Abstract-- AISI 304L steel is widely preferred in many fields such as pipe sector, biomedical and nuclear industry due to its wear behavior and good machinability. In this experimental study, temperature-dependent wear properties and worn surface structures of AISI 304L steel were investigated. All tests were conducted by using pin-on-disc test equipment under unlubricated conditions. As ambient temperatures, 25°C, 50°C, 100°C, 150°C, and 200°C were selected. The results indicated that the main friction properties, wear mechanisms, and wear rate of the worn steel samples were significantly affected by altering the test temperatures. It was observed that the friction coefficient oscillated at lower temperatures, but this case was quite different at higher temperatures. Micro observations showed that mixed deformation characteristic dominated by adhesive wear was observed between 25°C and 150°C while abrasive wear became more effective between 150°C and 200°C. Moreover, wear rate and specific wear rate values increased until 150°C, then dropped as a result of changing the wear mechanism and contact surface structure.
Keywords-- Wear; Friction; AISI 304L; Hardness; Dry-sliding
I. INTRODUCTION
AISI 304L steel is a low carbon version of the widely used austenitic AISI 304, and is frequently preferred by various industrial areas such as construction, ocean engineering, pipe sector, oil industry, nuclear industry, food processing, kitchenware and bio-medical (Hu et al., 2020; Kang, 2020) because of their high oxidation and corrosion resistance, wear performance, good machinability and weldability (Davis, 1994). Even though oxidation and corrosion resistance are the most common reasons for stainless steel usage (Karjalainen et al., 2018), in recent years, the wear resistance has also become a significant criterion considering the increasing demands from different industrial areas. On the other side, AISI 304L steel is sometimes exposed to high temperatures during the real industrial applications. At this point, if AISI 304L steel is handled specifically in terms of high temperature using purpose, some examples can be given. For instance, AISI 304L is widely used as heat transfer tube in spiral-wound heat exchanger in nuclear power plants (Lei et al., 2020). Additionally, it is also utilized as nuclear pump components subjecting to serious potential friction, triggering heat release. Aside from nuclear industry, AISI 304L has a noteworthy market share in pipe industry. Pipe fittings carrying hot liquids and hot gases may be contaminated with undesired particles, which leads to friction on pipe walls. On the other hand, in the food sector, AISI 304L is an ideal material for many kitchen equipment and utensils. These items are frequently subjected to wear at high cooking temperatures due to other secondary elements like mixing and cleaning elements. This kind of undesired cases can be risky for human health in long-term usage. Lastly, AISI 304L parts are used in the petrochemical industry as nozzles, top separators and central pipes (Ravindranath and Alezemi, 2019; Wensley et al., 2008; Wensley, 2000). Following chemical reactions occurred at high temperatures, tribological features of 304L parts may alter. Depending on their application diversity (from pipelines to gas heater systems), different kinds of high-temperature failures were reported by different researchers (Luder et al., 2016; Bahrami and Taheri, 2019) for austenitic stainless steel of 304L. It can be also seen from these findings that the correct understanding of the temperature-based wear mechanism of AISI 304L is notably significant since there is a risk of solid contaminations in the pipelines or gas heater systems. In addition, by way of this experimental effort, probable wear precautions can be predicted more easily owing to the fact that the principal mechanisms were discovered.
Until now, the investigations on the tribological properties of AISI 304L has focused solely on the wear behavior at room temperatures. In this context, Qin et al. (2017) and Wang et al. (2009) focused on surface treatments like nitriding to improve the low temperature wear resistance of AISI 304L. Rozing et al. (2016) discussed acidic media influence on the tribo-corrosion behavior of AISI 304L, and revealed that usage of AISI 304L steel for vegetable oil screw press equipment could provide good tribo-corrosion resistance. Saada et al. (2018a) explored that nanocrystallized layers formed on AISI 304L increased the wear performance. Guoquing et al. (2012) conducted wear tests on AISI 304L at room temperature, and found out that measured wear rate values went up with the increasing test forces. Saada et al. (2018b) studied on the tribological performance of AISI 304L and performed a comparative analysis by using another steel grade of UNS 2205. The investigation team emphasized that AISI 304L performed better under sliding against alumina. Qin et al. (2019) produced nano-grained 304L steel samples and showed that wear resistance improved with increasing micro hardness of specimens. With the intention of determination of the effects of structural models on the tribological features, Rai et al. (2017) conducted several experiments. The research group stated that wear behavior of harmonic structured AISI 304L showed better performance for a load of 5N, but, as the load reached 10 N, the situation changed in favor of the conventionally structured AISI 304L. In another study, Wang et al. (2016) examined the angle-dependent tribological response of AISI 304L in depth, and pointed that micro textures led to an improvement on the wear resistance of test specimens. Similarly, Martin and Ajayi (2014) emphasized that texturing with SiC enhanced the tribological performance of AISI 304L. To figure out the effect of grain size on the wear behavior of AISI 304L, Dehsorkhi et al. (2014) used different loads, and reported that fine grained samples exhibited superior wear resistance at low normal loads than the coarse-grained samples.
