Wear, 151 (1991) 203-217

203

Tribological
Kenneth
Eastman

properties

of titanium

alloys*

G. Budinski
Kodak Company, Building 23, 5th Floor, Kodak Park, Rochester, NY I4650 (U.S.A.)

(Received

April 30, 1991)

Abstract Titanium is often the most cost-effective corrosion-resistant material for applications in the chemical process industry that involve resistance to halides. Unfortunately, there are usually some components in these systems that involve relative sliding-titanium tribosystems - e.g. bolts and nuts, valves, piping connections, etc. Titanium and its alloys have had a reputation for poor tribocharacteristics, but detailed information on suitable counterfaces and wear specifics is scarce. This paper summarizes a study conducted on the two most widely used titanium alloys, Grade 2 commercially pure titanium and the age-hardenable Ti6Al4V. Dry sand-rubber wheel tests were conducted to assess abrasion resistance; fretting, galling and reciprocating pin-on-plane tests were conducted to determine if there is a best counterface for these two titanium alloys. The test results are distilled into recommendations for use of titanium alloys in tribosystems in the chemical process industry. Both alloys have poor abrasion resistance. Grade 2 pure titanium should be avoided in all titanium tribosystems and there are preferred counterfaces for the Ti6Al4V alloy, but the best metal-to-metal wear resistance is obtained when the alloy is anodized and coated with a dry film lubricant.

1. Introduction In the past decade, titanium alloys have been adopted as standard materials of construction for pipes, fittings, valves and similar equipment in the chemical process industry. Titanium alloys are often the best choices for handling halides and bleaches. They have far better resistance to these environments than the best 300 series stainless steels. The most popular alloys for this type of service are pure titanium (ASTM B348 Grade 2) and the Ti6Al4V alloy (ASTM B348 Grade 5) [l]. The Grade 2 pure titanium is one of four grades of pure titanium which differ in impurity level and strength; the 6A14V alloy can be solution treated and age hardened. The Rockwell C hardness is normally 30-36 HRC in the annealed condition and may increase to 39 HRC on age hardening. The hardness is about 36 HRC in the solution-treated and over-aged condition. Pieces of equipment made from these alloys do their job from the corrosion standpoint but occasionally the alloys must be used in parts of equipment that involve sliding of titanium on other counterfaces - titanium tribosystems. Titanium is an extremely reactive metal and has a reputation for poor tribological properties [2-51. For this reason, machine designers have tried to avoid its use in sliding systems, but *Paper presented at the International U.S.A., April 7-11, 1991. Conference on Wear of Materials, Orlando, FL,

0043-1648/91/$3.50

0 1991 -

Elsevier

Sequoia, Lausanne

204

there are times when this is not possible. For example, it is often necessary to use titanium fasteners to assemble titanium components. Periodic disassembly and reassembly of fasteners causes tapped holes in extremely expensive equipment to wear out. This eventually causes components to become useless. There are other unavoidable titanium tribosystems where similar wear problems can cause loss of extremely expensive (and critical) equipment. It is the purpose of this paper to present the results of a comprehensive laboratory study on the tribological properties of two titanium alloys (Grade 2 and Grade 5). The objective of this study was fourfold: (I) to determine the severity of the problem, (2) to determine if there are any counterfaces that mitigate wear of the titanium member, (3) to determine if surface treatments alter wear effects and (4) to determine the abrasion resistance of titanium. Using this information, we make recommendations to machine designers on how to prevent potential wear problems when titanium tribosystems are unavoidably present in chemical-handling machines. The overall objective of this study is to prevent loss of equipment or degradation of product quality due to wear failures. Titanium may be subject to different forms of wear in chemical process systems; the plan of this study was to assess the tribocharacteristics of titanium in the three wear modes that are likely to occur in these systems: abrasion, metal-to-metal wear and fretting wear. We will present the results that we obtained in this study in galling, abrasion, metal-to-metal and fretting tests. We will conclude with design recommendations for the use of titanium in tribosystems.

