Improvement on compressive properties of lotus-type porous copper by a nickel coating on pore walls

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2019.06.017

Abstract

Abstract:

The aim of this work is to understand the effect of a thin coating on the compressive properties of the porous metal. In our work, the uniaxial compressive behavior and the energy absorption properties of the lotus-type porous copper deposited with Ni coatings with thickness from 3.9 to 4.8 μm on pore walls were investigated. It is found that the Ni coating on pore walls shows a clear enhancement effect on compressive properties of the lotus-type porous copper, in which the specific yield strength and the energy absorption per unit mass at densification strain increase from 5.27 to 7.31 MPa cm³ g^-1 and from 11.50 to 18.21 J g^-1 with the Ni coating, respectively. Furthermore, the enhancement appears to be insensitive to the coating thickness. It is considered that the resistance of the interface between the nickel coating and the pore walls to the dislocation slip plays an important role in the improvement on compressive properties of the lotus-type porous copper.

Key words: Lotus-type porous copper, Coating, Pore walls, Compressive properties

Hao Du, Chuanyu Cui, Housheng Liu, Guihong Song, Tianying Xiong. Improvement on compressive properties of lotus-type porous copper by a nickel coating on pore walls[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2020, 37: 114-122.

Figures/Tables 8

Fig. 1. Image of the coated lotus-type porous copper specimen and its schematic diagram for the cross section of the pore structure.

Table 1 Effect of coating thickness on the average radius of pores, the half distance between neighbor pores and porosity for the lotus-type porous copper.

Coating thickness (μm)	Average radius of pores (mm)	Half distance between neighbor pores (mm)	Calculated porosity (%)	Measured porosity (%)
0	0.2193	0.3043		47.10
3.9	0.2154	0.3043	45.44	45.65
4.0	0.2153	0.3043	45.40	45.79
4.1	02152	0.3043	45.36	45.62
4.3	0.2150	0.3043	45.27	45.51
4.4	0.2149	0.3043	45.23	45.48
4.6	0.2147	0.3043	45.15	45.52
4.8	0.2145	0.3043	45.06	45.42
39.0	0.1803	0.3043	31.84

Fig. 2. Compressive stress-strain curve between the coated and the uncoated lotus-type porous copper (a) and the magnified part (b) in the strain range to 0.05.

Table 2 Density, compressive strength and energy absorption capacity of both the uncoated and the coated lotus-type porous coppers.

Parameters	Density (g cm^-3)	Compressive strength (MPa)	Specific compressive strength (MPa cm³?g^-1)	Energy absorption capacity per volume (MJ m^-3)	Energy absorption capacity per mass (J g^-1)
Uncoated	4.7081	22.1?±?2.0	4.69?±?0.42	48.2?±?3.0	10.24?±?0.64
Coated-3.9?μm	4.8372	28.2?±?2.8	5.83?±?0.58	69.1?±?3.7	14.29?±?0.76
Coated-4.0?μm	4.8247	29.3?±?2.7	6.07?±?0.56	71.6?±?3.9	14.84?±?0.81
Coated-4.1 μm	4.8398	28.4?±?2.5	5.87?±?0.52	69.5?±?3.5	14.36?±?0.72
Coated-4.3 μm	4.8496	29.4?±?2.8	6.06?±?0.58	72.2?±?4.0	14.89?±?0.82
Coated-4.4?μm	4.8523	29.6?±?3.1	6.10?±?0.64	73.7?±?4.1	15.19?±?0.84
Coated-4.6 μm	4.8487	28.8?±?2.6	5.94?±?0.54	70.1?±?3.5	14.46?±?0.72
Coated-4.8?μm	4.8576	29.2?±?2.9	6.01?±?0.60	71.3?±?3.9	14.68?±?0.80

Fig. 3. Relationship between energy absorption per mass (a), energy absorption efficiency (b) and strain for both the uncoated and the coated lotus-type porous copper.

Fig. 4. SEM images of pore walls after being compressed to 20% (a), 40% (c) and 80% (e) of the uncoated porous copper in low magnification and their corresponding high magnification images are shown in (b), (d) and (f), respectively.

Fig. 5. SEM images of pore walls after being compressed to 20% (a), 40% (c) and 80% (e) of the coated porous copper in low magnification and their corresponding high magnification images are shown in (b), (d) and (f, g), respectively.

Fig. 6. Schematic of a uniaxial compressive test of a specimen consisting of a copper substrate and a Ni coating.

