Solid-particle erosion occurs when discrete solid particles strike a surface. It differs from three-body abrasion primarily in the origin of forces between the particles and the wearing surface. In erosion, the extent of wear depends on the number and mass of individual particles striking the surface and on their impact velocity [8]. The difference of erosion from the abrasive wear lies in its fluid contribution to the mechanical action producing material removal. Solid-particle erosion is common in any system in which a gas stream carries abrasive particles. If loose abrasive particles are carried by a liquid, the wear is termed as slurry erosion.
WC-based hardmetals (cemented carbides) are employed widely as wear-resistant ceramic-metal composites for tools and wear parts. Raw materials supply, environmental concerns and some limitations of hardmetals have directed efforts toward development of alternative wear-resistant composites-cermets. Cermets consist primarily of ceramic particles such as titanium carbonitride (Ti(C,N)), titanium carbide (TiC), and chromium carbide (Cr3C2) bonded with alloys of Ni, Co or Fe. Cermets as resistant to solid particle erosion materials demonstrate their potential primarily in environmentally severe wear conditions – at elevated temperatures and corrosive environments.
Composition * | Processing ** | Structure *** | Mechanical Characteristics | Wear Testing Conditions ****** | Key Observations | Ref. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hardness **** | Toughness ***** | ||||||
|
LPS | dCarbide = 1–10 | - | - | ASTM G76, abrasive: SiO2 (75–200 µm), V = 60 m/s, α = 30, 60, 90° | TiC-NiMo cermets are at a disadvantage in relation to WC-based hardmetals | [6] |
TiC/50 vol% Fe | SHS/pseudoHIP | dTiC = 2–5 | 670 | - | Modified ASTM G76, abrasives: SiO2 and Al2O3, V = 60 m/s, α = 30 and 90°, T = 20 and 350 °C | Brittle erosion mechanism both at room and elevated temperatures | [14] |
TiC0.7N0.3/10 WC/NbC/TaC/20 Ni | LPS (1510 °C) | - | 990–1250 | 13.4–18.3 | Modified ASTM G76, abrasive: SiC (66 µm), abrasive flow: 2.33 g/s, α = 30, 60, 90° |
|
[15] |
Commercial cutting materials
|
LPS (cermets) | - |
|
- | ASTM G76, abrasive: Al2O3 (70 µm), abrasive flow 2.0 g/min, α = 20 and 90° |
|
[16][17] |
|
MI (1450 °C) (cermets) | dWC = 0.55–1.51 |
|
- | Modified ASTM G76/ASTM G211, abrasive: Al2O3 (50 µm), V = 40 m/s, α = 75°, T = 25, 180, 500, 700 °C | TiC- and TiB2-based cermets outperform WC-Co at > 500 °C | [35] |
|
LPS |
|
|
TRS:
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.2–0.3 mm), V = 80 m/s, α = 30° | Wear resistance depends on combined effect of resistance to penetration and cutting | [7] |
|
LPS | dTiC = 2–2.3 |
|
TRS:
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.2 mm), V = 80 m/s, α = 30° | WC/Co outperforms TiC-based cermets; TiC/FeNi outperforms TiC/NiMo (room temperature) | [8] |
Cr3C2/10–20 Ni |
|
dCr3C2 = 4–6 |
|
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 60 and 80 m/s, α = 30, 45, 60, 75 90° | RS grades outperform LPS grades | [9] |
|
|
dTiC~2 dCr3C2~4–6 |
|
TRS: 700–2600 | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 80 m/s, α = 30° | Two-cycle sinter + HIP is at disadvantage over one-cycle sinter/HIP | [10] |
|
LPS | d = 2 … 4 (depending on composition) | - | - | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.2–0.3 mm), V = 20 and 80 m/s, α = 30 and 90°, T = 23 and 600 °C | Mechanically mixed layer formation is an essential feature of material wear response | [11] |
|
LPS | dTiC = 1.9–2.2 dWC = 1.0–2.2 |
|
TRS:
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 80 m/s, α = 30° |
|
[12] |
TiC/40 NiMo (Ni:Mo 1:1, 2:1, 4:1) | LPS (1480 °C) | - | 1068–1330 | 17.5–18.2 | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 60 m/s, α = 75° | The erosion rate is influenced by the stress state of the, rate is lower for cermets with lower residual stresses | [18] |
TiC/20–60 NiMo (Ni:Mo 1:1, 2:1, 4:1) | LPS (1400–1480 °C) | dTiC = 1–5 | 810–1650 | TRS: 730–2450 | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 50 m/s, α = 30 and 90°, T = 20, 350 and 650 °C |
|
[19] |
|
LPS | dCarbide = 2–6 |
