UA119316U - METHOD OF FINISHING SURFACES OF STEEL PARTS - Google Patents

Abstract

Method of treating surfaces of steel parts by electro-erosion alloying (EEL) with an aluminum electrode, in which the processing is first carried out by EEL with an aluminum electrode at discharge energy Wp = 0.52-6.8 J and productivity of 1.0-3.0 cm2 / min, and then carry out the following EEL of the alitated layer with the same aluminum electrode, but at discharge energy, Wp = 0,52-4,6 J and productivity of 1.1-2.7 cm2 / min.

Description

The useful model belongs to the field of electrophysical and electrochemical processing, in particular, to electroerosion alloying (EEL) of the surfaces of steel parts with aluminum (alitization) and can be used for processing the surfaces of heat-treated steel parts, to increase their hardness, wear resistance and resistance to atmospheric corrosion. As a result of alitization, steel acquires high scale resistance (up to 850 - 900 C), because during heating, a dense film of aluminum oxide A/2Oz forms on the surface of alitized products, which protects the metal from oxidation. The hardness of the alite layer on the surface is up to 500 NMU, wear resistance is the highest of all methods.

The well-known process of alitization (M.A. Elizavetyn, 9.A. Satel. Технологические способе повишения длянгесности машин. M.: машиностроение, 1969.- 400s|), which includes applying an aluminum layer to a steel surface (usually by spraying), coating and annealing . At the same time, special attention is paid to the roughness of the surface to be coated, and oxide films, oil and dust are unacceptable. The dispersion of aluminum particles must be large, which accelerates the diffusion of aluminum into the surface layer of the metal during annealing. The coating is applied to the surface in a continuous layer in two or three methods and strictly adhere to the regime of thermodiffusion treatment, which preserves the coating layer. After applying the aluminum coating and coating, thermal diffusion saturation of the surface layer is carried out - the part is subjected to annealing. The initial temperature is 600-650 C, then rapid heating is carried out to 900-9507 J EU with exposure for 2.5-3.5 hours, after which the part is slowly cooled together with the furnace to a temperature of 500-550 C, and then in the air Coating thickness p with fused aluminum depends on the operating temperature of the parts: for a temperature of 700-800 "C, the coating thickness is 0.2-0.3 mm, and for a temperature of 900-1000 "C, it reaches 0.5-0.7 mm. After alitization, the parts are covered with a 10-20 95 solution of aluminum chloride, then coated with liquid glass, sprinkled with quartz sand and dried at a temperature of 100 "C. The dried part is again coated with liquid glass and dried again. At a temperature of 600-700 "C, the parts are loaded into a furnace and heated to a temperature of 1200-1250 "С with a holding time of 14-40 min., after which it is slowly cooled first in a furnace to a temperature of 800 "С, and then in air.

Being anodized in this way, low-carbon steel is more heat-resistant than special heat-resistant steel 4 x 14Н14В2М. Aluminized surfaces of the form made of steel Art. 3

When casting a tool from high-speed steel RI8 at a casting temperature of 1480-1500 "С, it was shown that such forms can withstand more than a hundred castings without any damage to the surface alithized layer.

Despite the positive results, the technology described above has a number of disadvantages: - high cost and laboriousness of the process; 35 - the need for control at all stages of technology; - heating of the whole part, and accordingly, structural changes of the metal; - leashes and distortions; - the duration of the process is more than 8 hours; - high consumption of electricity; 40 - negative impact on ecology, etc.

In the publication (S.N. Khymukhin, I.A. Astapov, M.A. Teslyna, etc. Formation of heat-resistant coatings by the method of electrospark alloying using intermetallic Mi-AI alloys // Technical sciences - from theory to practice: coll. art. on Mater. KhM International Scientific - Practical Conf. - Novosibirsk: SybAK, 20121 the influence of the composition of the synthesized Mi-AI! alloys 45 on the formation of coatings obtained by the method of electrospark alloying on stainless steel x 13 was studied. The phase composition of the coatings was studied, the results were presented metallography and heat resistance tests. It is shown that the most effective for creating heat-resistant coatings is the synthesized alloy of composition Mi-66.9 Uo AI-32.9 Fo.

The disadvantage of this technology is the need to synthesize alloys of the composition Mi-66.9 95 AI-32.9 9.

Alloys with a different composition do not lead to positive results. In addition, the EIL process must be carried out in a protective environment (argon), which requires additional costs for the manufacture of special equipment.