References

[1]	P.S. Liu, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 527 (2010) 7961-7966.
[2]	A.A. Mahaidin, N. Abdullah, M. Mohammad, M.A. Omar, M.J. Suleiman, N.M. Zainon, M.A.N. Hadi, M.N.A.Jalil, A.Z. Omar, M.B.M. Hijazi, Proced. Chem. 19(2016) 546-551.
[3]	J. Banhart, Prog. Mater. Sci. 46(2001) 559-632.
[4]	, H.L. Ren, J. Wang, L. Hao, H.T. Shen, Sci. China Technol. Soc. 60(2017) 613-623.
[5]	S.K. Hyun, K. Murakami, H. Nakajima, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 299 (2001) 241-248.
[6]	Z.J. Li, T.W. Yang, Q.L. Jin, Y.H. Jiang, R. Zhou, Rare Met. Mater. Eng. 43(2014) 2609-2613.
[7]	E.W. Andrews, G. Gioux, P. Onck, L.J. Gibson, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 43(2001) 701-713.
[8]	H. Nakajima, Prog. Mater. Sci. 52(2007) 1091-1173.
[9]	X.H. Liu, H.Y. Huang, J.X. Xie, Int. J. Min. Met. Mater. 21(2014) 687-695.
[10]	Y.X. Li, X.B. Liu, Acta Metall. Sin. 54 (2018) 727-741, in Chinese.
[11]	S. Suzuki, H. Utsunomiya, H. Nakajima, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 490 (2008) 465-470.
[12]	F. Diologent, R. Goodall, A. Mortensen, Acta Mater. 57(2009) 286-294.
[13]	B.A. Bouwhuis, J.L. McCrea, G. Palumbo, G.D. Hibbard, Acta Mater. 57(2009) 4046-4053.
[14]	Y. Boonyongmaneerat, C.A. Schuh, D.C. Dunand, Scr. Mater. 59(2008) 336-339.
[15]	M. Suralvo, B. Bouwhuis, J.L. McCrea, G. Palumbo, G.D. Hibbard, Scr. Mater. 58(2008) 247-250.
[16]	T. Abdulla, A. Yerokhin, R. Goodall, Mater. Des. 32(2011) 3742-3749.
[17]	B.A. Bouwhuis, T. Ronis, J.L. McCrea, G. Palumbo, G.D. Hibbard, Compos. Sci. Technol. 69(2009) 385-390.
[18]	A. Jung, D. Klis, F. Goldschmidt, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 378(2015) 178-185.
[19]	H. Du, G.H. Song, H. Nakajima, Y.H. Zhao, J.Q. Xiao, T.Y. Xiong, Appl. Surf. Sci. 264(2013) 772-778.
[20]	H. Du, J.Z. Qi, J.X. Wu, S.Q. Du, T.Y. Xiong, Mater. Sci.Forum 654-656(2010) 1030-1033.
[21]	J.S. Park, S.K. Hyun, H. Sueno, M. Tane, H. Nakajima, Y.S. Um, B.Y. Hur, F. Ono, Mater. Trans. 47(2006) 2208-2212.
[22]	L.J. Gibson, M.F. Ashby, AshbyCellular Solids: Structure and Properties, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999.
[23]	Z.H. Wang, H.W. Ma, L.M. Zhao, G.T. Yang, Scr. Mater. 54(2006) 83-87.
[24]	Y. Liu, Y.X. Li, J. Wan, H.W. Zhang, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 402 (2005) 47-54.
[25]	X. Lu, Z. Zhang, H. Du, H. Luo, Y. Mu, J. Xu, J. Alloys Compd. 797(2019) 727-734.
[26]	J. Liu, S. Shi, Z. Zheng, K. Huang, Y. Yan, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 708 (2017) 329-335.
[27]	A.E. Simone, L.J. Gibson, J. Mater. Sci. 32(1997) 451-457.
[28]	Y. Liu, K.M. Yang, J. Hay, E.G. Fu, X. Zhang, Scr. Mater. 162(2019) 33-37.
[29]	A.M. El-Sherik, J.Shirokoff, U. Erb, J. Alloys Compd. 389(2005) 140-143.
[30]	S. Basrour, L. Robert, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 288 (2000) 270-274.
[31]	Y.L. Mu, G.C. Yao, L.S. Liang, H.J. Luo, G.Y. Zu, Scr. Mater. 63(2010) 629-632.
[32]	Q.Z. Wang, D.M. Lu, C.X. Cui, L.M. Liang, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 211(2011) 363-367.
[33]	E.L. Zhang, B. Wang, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 47(2005) 744-756.
[34]	V.A. Lubarda, Mech. Mater. 117(2018) 32-40.
[35]	Q. Zhou, D.P. Hua, Y. Du, Y. Ren, W.W. Kuang, Q.S. Xia, V. Bhardwaj, Int. J. Plasticity 120 (2019) 115-126.
[36]	K.M. Davoudi, L. Nicola, J.J. Vlassak, J. Appl. Phys. 115(2014) 1-7.
[37]	J. Pina, A. Dias, M. Francois, J.L. Lebrun, Surf. Coat. Technol. 96(1997) 148-162.