Wear Behaviors of GH4169 Super Alloy and 3Cr2W8V Tool Steel Under Dry Rolling Condition

doi:10.1007/s40195-018-0724-6(012

Abstract

Abstract:

Wear behaviors of 3Cr2W8V and GH4169 with H70, including surface property, wear performance and friction work, were investigated. 3Cr2W8V and H70 friction pair suffered severer wear and surface damage than GH4169 and H70 friction pair. The wear process had an impact on GH4169 subsurface hardening, but no effect on 3Cr2W8V. Heat energy was a proportion of the total friction work, and 3Cr2W8V consumed more energy than GH4169 during temperature rise. From the numerical calculations, 3Cr2W8V had a more concentrated heat distribution and produced more wear than GH4169. Ultimate tensile strength (σ_UTS) and uniform elongation (ε_UE) were considered to evaluate the wear resistance of two materials, and GH4169 had a higher σ_UTS×ε_UE value and lower wear degree. In conclusion, the wear mechanism of GH4169 is adhesive wear, and 3Cr2W8V is a combination of abrasive and adhesive wear. Cooling can reduce the wear volume for GH4169 due to good thermal conductivity. The results show that GH4169 is more reliable for the tool material, with a better wear resistance under dry rolling condition.

Key words: Wear, Microhardness, Temperature, Strength-ductile combination

Ge Bian, Ming Cheng, Yang Liu, Shi-Hong Zhang. Wear Behaviors of GH4169 Super Alloy and 3Cr2W8V Tool Steel Under Dry Rolling Condition[J]. Acta Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters), 2018, 31(9): 983-996.

Figures/Tables 24

Fig. 1 Diagram of the three-planetary rolling process based on FEM modeling.

Table 1 Nominal compositions of H70

Material	Cu	Zn
wt%	67-69	27-28

Table 2 Nominal compositions of the GH4169 and 3Cr2W8V (wt%)

Material	C _eq ^a	Ni	Cr	Nb	Al	Ti	W _eq ^b	V	Mo	Fe
GH4169	≤0.08	45.0-55.0	17.0-21.0	4.75-5.50	0.30-0.70	0.72-1.15	-	-	2.70-3.30	Bal.
3Cr2W8V	1.8-2.8	0.2-0.3	2.7-6.0	-	-	-	8.6-12.0	0.3-0.5	0.2-0.3	Bal.

Fig. 2 Diagram of the ring-block wear test machine (1—block; 2—ring; 3—rotary axis; 4, 5—fixtures) .

Table 3 Experimental details of two wear tests

Test	Friction pair		Room temperature (°C)	Relative humidity (%)	Normal load (N)	Rotation speed (rpm)	Experiment time (s)
Test	Ring	Block	Room temperature (°C)	Relative humidity (%)	Normal load (N)	Rotation speed (rpm)	Experiment time (s)
1	H70	GH4169	21	40	200	200	1800
2	H70	3Cr2W8V

Fig. 3 Tensile engineering stress-strain curves of 3Cr2W8V, GH4169 and H70.

Table 4 Mechanical properties of the specimens

Material	E (GPa)	σ_YS (MPa)	σ_UTS (Mpa)	ε _UE	n	HV_m (HV)
H21	235	1128	1587	0.14	0.1411	503
IN718	203	488	847	0.57	0.4367	238
H70	80	64	212	0.64	0.5304	84

Fig. 4 Microstructure of the specimens: a GH4169, b 3Cr2W8V.

Fig. 5 Diffraction spectra of 3Cr2W8V, including the strengthening phase of Fe3W3C.

Fig. 6 Roughness results: a, b surface roughness (Ra), ten-point average roughness (Rz), root-mean-square deviation (Rq) value of blocks and rings; c, d surface morphology of GH4169 and 3Cr2W8V; e, f surface morphology of H70-1 and H70-2. Rings in Test 1 and Test 2 are represented as H70-1 and H70-2, respectively.