2. Galling

studies

In a 1989 unpublished study we conducted tests to find an appropriate material to use for nuts on titanium bolts. There was a concern that galling would occur, making disassembly difficult or impossible. In test on actual bolts and nuts it was determined that titanium bolts did not gall with a titanium nut or with nuts made from hard and soft stainless steels (type 316, 90 HRE3; 17-4, 43 HRC, 440 C, 58 HRC). However, after about 20 tightenings of a nut on a bolt 12.5 mm in diameter the threads on the titanium bolts were almost completely removed. It appeared that titanium does not gall like soft stainless steels. When soft stainless steel slides on itself under high normal forces, it forms macroscopic excrescences that in turn can lead to seizure. The titanium alloy that we tested, 6Al4V alloy, wore by adhesive transfer of Aat platelets to the mating material (Fig. l(a)). This type of transfer has been noted by other investigators [63 and is probably due to the reactivity of titanium when surface fihns have been removed by mechanical action. The material removal rate was higher than can be tolerated on bolts that are reused. As a result of this study we recommend a PH stainless steel counterface (43 HRC) coupled with surface lubrication (polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) or MO& coatings) to mitigate thread wear. In this study we also investigated the effect of heat treatment on the galling characteristics of the Ti6Al4V alloy. This alloy is received in the annealed condition (30-36 HRC). Most parts are made from this alloy in this condition; some parts receive a stress relief at 760 C (as part of the fabrication process) and occasionally, where maximum strength is required, the Ti6A14V alloy is solution treated and aged at 538 C (35-39 HRC). One technique that has been used to mitigate wear problems on heat-treated alloys is to perform the heat treatment in air and to leave the oxide that is formed on the titanium in place to act as a wear adjuvant. Galling tests were

Fig. 1. (a) Typical adhesive transfer of titanium: Ti6Al4V vs. itself (original magnification, X40). (b) Large excrescence formed in tantalum rider after rotation on Ti6Al4V at 14 MPa apparent pressure.

on the following couples: (1) annealed Ti6A14V stress relieved at 760 C vs. itself (oxide removed); (2) annealed pure titanium stress relieved at 538 C (oxide on contact surfaces) vs. itself; (3) annealed Ti6A14V stress relieved at 538 C (oxide on contact surfaces) vs. itself; (4) solution-treated and aged Ti6A14V vs. itself (oxide removed); (5) annealed pure titanium vs. Ti6A14V stress relieved at 760 C (oxide removed). The ASTM G98-89 galling test [7] was used with modified sample geometry. In this test the end of a 12.5 mm pin is rotated through 360 on a flat counterface under increasing normal forces and both surfaces are visually examined for galling. In our studies the upper sample was an annular ring with a contact area of 0.29 cm. Test surfaces were freshly abraded to produce a random scratch pattern and a roughness R, of 0.1-0.5 pm. The criterion for galling was the formation of macroscopic excrescences. Samples were tested with increasing normal forces until they galled or until we reached the capacity of the machine, 3.5 X lo4 N (276 MPa). Typical load increments were 4 kN. The criterion for galling was the ASTM G98 definition of galling: in Tribology, a severe form of wear characterized by localized, macroscopic material transfer, removal or formation of surface protrusions when two solid surfaces experience relative sliding under load. Surfaces were examined after rotation of the annular ring; if galling did not occur, the samples were refinished and retested. The surfaces were used as abraded and pure dry air was used to remove fine grinding detritus. Three replicates of each couple were tested. The results were essentially the same for all these couples; the threshold galling stress was over 276 MPa and there was no diminution of the tendency for wear and transfer. The coefficient of friction was higher on the pure titanium couples (Fig. 2) and definitely shows significant deformation during testing. In an effort to determine if there is some material that will run against titanium without the wear and transfer problem, we tested a variety of materials against solutiontreated and aged 6A14V in the same ASTM G98 galling test. The results shown in Table 1 indicate that titanium only galled against one material, tantalum, out of the performed

206
COEFFICIENT 1 OF FRICTION

SO

100

160

200

260

APPARENT + PURE TieAl4V Ti VS PURE (HT) Ti

CONTACT STRESS (MPa)

f ItiT) -4 TiBAI4V VS TI6Al4V

VS Ti6Al4V

PURE TI VS TIEAl4V

Fig. 2. Coefficient of friction of various titanium couples measured in the ASTM G98 test for threshold galling stress (galling did not occur up to the maximum stress obtainable in the test rig, 276 MPa).

