Search Results for wear surface

Fig. 2 Wear surface by cavitation of copper-base alloy in a lubricated gearbox. Courtesy of CETIM More

Fig. 3 Wear surface of Al 2 O 3 after vibratory cavitation test. Courtesy of CETIM More

Fig. 5 Wear surface of 304 stainless steel after vibratory cavitation test. Courtesy of CETIM More

Fig. 4 Wear surface stresses More

Fig. 26 Microstructure and wear surface conditions of a 25% Cr high-chromium white iron (ASTM class II type A) after Coriolis sliding erosion test. (a) Original microstructure (optical microscopy). (b) Wear surface by 1400 μm (D50) sand particles (scanning electron microscopy). (c) Wear More

Fig. 5 Comparison of wear surfaces for low-alloy steel specimens worn in (a) flow-through and (b) recycled slurry tests for 1 h and 1.67 h, respectively. Source: Ref 13 More

Fig. 32 Metallographic cross sections of wear surfaces of two materials that experienced the same high-stress abrasion. (a) At 60 HRC, the material exhibited no white-etching layers, while (b) at 20 HRC points, softer, significant gouging and white-etching layer formation is observed. More

Fig. 9 Comparison of wear surfaces for A514 low-alloy steel specimens worn in flow-through (a) and recycled (b) slurry tests for 60 min and 100 min, respectively. Source: Ref 37 More

Fig. 12 Wear surfaces of a lean duplex grade LDX 2101 (UNS S32101) after 72 h erosion-corrosion tests at 95 °C (200 °F) in 5% sulfuric acid with ferric iron using a tip speed of 4.8 m/s (15.7 ft/s) and quartz with a nominal particle size of (a) 0.05–0.2 mm, or 2–8 mils, and (b) 0.1–0.6 mm More

Fig. 5 Typical wear surfaces More

Fig. 6 Wear surfaces on common tools due to the tool motion, V More

Fig. 32 Metallographic cross sections of wear surfaces of two materials that experienced the same high-stress abrasion. (a) At 60 HRC, the material exhibited no white-etching layers, while (b) at 20 HRC points softer, significant gouging and white-etching layer formation is observed. More

Fig. 2 Typical wear surfaces More

Fig. 3 Wear surfaces on common tools due to the tool motion, V More

Fig. 29 Multiple arc-shaped cracks were visible on SiC wear surfaces (top left). Arc fractures were observed in the wear surfaces (yellow arrows). The area of the greatest chipping (top left, blue arrow) was opened to expose the fracture surfaces (top right). Scanning electron microscope image More

Fig. 25 Regions of wear identified by wear debris morphology and worn surface topography of aluminum and the counterface. (a) Fine equiaxed particle formation. (b) Compact delamination. (c) Plastic delamination. (d) Gross material transfer. Adapted from Ref 162 More

Fig. 6 Illustration of zero wear concept. (a) Surface profile when wear is less than the zero wear criterion. (b) Near the zero wear criterion. (c) Above the zero wear criterion. (d) Definition of the zero wear criterion More

Fig. 7 Wear traces on a hydrodynamic bearing surface. Courtesy of CETIM More

Fig. 8 Wear traces on a plain bearing surface initiated by cavitation. Courtesy of CETIM More

Fig. 9 Wear on suction surface of centrifugal pump impeller by cavitation and solid particle erosion. Courtesy of CETIM More