1996
DOI: 10.1007/bf00240794
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of hard anodize thickness on the fatigue of AA6061 and C355 aluminium

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
26
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
3
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The data points were curve-fit to a logarithmic model, as it was proposed by Rateick et al [15] for the fatigue behaviour of EAO-coated specimens.…”
Section: Fatigue Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The data points were curve-fit to a logarithmic model, as it was proposed by Rateick et al [15] for the fatigue behaviour of EAO-coated specimens.…”
Section: Fatigue Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…For aluminium wrought alloys with a conventional grain size, it is known that, in spite of the benefits that are obtained in terms of corrosion and wear resistance, anodising has a detrimental effect on the fatigue life [1,2,[15][16][17][18][19]. This is mainly due to the brittle and porous nature of the coating and the presence of tensile residual stresses.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Sadeler [6] performed fatigue tests on 2014 aluminum alloy which has been hard anodized and reported that the fatigue cracks nucleated within the hard coating and then propagated towards the substrate. Rateick et al [7] showed that anodization of wrought 6061-T6 alloy gave rise to an appreciable reduction in fatigue strength (60% debit) and the presence of cracks throughout the film is responsible for this degradation. They also reported that in case of cast C355-T6, anodization did not affect the fatigue strength significantly.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the adhesion of structurally significant items, chromic acid anodising (CAA) [1] and, to a lesser extent, phosphoric acid anodising (PAA) [2] are usually preferred options. However, the results of numerous studies [3,4,5,6] have shown that any form of anodising is potentially harmful to the fatigue and fracture properties of the underlying substrate material. Consequently, the benefits gained in terms of corrosion protection, or improved adhesive bonding properties, must always be weighed against the incurred penalty of a reduction to the fatigue strength of the component.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%