TABLE

1 couples tested as per

Friction coefficients and threshold galling stresses for various titanium ASTM G98 modified with an annular upper specimen Couple Stress (MPa) Friction CL, 17-4 Stellite 12 Waukesha 88 Ferralium 25.5 Nitronic 60 Gall Tough Itself Tantalum 440 C Al bronze Stellite 6 Itself Ti6Al4V 17-4 apparent > 276 > 276 > 276 > 276 > 276 > 276 > 276 > 14 > 276 > 276 > 276 > 276 > 276 > 276 stress relieved 0.36 0.35 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.37 0.36 0.53 0.44 0.36 0.45 0.47 0.43 0.48 /& 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.53 0.37 0.27 0.36 0.40 0.36 0.48

Comments

Ti6A14V vs.

Ti transfer Ti transfer Ti transfer Ti transfer Ti transfer Ti Transfer Ti transfer Galled Ti transfer Ti transfer Ti transfer Transfer Transfer Transfer and deformation and deformation and deformation

Pure Ti vs. aAt maximum

at 760 C.

15 counterfaces tested. It galled at a threshold stress of only 14 MPa. The threshold galling stress for all the other couples was above the 276 MPa capacity of our test machine. All the couples showed significant titanium wear and the pure titanium showed severe deformation in addition to high wear. We tested a variety of lubricants to determine if any were effective in preventing the titanium wear and transfer. Heat

207

treating oxides by themselves was not effective but several proprietary anodizing-lubricant treatments did prevent transfer in the galling tests. In summary, Grade 2 pure titanium and the 6Al4V alloy do not gall (formation of macroscopic excrescences) when mated against each other in any condition of heat treatment, but severe wear and transfer do occur. In the case of the pure alloy the plastic deformation that occurs makes this alloy totally inappropriate for use in tribosystems. The Ti6Al4V alloy does not gall against a wide variety of other corrosionresistant materials, but the titanium wear and transfer are such that these systems should not be used without a wear adjuvant. Suitable palliative treatments are: anodizing plus resin-bonded MoS, or PTPE; fluorocarbon enamels; MO&--Pb-Cu or similar antiseize compounds. Grade 2 pure titanium is totally unsatisfactory even for unlubricated metal-to-metal sliding and its use should be avoided. 3. Abrasion
Tests

A widely used test for assessing abrasion resistance of metals is the ASTM G65 dry sand-rubber wheel abrasion test [8]. This test produces abrasion on the large face of a 12 X 25 X 75 mm3 sample cut from the test material. The sample is pressed against a rubber-tired wheel and 50-70-mesh silica sand is metered between the specimen and the rotating wheel. After a prescribed number of wheel revolutions the wear on the sample is assessed by gravimetric techniques and a volume loss is calculated. In this study we performed three replicate tests on Grade 2 pure titanium and on the 6Al4V alloy in the age-hardened condition. The test results are compared with a variety of other materials in Fig. 3. These results indicate that the Grade 2 pure titanium has better abrasion resistance than the harder Ti6Al4V alloy. However, neither grade had abrasion resistance comparable to soft stainless steel. The results obtained on pure titanium appear to be incongruous with the Archard equation [9], which predicts abrasion resistance to be inversely proportional to material hardness:

MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION
CEMENTED CARBIDE
l

I, ,d HRC, (66 HRC,

STELLITE

1016

D2 TOOL STEEL 1060 STEEL* 17-4 STAINLESS STEEL 316 STAINLESS STEEL TI GRADE 2 TIBAUV ALUMINUM 6061 T6
_I

0 * FROM ASTM REFERENCE

066

200

400 600 600 100012001400 VOLUME LOSS (mm)

Fig. 3. Abrasion rates of various materials compared with Grade 2 pure titanium and Ti6Al4V (ASTM G65 test, procedure A).