Table 5 Roughness of the worn surfaces of the specimens

Test	Friction pairs	Position	R_a (μm)	R_z (μm)	R_q (μm)
1	H70-ring	Average	7.178	44.435	9.479
	GH4169-block	Average	55.728	842.455	76.503
	GH4169-block	Margin	92.836	1065.808	138.762
2	H70-ring	Average	13.857	202.847	25.539
	3Cr2W8V-block	Average	53.261	482.972	69.954
	3Cr2W8V-block	Margin	127.553	1328.788	201.155

Fig. 7 a Experimental results on transient coefficient of friction; b wear mass transfer and wear coefficient of the wear tests’ system, ring specimens in Test 1 and Test 2 are represented as H70-1 and H70-2, respectively.

Table 6 Wear parameters of two friction pairs

Test	Friction pair		Mass (mg)		Wear coefficient	Wear rate (×10^-9 m³/s)	E_d (J)
Test	Ring	Block	Ring	Block	Wear coefficient	Wear rate (×10^-9 m³/s)	E_d (J)
1	H70	GH4169	-9.4	+3.9	2.17×10^-6	1.09	114,982
2	H70	3Cr2W8V	-27.5	+4.4	8.36×10^-6	3.21	118,752

Fig. 8 Temperature variation detected on the surface of blocks: a GH4169-H70 friction pair; b 3Cr2W8V-H70 friction pair.

Fig. 9 Microhardness distributions along with the depth from the specimen’s surface: a GH4169; b 3Cr2W8V.

Table 7 Worn surface microhardness and the thickness of hardened layers

Test	Friction pairs		HV _m ^a (HV)	HV _M ^b (HV)	λ (μm)	R
1	GH4169	Position 1	238	306.5	74	-0.0142
		Position 2		346.5	213	-0.0071
		Position 3		351.5	205	-0.0076
2	3Cr2W8V	Position 1	503	503	0	0
		Position 2
		Position 3

Table 8 XRD analysis of microstrain of worn specimens

Specimens	Microstrain (%)	Microcrystal (nm)
GH4169	0.347	21.9
3Cr2W8V	0.011	58.7

Fig. 10 Worn surfaces morphology on blocks in three tests: a-c Test 1; d-f Test 2.

Fig. 11 Cross-sectional morphology of blocks after wear process in three tests: a-c Test 1; d-f Test 2.

Fig. 12 Hertz contact diagram and contact area for ring-block wear test.

Fig. 13 The simulation maximum temperature results: a block maximum temperature with heat transfer coefficient at 5000 and 50,000 W/(m2 K); b ring maximum temperature with heat transfer coefficient at 5000 and 50,000 W/(m2 K) .

Fig. 14 The simulation of temperature distribution results of blocks: a the block is GH4169 and the heat transfer coefficient is 5000; b the block is GH4169 and the heat transfer coefficient is 50,000; c the block is 3Cr2W8V and the heat transfer coefficient is 5000; d the block is 3Cr2W8V and the heat transfer coefficient is 50,000.

Fig. 15 The simulation of die wear depth results of blocks: a the block is GH4169 and the heat transfer coefficient is 5000; b the block is GH4169 and the heat transfer coefficient is 50,000; c the block is 3Cr2W8V and the heat transfer coefficient is 5000; d the block is 3Cr2W8V and the heat transfer coefficient is 50,000.

Fig. 16 Schematic illustration of the relationships between the wear properties and the σUTS×εUE.