In the publication |S.A.Pyachyn, A.A.Burkov, V.S.Komarova. Formation and study of electrospark coatings based on titanium aluminides. // Surface. X-ray, synchrotron and neutron research, 2013, Mo 6, p. 16-24 (Prototype)| the method of applying coatings is disclosed, which includes electrospark alloying (EIL) (the same as EEL) with an aluminum electrode of a metal surface. The structure and composition of the coatings are studied by the methods of electron microscopy, X-ray structural and micro-X-ray spectral analysis.

It has been established that the surface layer formed in argon mainly contains intermetallics and 60 //-TiiAliiZ regardless of the duration and frequency of the discharge pulses. Phases y-TiiaYi and og - TisYi can be obtained by the deposition of aluminum on titanium with the subsequent application of a second layer of titanium.

The investigated technology has some advantages compared to other similar technologies known from the prior art. The specified advantages include ease of implementation, the formation of a homogeneous surface layer due to mixing in the molten state of the materials used as electrodes, and high adhesion of the coating to the substrate.

However, this EIL technology with an aluminum electrode, like the above-mentioned EIL technology using Mi-AII intermetallic alloys, is also performed in a protective environment (argon), which significantly increases the costs of the process, and in addition, the specified technology is used only for titanium parts .

The basis of the useful model is the task of creating aluminum coatings on steel substrates by the EEL (EIL) method with an aluminum electrode.

The task was solved by creating a method of processing the surfaces of steel parts by electroerosion alloying (EEL) with an aluminum electrode, in which the treatment is first carried out by EEL with an aluminum electrode at a discharge energy of MMr-0.52-6.8 J and a productivity of 1.0-3.0 cm/min ., and then carry out the next EEL of the alite layer with the same aluminum electrode, but with a discharge energy of МУр-0.52-4.6 J and a productivity of 1.1-2.7 cm/min., or with a graphite electrode with a discharge energy of M /р--0.52-4.6 J and productivity 1.0-2.5 cm? /min. To improve the integrity of the alitized layer, re-treatment is carried out with the same aluminum electrode. If it is necessary to increase the hardness of the surface layer, then re-treatment is carried out with graphite. As a result, in the second case, the surface layer is saturated with carbon, carbides are formed, and the surface layer is hardened.

In addition, the roughness, thickness, microhardness and integrity of the surface layer are increased by increasing the discharge energy.

It was established that at M/r-4.5-6.8 J and productivity of 2.0-3.0 cmg/min. ensure the formation of an alite layer, respectively, with a thickness of 70-130 microns, a microhardness of 5000-7500

MPa, with a roughness (Ra) of 6-9 μm and a continuity of 95 - 100 95 or 97 - 100 95 for the variant with repeated

EEL aluminum electrode. At the same time, the roughness is reduced to Ka-1.8 μm by the following EEL aluminum electrode at the discharge energy UMr-1.3 J and to 1.9 μm by the subsequent EEL graphite electrode also at the discharge energy UMr-1.3 J.

At the same time, alitization is carried out in an air environment and at atmospheric pressure. Compared to alitization in the environment of any special gas, such as argon, there is no need for additional equipment to ensure its supply.

The essence of the useful model is explained by graphic material, where: - in fig. 1 presents different sections of the structure of the surface layer of steel 20 after EEL with aluminum at M/p-0.52 J; in fig. 2, C presents the results of durometric analysis of the microhardness distribution of the sample in fig. 1 as it deepens from the surface: a slide with impressions of the measurement of the microhardness of the surface layer, fig. 2, and the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. WITH; in fig. 4 shows the profilogram of the surface roughness of steel sample 20 during EEL with aluminum with the discharge energy UMr-0.52 J; in fig. 5 shows the structure of the surface layer of steel sample 20 after EEL with aluminum

MUr-1.30 J; in fig. 6 shows the "iron - aluminum" state diagram of the sample in fig. 5; in fig. 7, 8 present the results of durometric analysis of the microhardness distribution of the sample in Fig. 5: cross-section with the image of impressions obtained when pressing a diamond pyramid, fig. 7; distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 8; in fig. 9 shows the profilogram of the surface roughness of steel sample 20 during EEL with aluminum with a discharge energy of МУр-1.30 J; in fig. 10, 11 present the results of durometric studies of a steel sample 20 on a PMT-3 device with a load of P - 20 g after EEL with aluminum with a discharge energy of MMr-2.6 J: a slide with an image of the microhardness measurement impressions of the surface layer of steel sample 20 after EEL with aluminum with energy discharge M/r-2.6 J, fig. 10; distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, in Fig. 11; in fig. 12 shows the surface roughness profilogram of steel sample 20 during EEL with aluminum with discharge energy M/p-2.6 J; in fig. 13 shows the structure of the surface layer of steel sample 20 after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of M/p-4.60 J; in fig. 14, 15 show the results of durometric tests of the sample in fig. 13: a cut with impressions of the microhardness measurement of the surface layer, fig. 14; microhardness distribution over 60 layer depth, Fig. 15;