208

where W is the wear rate, K is the wear coefficient, D is the sliding distance, P is the load (normal force), h is the penetration hardness and LYis the included angle of abrasive particles. We did not perform additional experiments to explain these results, but metallographic studies on the wear scars suggest that material removal occurs by different mechanisms in the two materials. As shown in Fig. 4, the Grade 2 pure titanium wear scars had a lapped appearance and the Ti6Al4V scars showed a pattern suggesting hard and soft regions in the material. Neither material showed normal abrasion patterns. This type of wear scar was also obtained in abrasion tests vs. SC and A1203 by Hutchings and Mercer [lo]. Ferrous materials usually have a scar consisting of fine scratches - similar to a ground surface. It is possible to hypothesize that the mottled pattern in the Ti6Al4V alloy is from microstructural heterogeneities. It is a two-phase alloy, a mixture of stable a: phase and metastable p phase. The pure alloy is singlephase a. The fact that the pure titanium had better abrasion resistance than the harder (36 HRC) 6A14V alloy could be attributed to differences in the behavior of the sand in going through the rubber tire-sample interface. We have seen similar results in copper alloys - pure copper (60 HRB) had better abrasion resistance in this test than 1% Be-Cu at 42 HRC. There was strong evidence that the round and subangular sand used in this test rolls through the sample-tire nip rather than becoming fixed in the rubber. The way that this test produces abrasion is that grains of sand become embedded in the rubber and are momentarily fixed to the rubber wheel so that they are capable of plowing a furrow or scratch in the specimen. Rolling grains of sand do not produce abrasion. This is probably the explanation of the lack of correlation with the Archard equation. The adhesion of the sand to the pure titanium is greater than to the alloy and this produces rolling grits rather than fixed grits, hence reduced abrasion. Irrespective of the differences between the pure and 6Al4V titanium alloy, the important finding of this test is that both grades of titanium have poor abrasion resistance. The abrasion rates of both grades were at least 15 times the abrasion rates that would be obtained on a hardened tool steel such as Type D2. These data suggest that titanium should be avoided for applications involving low stress abrasion from

(4

0)

Fig. 4. Wear scars on Ti6A14V and Grade 2 pure titanium after ASTM G65 sand abrasion test, procedure A (original magnification, x 100): (a) Grade 2 - note lapped appearance; (b) Ti6Al4V - note discontinuous removal of material.

209

hard particles. Ayers [ll] verified the poor abrasion characteristics of titanium and proposed surface modification by injection of carbide particles by laser cladding. This technique is not in wide use and is not ready for use in everyday machine design.

4. Fretting damage Titanium components used in chemical process systems are often intended to be non-sliding systems, but many non-sliding parts can experience fretting motion in bolted assemblies. Temperature fluctuations or machine vibrations produce oscillatory relative motion in the amplitude range 10-300 pm where fretting damage occurs. In this study we tested titanium (Ti6Al4V) under fretting conditions against a variety of couples. We used the test rig shown schematically in Fig. 5 and the following test conditions: oscillatory motion, amplitude 50 pm, frequency 3.3 Hz, normal force 30 N, test duration 3 x 10 cycles. Hemispherical riders with an end radius of 6.25 mm were made from Ti6Al4V and oscillated against flat samples of the following materials: (1) itself (36 HRC); (2) cemented carbide (WC-Co); (3) 17-4 stainless steel (43 HRC); (4) 440C stainless steel (57 HRC); (5) Stellite 6B @* (43 HRC); (6) chromium plate (on 1020 steel); (7) 316 stainless steel (90 HRB); (8) itself plus anodize plus MO& The test is described in detail in a previous publication [12], but essentially damage to the ball and counterface was assessed by profilometry. The scar depths were measured in both members and a volume loss was calculated from these data.

IIILOCKJ

Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of fretting test rig. Test conditions: amplitude 50 pm, frequency 3.3 Hz, normal force 30 N, test duration 25 h. *Registered trademark of Stoody Deloro Stellite Co.

210

The test results presented in Fig. 6 suggest that this alloy is quite susceptible to damage self-mated and mated against stainless steels. Photomicrographs of the couples with the most damage (Ti6Al4V vs. itself) and the least damage (Ti6A14V vs. Stellite 6B) are presented in Figs. 7 and 8 respectively. The damage is substantial even against a hard stainless steel counterface (440C stainless steel). Of the eight couples tested, the lowest system damage was obtained with a couple of Ti6Al4V vs. SteIlite 6B. The anodized and lubricated couple did not wear as well as the bare Steliite-titanium couple. However, most of the system wear was in the anodize coating; the coating was 5 pm thick and did not penetrate. Thus the wear on the titanium was low. Essentially, titanium vs. anodized and lubricated

36

30 26 20 VOLUME LO88

IS
* 10 EXP-a m

IO
hn?) RIDER

6
m

10

16
LOW

20
. 10 EXP-8

26
htl

30

316

VOLUME

COUNTERFACE

Fig. 6. Results of fretting corrosion tests on Ti6A14V vs. various counterfaces. Titanium hemisphere rider is oscillated on a flat counterface. Data are averages for three tests.

