2012
DOI: 10.1080/09507116.2010.527487
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative study of three austenitic alloy with cobalt resistant to cavitation deposited by plasma welding

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Co content filler metals have superior resistance [30,31], however, in the case of carbon steel runners, the deposition of stainless steel 309L already is a possible and effective solution, due to its higher resistance to cavitation [12]. Will et al [30] evaluated the cavitation resistance of 309LSi and Co-steel alloys coatings welded by PTA with different parameters of the pulsed current, resulting in the lowest erosion rate for the Cavitec alloy, 0.45 mg/h, welded with pulsed current 180/120 A and peak/base time 0.1/0.1 s. By the same process, but with current 160 A, da Cruz, Henke, and d'Oliveira [32] welded the FeMnCrSi alloy [33], obtaining erosion rate of 0.52 mg/h, aswelded, and 0.33 mg/h, after mechanical cold work post-treatment, which converted partially the phase austenite on martensite, increasing the hardness and cavitation resistance. Using the same PTA pulsed arc process, but with pulsed current 180/80 A and peak/base time 0.1/0.1 s, Pukasiewicz et al [34] remelted FeMnCrSi [33] alloy arc-sprayed coatings, reaching the erosion rate of 0.65 mg/h.…”
Section: Defects and Repairing Of Runnersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Co content filler metals have superior resistance [30,31], however, in the case of carbon steel runners, the deposition of stainless steel 309L already is a possible and effective solution, due to its higher resistance to cavitation [12]. Will et al [30] evaluated the cavitation resistance of 309LSi and Co-steel alloys coatings welded by PTA with different parameters of the pulsed current, resulting in the lowest erosion rate for the Cavitec alloy, 0.45 mg/h, welded with pulsed current 180/120 A and peak/base time 0.1/0.1 s. By the same process, but with current 160 A, da Cruz, Henke, and d'Oliveira [32] welded the FeMnCrSi alloy [33], obtaining erosion rate of 0.52 mg/h, aswelded, and 0.33 mg/h, after mechanical cold work post-treatment, which converted partially the phase austenite on martensite, increasing the hardness and cavitation resistance. Using the same PTA pulsed arc process, but with pulsed current 180/80 A and peak/base time 0.1/0.1 s, Pukasiewicz et al [34] remelted FeMnCrSi [33] alloy arc-sprayed coatings, reaching the erosion rate of 0.65 mg/h.…”
Section: Defects and Repairing Of Runnersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This implosion generates micro-jets, which reach the material with energy enough to erode the hydraulic component by a fatigue mechanism [12][13]. To improve the runners' cavitation resistance, coatings have been applied by welding process on the runners' areas susceptible to cavitation, depositing materials resistant to cavitation, highlighting the cobalt stainless steels filler metal [8,13], which is widely applied by GMAW (Gas Metal Arc Welding) [14][15][16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, there is a demand for corelating the mechanical and functional properties of engineering materials with their CER. Different methods are employed to this end, starting from simple comparative analyses [32][33][34] and regression methods [4,35,36] to artificial neural networks [37,38]. Although comparative analyses into the relationship between plasma spray parameters and CER are reported in the literature [39,40], to our knowledge, no study to date has utilized the ANN to predict the CER of APS thermally sprayed coatings.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%