in fig. 16 shows the surface roughness profilogram of steel sample 20 during EEL with aluminum with discharge energy M/p-4.6 J; in fig. 17 shows the structure of the surface layer of steel sample 20 after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of M/p-6.8 J; in fig. 18-19 show the results of durometric studies of the surface layer in fig. 17: sandblast with impressions of measuring the microhardness of the surface layer, fig. 18, and the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 19; in fig. 20 shows the surface roughness profilogram of steel sample 20 during EEL with aluminum with discharge energy UUr-6.8 J; in fig. 21-22 present the results of the durometric analysis of the distribution of microhardness as it deepens from the surface of the steel sample 40 after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of MMr-0.52 J: a sandpaper with impressions of the measurement of the microhardness of the surface layer, fig. 21, and the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 22; in fig. 23 shows the surface roughness profilogram of a steel 40 sample during EEL with aluminum with a discharge energy of МУр-0.52 J; Figs. 24-25 show the results of durometric studies: a sandpaper with impressions of measuring the microhardness of the surface layer, Fig. 24, and the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 25, of the sample in fig. 23; in fig. 26 shows the surface roughness profilogram of steel sample 40 during EEL with aluminum with discharge energy UUr-2.6 J; Figs. 27-28 show the results of durometric studies: sandpaper with impressions of measuring the microhardness of the surface layer, Fig. 27, and the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 28, of the sample in fig. 26; in fig. 29 shows the profilogram of the surface roughness of the steel sample 40 during EEL with aluminum with the discharge energy UUr-6.8 J; Fig. 30 shows the correlation dependence of the roughness of the surface layer of steel 20 on the energy of the discharge during alitization by the EEL method. Fig. 31 shows the correlation dependence of the microhardness of the surface layer of steel 20 on the energy of the discharge during alitization by the EEL method.

Fig. 32 shows the correlation dependence of the integrity of the surface layer of steel 20 on the energy of the discharge during alitization by the EEL method. Fig. 33 shows the correlation dependence of the roughness of the surface layer of steel 40 on the energy of the discharge during alitization by the EEL method. Fig. 34 shows the correlation dependence of the microhardness of the surface layer of steel 40 on the energy of the discharge during alitization by the EEL method. Fig. 35 shows the correlation dependence of the integrity of the surface layer of steel 40 on the energy of the discharge during alitization by the EEL method.

To determine the influence of the energy parameters of the EEL equipment on the qualitative parameters of the coatings, samples of 20 and 40 steel with a size of 15x15x8 mm were made, which were coated with an aluminum electrode on the "Zlytron 52A" machine using different modes.

Processing was carried out in an air environment at atmospheric pressure. Each EEL mode corresponded to its own discharge energy and productivity - the area of the formed coating per unit of time (see Table 1). Dependence of EEL performance on discharge energy

Table 1

Energy discharge (Mr), J | 052 | 713 | 26 | 46 | 68

It should be noted that a decrease in the productivity of the EEEL entails a decrease in the quality parameters of the surface layer (the appearance of burns, and most importantly - the destruction of the formed layer), which is especially noticeable at the energy of the Moore discharge" 1 J. An increase in productivity leads to a decrease in the integrity of the coating.

To reduce the surface roughness, after EEL with aluminum, alloying was performed with the same aluminum electrode or graphite graphite, but at lower modes. The thickness of the coating layer was measured with a micrometer, and the surface roughness was measured with a profilograph-profilometer device. 201 of the Kalybr plant by taking and processing profiles. The structures of the surface layer were studied on the optical microscope "Neofot-2", where the quality of the layer, its integrity, thickness and structure of the sublayer zones were evaluated. At the same time, a durometric analysis was performed on the PMT-Z microhardness tester for the distribution of microhardness in the surface layer and along the depth of the cut, starting from the surface.

