A comparative study of conventional magnetron sputter deposited and plasma enhanced magnetron sputter deposited Ti–Si–C–N nanocomposite coatings

• Published in: Surface & coatings technology Vol. 241; pp. 74 - 79
• Main Authors: El-Rahman, A.M. Abd, Wei, Ronghua
• Format: Journal Article Conference Proceeding
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 25-02-2014; Elsevier
• Subjects: Applied sciences; Coatings; Contact of materials. Friction. Wear; Conventional magnetron sputtering; Cross-disciplinary physics: materials science; rheology; Crystal defects; Deposition; Erosion wear resistance; Exact sciences and technology; Magnetron sputtering; Materials science; Mechanical properties and methods of testing. Rheology. Fracture mechanics. Tribology; Metals. Metallurgy; Microcracks; Microstructure; Nanostructure; Nonmetallic coatings; Physics; Plasma enhanced magnetron sputtering; Production techniques; Surface treatment; Surface treatments; Titanium; Titanium base alloys; Ti–Si–C–N nanocomposite coating; Tribology; Wear resistance; Ti–Si–C–N nanocomposite coating; Erosion wear resistance; Microstructure; Plasma enhanced magnetron sputtering; Conventional magnetron sputtering; Plasma; Mechanical properties; Surface treatments; Non metal coating; Sputtering; Ti-Si-C-N nanocomposite coating; Titanium carbonitride; Magnetrons; Composite materials; Nanocomposites; Composite coating; Wear; Physical vapor deposition; Wear resistance; Comparative study; Erosion; Tribology
• ISSN: 0257-8972; 1879-3347
• DOI: 10.1016/j.surfcoat.2013.08.049

In this study, Ti–Si–C–N nanocomposite coatings were deposited using Conventional Magnetron Sputtering (CMS) and Plasma Enhanced Magnetron Sputtering (PEMS) techniques on Ti–6Al–4V and Custom-450, a stainless steel used in the turbine industry. The only difference between the CMS and the PEMS is that in the PEMS process a global plasma is generated using hot tungsten filaments, in addition to the magnetron plasma generated in the CMS process. During both the CMS and PEMS depositions, two magnetrons with Ti targets were used in an argon–nitrogen–trimethylsilane gaseous mixture to form Ti–Si–C–N. Then the microstructural, mechanical, and tribological properties of these coatings were studied and compared. The Ti–Si–C–N coatings deposited by both techniques have the same grain size of 5.2±0.1nm with a cauliflower-like microstructure. However, the CMS coating has a number of embedded micrometer-sized defects and microcracks. The PEMS coating has substantially reduced the number and size of the defects and microcracks. It has also significantly improved the mechanical and tribological properties. The surface microhardness of the PEMS coating (24.65GPa) is twice as high as that of the CMS coating (11.77GPa), while the effective elastic modulus of the PEMS coating (331GPa) is 50% higher than that of the CMS coating (215GPa). As a result, higher H/E* and H3/E*2 values have been achieved. Finally, the PEMS coating has significantly increased the wear and erosion resistance, while reducing the coefficient of friction slightly.
•TiSiCN coating was deposited using plasma enhanced magnetron sputtering (PEMS).•It was compared with conventional magnetron sputtering (CMS).•Both coatings are found to be nanocomposite coatings (nc-TiCN/a-SiCN).•The PEMS coating is twice as hard as the CMS coating.•PEMS coating has a much higher wear resistance than the CMS coating.