Effect of Laser Surface Modifications Tribological Performance of 1080 Carbon Steel

[+] Author and Article Information
S. H. Aldajah

 UAE University, Al-Ain, UAE

O. O. Ajayi, G. R. Fenske, Z. Xu

Energy Technology Division,  Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439

J. Tribol 127(3), 596-604 (Jan 18, 2005) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1924461 History: Received April 01, 2004; Revised January 18, 2005

High-power laser surface treatments in the form of glazing, shock peening, cladding, and alloying can significantly affect material surface properties. In this paper, effects of laser glazing, laser shock peening, and their combination on the tribological behavior of 1080 carbon steel were investigated. Laser glazing is a process in which a high-power laser beam melts the top layer of the surface, followed by rapid cooling and resolidification. This results in a new surface layer microstructure and properties. Laser shock peening, on the other hand, is a mechanical process in which a laser generates pressure pulses on the surface of the metal, similar to shot peening. Five conditions were evaluated: untreated (baseline), laser shock peened only (PO), laser glazed only, laser glazed then shock peened last, and laser shock peened then glazed last (PFGL). In pin-on-disc testing, all laser-treated surfaces reduced dry friction when sliding against alumina, with the PFGL surface having maximum friction reduction of 43%, especially in the early stage of testing. Under lubricated conditions, all laser-treated surfaces except the PO sample lowered friction against alumina. Similarly, all glazed samples showed reduced wear by a factor of 2–3, whereas the peening alone did not change wear significantly. These tribological results are associated with changes in the near-surface microstructure and properties.

Copyright © 2005 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Pin-on-disc test machine

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Ball wear volume

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Two- and three-body abrasions in alumina ball wear scar

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Grain boundary microcracking and grain cleavage in alumina

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Debris accumulation after grain pullout on alumina ball

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Flat wear volume under dry and lubricated conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Different degrees of abrasion in flats

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Crack initiation resulting in material loss

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Areas of local indentations in the wear track

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Mild abrasion (polishing) wear under lubricated condition

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Plastic deformation at the edge of a polishing mark

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

1080 carbon steel with four different treatments

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

(a) Single-pass laser-glazed region and (b) multipass laser-glazed region

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Optical micrographs with Knoop microhardness measurements

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Variation of microhardness with depth

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

(a) Friction coefficient versus time for dry contact and (b) friction coefficient versus time for lubricated contact



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In