In fig. 1 shows different sections of the structure of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 20 after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of УМр-0.52 J. As a result of the analysis of the structure of the formed surface layer (a layer with a modified structure), it was concluded that its integrity tends to 100 95 There are separate areas of the "white" layer (up to 60 95) with a thickness of 10-12 microns. The transition zone, the thickness of which is 20-30 μm, is rather weakly expressed.

In fig. 2, C presents the results of durometric analysis of the microhardness distribution of the sample as it deepens from the surface. Prints, fig. 2, obtained when the indenter was inserted under a load of 20 g.

As can be seen from the graph, fig. 3, the microhardness on the surface of the sample is -" 2000 MPa, further, as it deepens, it gradually decreases and at a depth of 50-60 microns it becomes the microhardness of the base of 1600-1700 MPa.

The analysis of the results of measuring the roughness of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 20 after EEL with aluminum at MUr-0.52 J showed that the maximum surface roughness is Ktakh-9.297, and the arithmetic average Ka and K7, respectively, are 1.263 and 2.337 μm, fig. 4.

In fig. 5 shows the structure of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 20 after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of M/r-1.30 J. In Fig. 5, three zones are clearly visible: 1. "white layer", that is, a layer that cannot be etched by ordinary etchants, the thickness of which is 30-50 μm; 2. transition zone or diffusion zone with a thickness of up to 40 μm, consisting, according to the state diagram of iron - aluminum, fig. 6, from solid solutions of aluminum in iron, intermetallic phases of the type

EezAI, EeAIig, GegAi5, EeAIz; 3. the base metal having a ferrite-pearlite structure.

In fig. 7, 8 present the results of durometric studies: a grindstone of a sample made of steel 20 with an image of the impressions obtained when pressing a diamond pyramid on a PMT-3 device with a load of P - 50 g, fig. 7, and the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 8.

As can be seen from the graph in fig. 8, the maximum microhardness of the surface layer is

From 2050 MPa, which gradually decreases as it deepens to the microhardness of the base, steel 20.

The microhardness of the "white" layer is low and is within 2000-2050 MPa, the microhardness of the transition zone is 1800-1950 MPa.

The analysis of the results of measuring the roughness of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 20 after EEL with aluminum at M/r-1.30 J showed that the maximum surface roughness is Ktakh-21.648 μm, and the average arithmetic Ka and K7, respectively, is 1.929 and 6.216 μm, fig. . 9.

The integrity of the layer with a modified structure tends to 100 95, and the "white" layer - to 80 95.

In fig. 10, 11 present the results of durometric tests of a sample made of steel 20 on a PMT-3 device with a load of P - 20 g after EEL with aluminum with a discharge energy of MUr-2.6 J: a sandpaper with impressions of the measurement of the microhardness of the surface layer, fig. 10, distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 11.

As in the previous sample, the surface layer consists of three zones: the "white layer", the thickness of which is on average in the range of 40-50 microns, but in some areas it reaches 70 microns; transition or diffusion zone up to 50 μm thick and the base metal having a ferrito-pearlite structure. The maximum microhardness of the surface layer is 2700 MPa, which gradually decreases as it deepens and at a depth of -120 microns corresponds to the microhardness of the base (41700 MPa). In the transition zone, the microhardness is within 1800-2200 MPa.

The analysis of the results of measuring the roughness of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 20 after EEL with aluminum at M/r-2.60 J showed that the maximum surface roughness is Ktakh-23.242 μm, and the average arithmetic Ka and K7, respectively, are 3.327 and 9.297 μm, fig. 12.

The integrity of the layer with the modified structure tends to 100 95, and the "white" layer to -85 95.

In fig. 13 shows the structure of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 20 after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of M/p-4.60 J, and in Fig. 14, 15 show the results of durometric studies: a sandpaper with impressions of measuring the microhardness of the surface layer, fig. 14, and the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the surface layer, fig. 15.

As in the previous sample, the surface layer consists of three zones: the "white" layer, the thickness of which is on average in the range of 50-70 microns, but in some areas it reaches 90 microns; transition or diffusion zone up to 50 μm thick and the base metal having a ferrito-pearlite structure. The maximum microhardness of the surface layer is 5010 MPa, which gradually decreases as it deepens and at a depth of -«- 150 microns corresponds to the microhardness of the base. In the 60 transition zone, the microhardness is in the range of 2000-2500 MPa.

Analysis of fig. 13-15 showed that an increase in discharge energy up to 4.60 J is accompanied by an increase in surface roughness: Kitah-40.641 μm; K a - 6.171 μm and K2 - 16.256 μm, fig. 16.