Fig. 7. Wear scars on (a} Ti6Ai4V rider and (b) counterface magnification, X 50).

after 25 h fretting

test (original

(4
Fig. 8. Wear scars on (a) titanium (original magnification, X 50).

(b)
rider and (b) Stellite 6B counterface after 25 h fretting test

VOLUME LOSS * EXP-2 4

mm3

I I

160

HO

660

660

COUNTERFACE -

HARDNESS
-

(kg/mm)

COUNTERFACE

RIDER

Fig. 9. Effect of hardness titanium

on fretting

damage: Ti6Al4V rider vs. various stainless

steels.

is a reasonable couple if the lubricant can be tolerated. In a similar study Ball [12] concluded that a polyimide dry film lubricant was somewhat better than MO& types of lubricants. These results suggest that wherever titanium may be subject to fretting damage, a suitable counter-face would be Stellite 6B. We tested wrought Stellite but we anticipate that the same or similar Stellite alloys applied as a hardfacing deposit would be satisfactory. The test data also suggest that the use of a hardened counter-face helps (Fig. 9). If the use of Stellite is not possible, the anodized and lubricated titanium would be the second choice. Additional counterface options are cemented carbide, chromium plating or hardened 440C stainless steel (58 HRC). Komanduri and Read [13] determined that the low binder WC-Co is a more suitable counterface for titanium than the high cobalt grades. The grade that we tested had 7% cobalt. A lower cobalt

212

grade may have produced better results. An easy-to-use palliative would be to chromium plate the titanium counterface (titanium cannot be chromium plated by conventional means). This is probably the minimum protection that should be taken to prevent fretting damage. In summary, unlubricated self-mated titanium couples should be avoided in systems where fretting damage could affect serviceability. If they must be used, a suitable counterface would be Stellite 6. If both members must be titanium, they must be separated by a lubricious film.

5. Metal-to-metal

wear

To assess the wear of self-mated titanium in simple sliding applications, we decided to test the metal-to-metal wear characteristics of the pure titanium and the 6Al4V alloy against a variety of counterfaces in a reciprocating ball-on-plane test. This test uses a ball rider (12.5 mm diameter) oscillating on a flat counterface under a given normal force for a given sliding distance at a controlled velocity (1 kgf normal force, 2.5 cm amplitude, 0.08 m s-r sliding velocity, 516 m of sliding). Wear of both members is assessed by profilometry of the ball scar and counterface scar (three traces each) and wear volumes are calculated from geometry changes. In this study we tested the couples shown in Table 2. There are not a significant number of options available when looking for a suitable counterface for titanium. Acceptable counterfaces should have corrosion resistance comparable to titanium since in the chemical process industry it is common to only use titanium where conventional stainless steels have inadequate corrosion resistance (titanium costs five to ten times as much as stainless steel). The uncoated metals that we selected as candidates all have significant corrosion resistance: Nitronic 60 similar to 304 stainless steel; Ferralium 255@* - exceptional pitting resistance in TABLE 2
Test couples for ball-on-plane reciprocating wear test. Three tests of each ball were conducted on each counterface, with fresh surfaces each time Ball riders (1) (2) (3) (4) Pure Ti Grade 2 Ti6Al4V Chromium-plated 440C stainless steel Grade 2 Ti + anodize + MoSr dry film lube Flat counterfaces (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Grade 2 Ti + anodize + MoSr dry film lube Nitronic 60 stainless steel (Ammo steel) Gall Tough stainless steel (crucible steel) Tantalum Zirconium Grade 2 Ti + anodize +PTFE dry film lube Ti6Al4V + anodize + PTFE dry film lube Ti6Al4V plated with Ni-P+PTFE Ti6Al4V chromium plated 316 stainless steel plated with Ni-P+PTFE Grade 2 Ti plated with Ni-P+PTFE Ferralium 255 Ti6Al4V PVD coated with TiN 2 pm thick

*Registered

trademark

of Cabot Corp.

