sprayed Thermal Spray for Corrosion Protection, Surf. Coat. Technol.,
Aluminium Coating on AZ91D Magnesium Alloy, Corros. Sci., 2016, 287, p 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2015.12.075
2010, 52, p 3191-3197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2010.05. 21. J.F. Archard, Contact and Rubbing of Flat Surfaces, J. Appl.
023 Phys., 1953, 24, p 981-988. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1721448
10. M. Campo, M. Carboneras, M.D. López, B. Torres, P. Rodrigo, 22. X.-T. Luo, C.-X. Li, F.-L. Shang, G.-J. Yang, Y.-Y. Wang, and
E. Otero, and J. Rams, Corrosion Resistance of Thermally C.-J. Li, High Velocity Impact Induced Microstructure Evolution
Sprayed Al and Al/SiC Coatings on Mg, Surf. Coat. Technol., During Deposition of Cold Spray Coatings: A Review, Surf.

123
J Therm Spray Tech (2018) 27:1615–1631 1631

Coat. Technol., 2014, 254, p 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/J. Coatings, Acta Mater., 2013, 61, p 6329-6337. https://doi.org/10.
SURFCOAT.2014.06.006 1016/J.ACTAMAT.2013.06.033
23. L.L.H.H.T. Zhang, X.Y. Dai, and J.C. Feng, Preliminary Inves- 26. A.J. López, P. Rodrigo, B. Torres, and J. Rams, Dry Sliding Wear
tigation on Real-Time Induction Heating-Assisted Underwater Behaviour of ZE41A Magnesium Alloy, Wear, 2011, 271,
Wet Welding, Weld. Res., 2015, 94 p 8s-15s. http://files.aws.org/ p 2836-2844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2011.05.043
wj/supplement/WJ_2015_01_s8.pdf. Accessed 28 June 2018. 27. S.A. Selvan and S. Ramanathan, Dry Sliding Wear Behavior of
24. S. Kou, Welding Metallurgy, Wiley, London, 2003 Hot Extruded ZE41A Magnesium Alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. a.,
25. T. Suhonen, T. Varis, S. Dosta, M. Torrell, and J.M. Guilemany, 2010, 527, p 1815-1820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2009.11.
Residual Stress Development in Cold Sprayed Al, Cu and Ti 017

123