The integrity of the layer with a modified structure tends to 100 95, and the "white" layer to 95 95.

In fig. 17 shows the structure of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 20 after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of M/p-6.8 J, and in Fig. 18-19 shows the distribution of microhardness along the depth of the layer. The thickness of the "white" layer varies from 25 to 70 μm, and the microhardness decreases from 3,7270 MPa on the surface to 6,100 MPa at the beginning of the transition zone. Further, in the transition zone, to a depth of 130 μm, there is a sharp decrease in microhardness to 2410 MPa, and then more smoothly - to 1700 MPa at a depth of 260 μm. A further increase in the discharge energy to 6.8 J is accompanied by a significant increase in the surface roughness: Kitah-58.305μm; Ka - 9.039 μm and

KI-18,142 μm (Fig. 20). The integrity of the "white" layer tends to 100 95.

In fig. 21-22 present the results of durometric analysis of the distribution of microhardness as it deepens from the surface of a steel 40 sample after EEL with an aluminum electrode with a discharge energy of UMr-0.52 J. Prints, fig. 21, obtained during the introduction of the indenter under the load of g.

Analysis of the microstructure showed that the coating consists of two zones: a "white" layer and a transition layer with a modified structure. The formation of a uniform layer with a modified structure with a thickness of 20-30 microns is observed on the sample after EEL with aluminum with a discharge energy of M/p-0.52 J. There are separate areas of the "white" layer (less than 50 95) 20 with a thickness of 10-15 microns.

As can be seen from the graph, fig. 22, the microhardness on the surface of the sample is "- 2370 MPa, then, as it deepens, it gradually decreases and at a depth of 100-125 microns passes into the microhardness of the base.

The analysis of measuring the roughness of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 40 after EEL with aluminum at UMUr-0.52 J showed that the maximum surface roughness is Ktakh-8.102, and the average arithmetic Ka and K72, respectively, are 1.600 and 3.028 μm, fig. 23.

When the discharge energy increases to 2.6 J, the integrity of the "white" layer increases to 70 95, and the layer with a modified structure, as in the previous sample, tends to 100 95. The thickness of the "white" layer is mainly 30-40 μm, although in some places it reaches 70 μm.

Based on the results of the durometric analysis, fig. 24-25, and, as can be seen from the graph, fig. 25, the microhardness on the surface of the sample is 3,500 MPa, then, as it deepens, it gradually increases and at a depth of about 50 μm is 4,500 MPa, after which it gradually decreases and at a depth of 150-170 μm passes into the microhardness of the base. The analysis of measuring the roughness of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 40 after EEL with aluminum at UUr-0.52 J showed that the maximum surface roughness is Kitakh-11.555, and the average arithmetic Ka and Kz, respectively, is 1.853 and 4.144 μm, fig. 26.

If we compare the microstructures, the depth of the transition zone increases as the discharge energy increases. At M/r-0.52 J, it is not pronounced, while at Uur-2.6 J, it is about 30-40 μm and is characterized by increased hardness - about 4500 MPa. The reason for the increase in the hardness of the transition zone can be phase transformations that occur when steel is heated above critical temperatures and accelerated cooling in air. The microstructure clearly shows an area of incomplete recrystallization, which for steel 40 is determined by heating to a temperature range of 730-755 "C. Despite this, the metal in this area undergoes only partial recrystallization. Thus, along with the grains formed as a result of recrystallization, grains of the original metal are present. on accelerated cooling after EEL (in air), given the low resistance of undercooled austenite of steel 40, the formation of a needle-type structure (martensite) does not occur, which, due to high hardness and brittleness, can lead to the formation of cracks. Therefore, it can be assumed that, despite the increased hardness of the surface layer, its tendency to small deformations remains.

With an increase in the discharge power to 6.8 J, the thickness of the "white" layer increases to 60-130 μm, and the integrity increases to almost 100 95

As for the sample after EEL with UuUr-2.6 J, a transition zone with a thickness of up to 150 μm is observed, which is characterized by an increased hardness of 2335-3430 MPa, fig. 27-28.

The analysis of measuring the roughness of the surface layer of a sample made of steel 40 after EEL with aluminum at Uur-6.8 J showed that the maximum surface roughness is Kitah-49.008, and the average arithmetic Ka and K72, respectively, are 8.138 and 17.345 μm, fig. 29.

Based on the conducted research, in table 2 and fig. 30-35 present the results of the impact of the discharge energy on the quality parameters of the formed surface layers of steel 20 and steel 40 bo when alitizing by the EEL method.