213

chlorides; Gall Tougha - similar to 304 stainless steel; tantalum - the most corrosionresistant non-noble metal; zirconium - resistant to a wide variety of corrodents. Thus, if one of these metals worked as a suitable counterface for titanium, it would probably have adequate corrosion resistance to be used in hostile environments. A similar approach was taken in selecting coatings. We chose candidate corrosionresistant coatings that can be applied to titanium. Coatability is a concern because titanium has a very passive oxide on its surface; it cannot be plated by conventional techniques. It can be anodized but this is not a standard coating and only proprietary treatments are available to the average machine designer. The proprietary processes are combined with fluorocarbon (PTFE) treatments or other resin-bonded dry film lubricants to provide lubricity. Some electroless nickel platings have shown promise for adhering titanium and we tested three proprietary Ni-P-PTFE platings. They all contained from 10% to 20% PTFE which was codeposited with the nickel. Finally we tested a TiN coating since this is much harder than titanium and there are no adhesion problems. In summary, the types of coatings that we evaluated were essentially: (1) anodizing impregnated with PTFE or MoSz (4 pm thick); (2) Ni-P electroless plating with PTFE (25 pm thick); (3) TiN physical vapour deposition (PVD) coating (2 pm thick); (4) chromium plating (1 pm thick). The other part of the test matrix was a counterface of chromium-plated 440C stainless steel. The rationale for selecting this as a candidate is that it is the hardest corrosion-resistant counterface that is readily available. It can be chromium plated to make a composite surface which will have respectable corrosion resistance (but not as good as titanium or the other metals tested). It is essentially the easiest-to-implement counterface. The reciprocating wear test results are presented in Fig. 10. Two counterfaces produced low system wear against Ti6A14V, Grade 2 pure titanium and chromiumplated pure titanium: (1) pure titanium plus anodize plus MO& dry film lube plus 460 lube; (2) Ni-P-PTFE plating on 316 stainless steel. Previous investigations [14] found that dilIi.rsed Ni-P platings improved the wear properties of Ti6Al4V. We believe the PTFE addition produced a lubrication effect that allows the use of these coatings as deposited. The most suitable counterface for chromium-plated 440C stainless steel was the anodized titanium alloys with MO& dry film lubricant. The couples that produced low system wear are: (1) Ti6Al4V vs. anodized Grade 2 titanium plus anodize plus MO&; (2) Ti6A14V vs. Ni-P-PTFE plating; (3) Grade 2 titanium vs. anodized Grade 2 titanium plus anodize plus MO&; (4) Grade 2 titanium vs. Ni-P-PTFE plating; (5) chromium-plated Grade 2 titanium r~. Grade 2 titanium; (6) chromium-plated pure titanium vs. Ni-P-PTFE plating; (7) chromium-plated 440C stainless steel vs. Grade 2 titanium plus anodize plus MO&. These results suggest that whenever titanium (pure or alloy) is used in a sliding system, the counterface should have a lubricious coating. None of the pure metal or specialty alloy counterfaces compared with the PTFE or MO&-lubricated systems. The results are in agreement with previous investigations [15]. The friction results (Fig. 11) show that the anodized plus MO&-treated counterfaces had the lowest kinetic coefficient of friction against pure and alloy titanium. This result is in line with what one would expect. However, these data also show that the wear characteristics of the various lubricous coatings differed significantly. Some were more effective than others in reducing system wear. These friction data suggest that designers could effectively prevent metal-to-metal wear in titanium tribosystems by having one of the titanium members treated with an anodize that is subsequently coated with a PTFE or MO!&

214

0 OLUME COUNTERFACE LOSS (mm

Fig. 10. Results of metal-to-metal in a reciprocating ball-on-plane 1.6 Hz, 1.1 kgf normal force, 2 were at their maximum working

wear tests on titanium and other corrosion-resistant materials rig. Data are average values for three tests. Test conditions: h test duration, 2.5 cm stroke amplitude. All metal samples hardness.

c
. FTFE
,1-S REFFER

0.2

0.4

TC DIFFERENT

GOUtNO

VENDORS

COEFFICIENT

0.6 0.8 OF FRICTION

Fig. 11. Kinetic coefficient of friction of couples in bail-on-plane derived from average force readings during the test.

wear test. Coefkients

were

216

dry film lube. All the dry film coatings tested were applied by spray and bake techniques. The MO& coating had an epoxy binder.