|
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasives: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), SiC (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 60 m/s, α = 75° | Modulus of elasticity may be used for evaluation of mild erosion | [20][24] |
|
LPS | dCarbide = 2–4 | - | - | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 20 and 80 m/s, α = 30 and 90°, T = 23 and 600 °C |
|
[21] |
|
LPS | dCarbide = 1–4 | ~1380 |
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiC (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 60 m/s, α = 60° | Materials with high thermal conductivity possess higher erosion resistance | [22] |
|
LPS | dCarbide = 1–4 | 1030–1410 | 9.8–19.0 | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasives: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), SiC (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 20, 30, 45, 60, 80 m/s, α = 30, 45, 60, 75, 90° | Maximal erosion rate at α = 60–90°, depending on composition | [23] |
|
LPS | dCarbide = 2–6 |
|
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasives: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), SiC (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 45 m/s, α = 60° |
|
[25][29] |
|
LPS | - |
|
- | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 80 m/s, α = 30° |
|
[26] |
|
LPS | dWC ≤ 1.0–2.2 dTiC ~ 2.0 |
87.3–91.3 HRA | 12.5–18.0 | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.2 mm), V = 80 m/s, α = 30° | Erosion resistance depends on elastic modulus and proof stress | [27] |
|
LPS | dTiC ~ 3 |
|
|
Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 46 and 80 m/s, α = 30, 45, 60, 75, 90° | Mechanical properties do not enable prognosis of erosion resistance | [28] |
|
LPS | dCarbide = 2–2.7 |
|
- | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasives: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm) and/or SiC (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 31, 46, 61, 80 m/s, α = 30, 45, 60, 75, 90° |
|
[30][31][32] |
|
LPS | - | TiC/FeSi 1020–1360 WC/Co 1200 |
- | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasives: Al2O3 (90 µm), glass spheres (650 µm), V = 30 and 80 m/s, α = 67° |
|
[33] |
|
LPS (1250–1300 °C) | dCr3C2 = 3–15 (depending on composition) | 1010–1220 | 10.1–10.4 | Centrifugal accelerator, abrasive: SiO2 (0.1–0.3 mm), V = 31 and 80 m/s, α = 30 and 75° | Mo addition and low residual stresses enhance wear resistance. |
Figure 5. Features of cermet surface transformation under abrasive, sliding and erosive wear.
Composition * | Processing ** | Structure *** | Mechanical Characteristics | Wear Testing Conditions ****** | Key Observations | Ref. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hardness **** | Toughness ***** | ||||||
TiC0.7N0.3/15 Ni + Mo2C/WC/TaC/NbC additions |
|
Slurry-pot test, Al2O3 (5 wt%, 150–250 µm) slurry:
|
Mo2C additions dramatically increase erosion resistance | [44][49][56] | |||
TiC0.7N0.3/10Mo2C 15Ni |
|
|
Binder loss is the primary degradation mode | [45][46][55] | |||
TiC0.7N0.3/10Mo2C Cr3C2 15Ni (1, 3, 5, 7 Cr3C2) |
|
Slurry-pot test, Al2O3 (5 wt%, 150–250 µm) slurry:
|
Erosion performance is improved by Cr3C2 additions in all environments | [47][51][52][54] | |||
TiC0.7N0.3/10Mo2C 15Ni/Co (different Ni/Co ratios) | Sinter/HIP (1450 °C, p = 5 MPa) | - | 92.0–92.5 HRA | TRS: 1510–1650 | Slurry pot test, SiO2 (5 wt%, 0.1–0.3 mm) slurry:
|
Erosion resistance improvement with the addition of Co | [48] |
Ti(C, N)/10Mo2C 15Ni (different TiC/TiN ratios) | LPS (1440 °C) | dTiCN = 0.78–1.44 | 92.2–92.5 HRA | - | Slurry pot test, Al2O3 (5 wt% 150–250 µm) slurry:
|
The best performance of TiC0.9N0.1-based cermets in alkaline and acidic conditions | [50][53] |
|
LPS | - |
|
- | Slurry pot test, SiO2 (5 wt%, 0.3–0.4 mm) slurry:
|
Corrosion proof cermets outperform WC/Co in neutral environment | [57] |
Cr3C2/10–40 Ni | LPS | dCr3C2 = 2–5 | 900–1490 | 9.5–19.0 | Slurry-jet impingement test, SiO2 (6, 8, 10 wt%, ~0.1 mm) slurry: V = 4 m/s, α = 90°:
|
Erosion performance depends on the interplay of binder fraction and the abrasive concentration | [58][59] |