Qualitative parameters of the surface layers of steel samples EEL with an aluminum electrode

Table 2

DV tennnne Matt shen U

Thickness, μm Microhardness, MPa Roughness, μm of "white" discharge, layer 95 layers of zone layer of zone 0.52 | 0-2 | 20-30 | 2000270 | 1900550 | 13 | 23 93 | 60 7lzo | 30-50 / 30-40 |2050-70| 1850480 | 19|6b2 216| 80 68 Ido70 | 110-130 )|7270450| 2370570 | 90 |t18y| 5853 100 and 68 | 60-30 | 130-150 )|7400-70| 2390570 | 81 |173| 490 | 100 "- EEL with a graphite electrode.

The analysis of Table 2 showed that when alitizing by the EEL method, using the modes: discharge energy in the range of UMr-4.6-6.8 J and productivity of 2.0-3.0 cm-/min., provide the highest quality parameters of the surface layer: the formation of a "white" layer with a thickness of 70-130 microns, microhardness 5000-7500 MPa, roughness (Ka) 6-9 microns, and integrity 95-100 95, respectively.

To reduce surface roughness, further EEL was carried out with the same aluminum electrode, using discharge energy that provides 2-3 times lower surface roughness, and productivity, according to Table 3. For comparison, in order to reduce roughness, further EEL of alitized surfaces was carried out with graphite electrode, using the same discharge energy as when alloying with aluminum, according to Table 3.

It should be noted that when using a graphite electrode to reduce the roughness of alitized surfaces, the performance is lower than when using an aluminum electrode.

Dependence of EEL performance on discharge energy

Table C

Table C shows the results of the qualitative parameters of the surface layers of samples made of steel 20, alitized by EEL at the discharge energy of UMr-4.6 J, after their EEL with an aluminum and graphite electrode at Mur-1.3 J, in order to reduce the roughness of the surface layer.

The analysis of table C showed that when using both aluminum and graphite electrodes to reduce the roughness, the roughness (Ka) decreases, respectively, from 6.2 to 1.8 and 1.9 μm, and the integrity increases, respectively, from 95 to 100 and 97 95. At the same time, the thickness and microhardness of the "white" and transitional layers changes slightly. Thus, during the EEL of steel samples with aluminum, with an increase in the discharge energy, such qualitative parameters of the surface layer as roughness, thickness, microhardness of the "white" layer and the transition zone increase.

The integrity of the "white" layer at UuUr-0.52 J is low (50-60 95), with a further increase in the discharge energy, it increases and at M/r-6.8 J it is 100 95.

A comparative analysis of the influence of the substrate on the quality parameters of the surface layer during alitization using the EEL method showed that when replacing steel 20 with steel 40, the thickness of the "white" layer and the transition zone increases, that is, the depth of the zone of increased hardness, as well as the value of its microhardness. Surface roughness practically does not change.

The process of alitization by method can be recommended for practical application

EEL, using modes (discharge energy in the range of Mr-4.6-6.8 J and productivity 2.0-3.0 cm/min.), which ensure the formation of a "white" layer with a thickness of 70-130 microns, respectively , with microhardness of 5000-7500 MPa, roughness (Ka) of 6-9 μm and integrity of 95-100 Ob.

Further EEL with the same aluminum electrode, but with discharge energy that provides in 2-

A much smaller surface roughness allows you to reduce the surface roughness and increase the integrity of the alite layer. For example, when alitizing with the energy of the MUr-4.6 J discharge, the surface roughness

Ka-6b, 2μm, and the continuity of the alite layer is 95 9o, further alloying with aluminum from MMr-1.3 J allows to reduce the surface roughness to Ka-1.8 μm and increase the continuity to 100 95. At the same time, the thickness and microhardness of the "white" and transition layers changes slightly.

Claims (5)