6. Summary

and conclusions

The various wear tests conducted in this study have shed considerable light on the idiosyncracies of titanium alloys when they are used in sliding systems. The following are the conclusions from these tests and recommendations for use of titanium in design situations. (1) Titanium does not gall against most metal counterfaces, but it does adhesively transfer and wears at a high rate (it can be used for threaded fasteners without concern about seizure, but the threads wear). It can be used mated with 300 series stainless steels to form a galling-resistant (but not wear resistant) tribosystem. (2) The wear of titanium alloys in sliding systems can be significantly reduced by the use of an anodizing and subsequent treatment with dry film lubricant coating on one member of the couple (anodizing plus MO& or PTFE). (3) Both the pure and alloy grade of titanium have poor abrasion resistance (poorer than soft 300 series stainless) and their use should be avoided in systems involving low stress abrasion. (4) Titanium is quite prone to fretting damage (coupled to itself and to soft and hard stainless steels). A counterface that reduces damage to both members is Stellite 6B. This counterface should be used whenever possible. Other counterfaces can be used if they have a lubricous coating (anodize plus PTFE or MO& dry film lubricant). (5) Pure titanium transfers and deforms badly in unlubricated tribosystems; its use in any tribosystem should be avoided. We have not learned everything that there is to know about the wear characteristics of titanium, but adoption of the above guidelines by design engineers will produce major reduction in wear problems with titanium alloys.

References

1 Standard specification for titanium and titanium alloy bars and billets, ASTM 8348-83. 2 S. Fayeulle, Tribological behavior of nitrogen implanted materials, Wear, 107 (1986) 61-70. 3 T. S. Eyre and H. Asalin, Effect of boronizing on adhesive wear of titanium alloys, Tribologv, 10 (1977) 281-285. 4 I. S. Vaptying and V. I. Syshchikov, Effect of alloy content on frictional properties of titanium, Wear, 3 (1960) 332. 5 I. J. Polmear, Light Alloys, Arnold, London, 1981, p. 198. 6 S. L. Rice, Materials transport phenomenon in the impact wear of titanium alloys, Wear, 65 (1980) 215-226. 7 Standard test method for galling resistance of materials, ASTM G98-89, 1989. 8 Practice for conducting dry sand/rubber wheel abrasion test, ASZM G65-87, 1987. 9 E. Rabinowicz, Friction and Wear of Materials, Wiley, New York, 1965, p. 168. 10 I. M. Hutchings and A. P. Mercer, The influence of atmosphere composition on the abrasive wear of titanium and Ti6Al4V, Wear, I24 (1988) 165-176. 11 J. D. Ayers, Wear behaviour of carbide-injected titanium and aluminum alloys, Wear, 97 (1984) 249-266. 12 R. C. Bill, Selected fretting-wear-resistant coatings for Ti-d%AU%V alloy, Wear, 102 (1985) 283-301.

13 R. Komanduri and W. R. Reed Jr., Evaluation of carbide grades and a new cutting geometry for machining titanium alloys, Wear, 92 (1983) 113-123. 14 Guang-Xi Lu and Jung-Roug Liu, Unlubricated sliding wear behavior of nickel diffusion coated Ti6Al4V, Wear, 121 (1988) 259-269. 15 F. deLaat and T. Adams, Inhibiting the wear and galling characteristics of titanium, Met. Eng. Q., (August 1968) 39-47. 16 K. G. Budinski, Wear characteristics of industrial platings, in R. Bayer (ed.), Selection and Use of Wear Tests for Coatings, ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ. 769, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1982, pp. 118-133. 17 K. G. Budinski, Evaluation of fretting corrosion by means of a new device for control of oscillation amplitude, in S. D. Brown (ed.), Mareriulr Evaluation Under Fretting Conditions, ASTM Spec. Tech. PubI. 780, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1982, pp. 49-67.