References

[1]	G. Aurégan, V. Fridrici, P. Kapsa, F.Rodrigues,Wear 332-333, 1176(2015)
[2]	L. Duan, Z. An, R. Yang, Z. Fu, Tribol. Int. 103, 218(2016)
[3]	N. Ma, Z. Cai, H. Huang, D. Deng, H. Murakawa, J. Pan, Mater. Des. 88, 1296(2015)
[4]	E. Rabinowicz, J. Appl. Mater. 33, 479(1966)
[5]	N.T.R.Kumar, P. Bhramara, L.S. Sundar, M.K. Singh, A.C.M. Sousa, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 85, 331(2017)
[6]	J.F. Archard, J. Appl. Phys. 32, 1420(1961)
[7]	E. Rabinowicz, Asle Trans. 14, 206(1971)
[8]	L.E. Samuels, T.O. Mulhearn, J. Mech. Phys.Solids 5, 125 (1957)
[9]	M.A. Moore, Wear 17, 51 (1971)
[10]	J.F. Archard, Wear 2, 438 (1959)
[11]	P.C. Okonkwo, G. Kelly, B.F. Rolfe, M.P. Pereira, Tribol. Int. 97, 218(2016)
[12]	C. Trevisiol, A. Jourani, S. Bouvier, Tribol. Int. 113, 411(2017)
[13]	S.S. Prabu, S. Prathiba, M.A. Asokan, A. Jain, N.K. Jain, P.K. Chourasiya, Procedia Eng. 97, 2119 (2014)
[14]	S.M. Agrawal, S. Lahane, N.G. Patil, P.K. Brahmankar, Procedia Eng. 97, 4(2014)
[15]	W. Hong, W. Cai, S. Wang, M.M. Tomovic, Chin. J. Aeronaut. 11, 16(2017)
[16]	C.X. Ren, Q. Wang, Z.J. Zhang, Y.K. Zhu, Z.F. Zhang, Acta Metall. Sin. (Engl. Lett.) 30, 212(2017)
[17]	M.T. Huber, Ann. Phys. Berlin 14, 153 (1904)
[18]	W.Z. Zhai, X.L. Shi, K. Yang, Y.C. Huang, L.P. Zhou, W.L. Lu, Acta Metall. Sin. (Engl. Lett.) 30, 576(2017)
[19]	S. Fouvry, T. Liskiewicz, P. Kapsa, S. Hannel, E. Sauger, Wear 255, 287 (2003)
[20]	I. El-Thalji, E. Jantunen, Tribol. Int. 84, 90(2015)
[21]	Q. Li, Z.X. Wang, S.Y. Xie, Acta Metall. 53, 494(2017)
[22]	Y.L. Song, C. Cheng, X. Miao, X.H. Han, D.S. Qian, C. Xu, Acta Metall. Sin. (Engl. Lett.) 30, 957(2017)
[23]	H. Zhang, H.F. Qin, Z.C. Ren, J.G. Zhao, X.N. Hou, G.L. Doll, Y.L. Dong, C. Ye, Surf. Coat. Technol. 330, 10(2017)
[24]	D.Y. Wang, D.L. Shu, X.C. Guo, Wear 119, 101 (1987)
[25]	L. Ma, L.B. Shi, J. Guo, Q.Y. Liu, W.J.Wang, Wear 394-395, 149(2018)
[26]	T. Souilliart, E. Rigaud, A. Le Bot, C. Phalippou, Tribol. Int. 105, 241(2017)
[27]	M. Pouranvari, A. Ekrami, A.H. Kokabi, J. Alloys Compd. 723, 84(2017)
[28]	D.M. Rowson, T.F.J.Quinn, J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 13, 209(1980)
[29]	H. Blok, Wear 6, 483 (1963)
[30]	E. Parodi, L.E. Govaert, G.W.M.Peters, Thermochim. Acta 657, 110 (2017)
[31]	Y. Tsuya, Wear 14, 309 (1969)
[32]	T. Doca, F.M. Andrade, Pires. Comput. Struct. 191, 62(2017)
[33]	M. Megahed, M.A. Attia, M. Abdelhameed, A.G.El-Shafei, Acta Metall. Sin. (Engl. Lett.) 30, 781(2017)
[34]	J.H. Liu, G.X. Wang, Y.P. Bao, Y. Yang, W. Yao, X.N. Gui, J.Power Sources 19, 1(2012)
[35]	H. Rojacz, H. Pahr, S. Baumgartner, M. Varga, Tribol. Int. 113, 487(2017)
[36]	W. Wang, R. Song, S. Peng, Z. Pei, Mater. Des. 105, 96(2016)
[37]	A. Ghosh, N. Paulson, F. Sadeghi, Int.J.Solids Struct. 58, 335(2015)
[38]	Y.Z. Tian, L.J. Zhao, N. Park, R. Liu, P. Zhang, Z.J. Zhang, A. Shibata, Z.F. Zhang, N. Tsuji, Acta Mater. 110, 61(2016)
[39]	M. Agmell, A. Ahadi, J.M. Zhou, R.L. Peng, V. Bushlya, J.E. Stahl, Mach. Sci. Technol. 21, 103(2017)
[40]	M.N. Balc?, B. Y?ld?r?m, S. Dag, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 101-102, 59(2015)
[41]	C. Wu, L. Zhang, S. Li, Z. Jiang, P. Qu, Tribol. Int. 100, 70(2016)