USEFUL MODEL FORMULA 1. The method of surface treatment of steel parts by electroerosion alloying (EEL) with an aluminum electrode, which differs in that the treatment is first carried out by EEL with an aluminum electrode at a discharge energy of МУр-0.52-6.8 J and a productivity of 1.0-3.0 cm/ min., and then carry out the next EEL of the alite layer with the same aluminum electrode, but with a discharge energy of Mr-0.52-4.6 J and a productivity of 1.1-2.7 cm/min. 2. The method according to claim 1, which differs in that the roughness, thickness, microhardness and integrity of the surface layer are increased by increasing the discharge energy. 3. The method according to claim 1, which differs in that at MUr-4.6-6.8 J and productivity of 2.0-3.0 cm/min. ensure the formation of an alite layer, respectively, with a thickness of 70-130 μm, a microhardness of 5000-7500 MPa, a roughness (Na) of 6-9 μm, and a continuity of 95-100 95. 4. The method according to claim 1, which differs in that the roughness is reduced to Na-1.8 μm by the following EEL with the same aluminum electrode at a discharge energy of МУр-1.3 J. 5. The method according to any of claims 1-4, which differs in that the processing is carried out in an air environment and at atmospheric pressure. Fig. 1 ee sho penya Fig. 2 On Me : : : : : : : : : Myh N I : and x : N ne : I va KE SHI : TU ket shiya - y N : her : : I and : and : and : and : and : : : : : : and min in the Church of her EE 12 yomkhm Fig. From freebies OO MYT Kv tt hi Z p ia sok n | ! pa me : GNN ENN UNN runo zu i yi yi yi yi sho 1 TYA YAN poker tvekya Bey Х g zh Yara NY TYA ET: f: her "Biy kt ti NU : p MY Esh oh 7 : i U po Z -K MORE - And ND we have fires pokhhe Mk. Fig. 4 КК ОВ В ВК о осв p е 0 НИ: ХХХ KO Z ШЯ о 1 ои and: Z КК АК ВК КК ЦЕ У о SOKY сх ЗХ po и s . 0 VAK OV OKKO KU ECHO PO i Z s y Z A KJ o. Be p PK Kiya UZH Se KK ШХ хх КН ВК о SOKY i Х Х Ш Ш SN SOU З ЗК ШИНИ Б ОО ШЧА о 5. i: OO OO OO В sk ka Z ХК M o KKU N "NOT. 5 he ukl m y M zhkUuyukh Zyny g VV "ni ts Kg R : Ye t I 1 Z hna i v in M NE PEN in shik ni ee NI ZO YOU MNE Y NE M DY Z NN: TK nin still Mche seli how 1 eh le NN ron i mak AY An TO ek I, Y my NPK a MKK VEN she : GRA Comm. And PD Dershe shi VZ SE poz mu shi ish! ak ED сх 5 "VM ni pah vin OT PI ES VEJI her ! i a VI EI HE YAKU nn i v Ya. T- nia i De Ba: ssh she yi re M i TO bouch lk.--- 4 PE No 3 s ak v z KS V Ve ZV XE g asvya z Fig. 6 nin p. still pa . what p o. . Fig. 7 to us; Os: : still, ia chu : : S: ZE kch! them | ! Kk pnia Y! : what p! вчшнн BC) хх хи КА НА НЕ 15 135 Micron thickness Fig. 8 kh. и тих Ж Z ежете рок -х и : i : гз ИЗ I и i U ef Km oh ZK i VN they MAN MY Thursday WITH B o. shi piti shcha PININNNNN KK -Nsye EP KK prshno NN ssh pi U she I MO i M o KK ek . EE VO eh Z VO B o. CAN fig. About the HORROR. :) : y : PE UZN g hm 175 Pe. zha Fig oi Tuhekoomtyuh N pehomitiimyuh zhh. x H! to shk y E y : ; х и муху хи мкю М. MM x 1 vu N ! i HOM p sumo. mm Chng.tya KK U Es o NO: VE U and M PI VH s EN v A V OO. B shi V I PKOKKY OO OH B I OB B ko a what o ENN OKO dO ke o p ss OY Pi KM Uh . pe ss V OKO XX we. horn. 15 o. O.O. KKU i ee : s ZA KNY II i IKIK, o ev she s o i o. i EI o a ih o : Fg. 14. M : : : PEK Z en pn ao2ya zhk p7a 0) z2zh ash 75 ЗB xx ZU y. µm Fig. TV bulls, sia ion vin non ene kovovnnnn mn nin zhk: luka hUk tuyu! Zhkooar mi hom SCHI : : : off summer KE and SHE: vena i. Kivi zh hi in I NI B TE X kv UK pa VZHK Ku De Ne en ke A o KA Ka V NN YN NVO M zam pis pi nie i shi i y . chic and she o - : : : -ki her : and ra and it and Y Dokhma Fig. 36 "X MM Fo х OKO ooo No EK VV . KOH OK her KU OK not OK PEV . х я OK В В s o Ne OO OKKO OK xx s o. ОХ НН я an EuKOK EK В MV s: В ВЕ о 3 17 ZAS Pe Fig. 8 Z. Mykh NE : : SYCH ko : | : vogo Kk : : 5, : SAME X : : : : Ek : X : : : shh ! from x | ! min : and Who, what from : ! z and don't go omyu 25 5 3 yayu Z, zkzh Yang. 19. Mr. Lusheen smelled. i: i: i Y i xx: N sce ip Ob Ad gi peri ny ny ny we in nin yah I kh y y I y eyY y ENN I and to p: and Olya; DREAM I 1 : lLyuhoehshk! : N oh pek KY Koha Kvt Fig. 20 KOKO OO OPOV o ZO BO S vav Fig 2 Nv. washed But : : : i CHE : lita nn Ko : : : yy Zh ! ha : : o : no : Shin nn iso : ! ! nya : : E in my mo me o na ate Z. Mich FG. 22 oo M nen i nn ny v v KN po vo o ped lil kyu. pr : shi EE he her pauvrschh z : still Tr VA z : Nekhl blEhVn gi: BA : y 2 : ko VBIK MA - Usppanko MUK, krkhh : i JHE Be I PEN MKU Z poonka tivna I I nie Ne pen nyu EV pe shchi ХХ Ж UT Ptseh Ma ож EE: KosvI KI i - ro 1 SU In K і: na V OE and SHEU m: NN EE E ! M xx potr i NNYA p, E SCHE: Kn: A shk VNU Z NI : H 4 | ZED DN De A KD NE oo o DOD AD Dekhnu hm Fig. 24 s B s VOK IKK in more KK in U ZHI OKO in s o: PC M: a Fig. 24 I said; : z Z yiv : sh A zhi 1 : : ! Z gi zas, I : : v NN Mne v MY NI Ka i y nov : N : Shk KE : ono y I : sha YN NIYA tia IMK : : : : Z : NIK Men d zi shchi il dya za to we Yang. 25 ooo shk nan nn p i Mt KAH. them and: t pknizhtkastumh and Dokii huyu. N I y y pvh yuky 4 N E i : : s ; n: 7 th menu of the ICC WHAT NN as El EN V kovy freon dn Porak k myh and Hn N as VN SVINYA and VZHK VA rn 4 rennia NN Vyav M BOZHU 1 SHKN V «MAYU ii I same : TA A g o gia I A ZEPISHSHIIIPIIIIPH OH PNVNv ХК drmov nka Fk. 26 of the Criminal Code of the Criminal Code of Ukraine of the UOVOVKVK ee E Z: A Criminal Code of Ukraine. Wasp WATER Fig. 27 Ni, Mn : doe : Z eh pn viyu : | : Residential complex : | : : : 1 : ET : И : зх ! - : : : LEK : in role. How NOT nin v z vii ish yuyu ii. ex Fig. 28 ZMK DU rolu rutu FC KIT i u y mu, EI IY NI PT pn nn N IZ : I and Claude otu hih z N N PE : : oh roofs. NE N NA : i : Flour ZK more : t ek pitoma KE I M 13 ro. It is where KODU nya GI: m Oh Her: KOT NO and chn p. OO yuyu OBAMI PEN EK GOD 1 We 1 chi V Ko: OTO ve 1 yachKts Kn G»YA feNeknnnit and in the days of NYANI GNE UNN o EUSHNNE: BU Kozy Te Vyudes p N eh 1-4 MODE MA IK KI Z: : NE i aa sli KO o Zh, p LZh « Na PEOM p : N OO TuM: N KANENY 1 3 MORE: I M Aa PDK Moss korelosovyeut aesthetics MYH VYK tray KU. MYH kvi : : : mon nnya : N : : : : : K: E : : : : : Na 2 : : : : : r : i : : : : tt : N : : : I may : : i : : : Mouth : : N : : : m : N : N : N oy : : N : r N : Z : Ok : : : : M : : : : yati I : : : : 8 N : I I I : : her N x 3 I 3 be 7 zhu j wife of shih ni nya - : xx : - - pe» y 1 I shk pe : I y me : y Na : Kai zah : r che : ryn Zh : rozy : Ni : M fllnyanYAHt o ten : : shih x i z 1 I 3 4 3 x 7 ZhiyZ zhi 7 : : : : : i I : : : I : : : : N «7 BU : : : given i 1 1 I saliva t : : : child i N : ra : hi NO : I and prin y g y N ody : : N I know h : : t And that Kai : : і : r : : : hv y nn nin nn M / : : : : : : : with and | th th 4 x GI 2 beige