It is known that the investigation of the friction properties and wear performance of engineering materials at different temperatures is necessary. Hence, the wear behavior of various steel grades for different temperatures have been studied by researchers. Accordingly, Xia et al. (2019) tried to explore the tribological properties of NM600 steel under sliding wear. As temperature values escalated from 20°C to 300°C, they noticed that the main deformation mechanism changed from adhesive/fatigue wear to abrasive/oxidation damage. Likewise, Chengru et al. (2020) analyzed the effect of temperature on the microstructure, physical properties and sliding wear behavior of low alloy wear-resistant martensitic steel. The researchers indicated that dominant wear mechanisms of deformed specimens converted from fatigue spalling and abrasive wear (at 300°C) to oxidation wear and plastic deformation (at 500°C). At this point, it is significant to express that although the wear performance of some steel grades was tested in the previous literature efforts, there is no comprehensive study about the effect of ambient temperature change on the wear behavior of AISI 304L. Since the friction properties and wear mechanisms of steel grades change notably depending on the service temperature, this circumstance is highly critical also for AISI 304L due to its common using in many unlike applications.
In this paper, differently
from the literature works conducted at room temperatures, probable effects of
ambient temperature on the wear performance of AISI 304L steel under
unlubricated conditions were examined. Furthermore, the friction characteristic
of the AISI 304L was determined depending on various test temperatures (from
25°C to 200°C). Lastly, this effort also in
Table 1. Chemical composition of tested AISI 304L steel and alumina pin
Fig. 1. Test equipment; side view with sample geometry (a) and front view with test schema(b).
troduces a wide perspective for typical deformation mechanisms of AISI 304L steel using detailed physical and microscopic observations.
II. MATERIALS AND METHOD
A. Materials
AISI 304L stainless steel used in this research were supplied from Engin Metal Industry and Trade (Kocaeli, Turkey) in the form of a flat bar and cut with desired dimensions of 10x10x5 mm with band-saw. Alumina spheres with a diameter of 6 mm were used as abrasive pin. Table 1 given below indicates the chemical composition of the steel samples according to the supplier information and the main chemical components of alumina spheres detected in detailed energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis.
B. Procedure
As for the determination of tribological
performance, specially-designed pin-on-disc test equipment (Turkyus Pod
Ht&Wt, Turkey) was used. Five different ambient temperatures (25 °C, 50 °C,
100 °C, 150 °C and 200 °C) were created for the tests of AISI 304L samples
utilizing the precisely controlled and locked heat chamber that can reach up to
850 °C. Figure 1 depict the testing equipment and schematic views of the test
mechanism and sample geometry. During all wear tests, applied force and
rotational speed values were kept constant at 5N and 50 rpm, respectively. Each
test at the specified temperatures was repeated three times and they lasted in
2100 seconds. Moreover, the friction coefficient trend and the ambient
temperature were followed using the software program of the specially designed
testing machine. To determine the microhardness values of worn samples,
Shimadzu HMV-2 micro-Vickers hardness tester was used. In the hardness tests,
100 g load was applied during 15 seconds of loading time. In addi-
Fig. 2. Illustration of measurement points on tested sample (a) and hardness [HV] values of tested samples versus measurement points (b).
tion, Fei Quanta FEG 250 model scanning electron microscope (SEM) was utilized for micro observations and detailed EDS analysis. Besides, the weight of the specimens was measured with Shimadzu AT model precision balance before and after each test to determine the mass loss.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Measurement of microhardness
In previous studies (Guoqing et al., 2012; Bi et al., 1998; Qi et al., 2000), several researchers emphasized that due to higher plastic deformation and martensite phase, hardness values measured in worn areas went up with increasing applied force in the test. On the other hand, this experimental study differed from others in the literature by performing the tests at various ambient temperatures instead of changing the applied load in the test. First, the hardness values of the tested samples were measured four times from different locations on the same circle line (Fig. 2a). A total of twenty hardness measurements (5 different distances and 4 measurements for each distance) were performed for each tested sample using Vickers microhardness tester.
Furthermore, the average of four measurement results for each
sample were taken into account while creating Fig. 2b. The results in Fig. 2b
exhibit that the hardness values decrease from the worn to the unworn surface
due to the strain hardening effect caused by plastic deformation. For low test
temperatures such as 25 °C and 50 °C, the highest hardness values were observed
at a distance of 0.1 mm from the worn surface. However, it was determined that
they could not maintain the highest hardness values when the distance from the
worn surface was more than 0.1 mm at the same test temperatures. Also, it
Fig. 3. Change of friction coefficient during test time for different temperatures.
Fig. 4. Average friction coefficient versus temperature.
is observed that until 0.5 mm away from worn surface, hardness of tested steel decreased slowly for all ambient temperatures, and then tended to be stable until the standard hardness of AISI 304L as reported in other studies (Fig. 2b) (Guoqing et al., 2012).
B. Friction and wear properties
As can be seen from Fig. 3, friction coefficient values fluctuate during the wear test related to ambient temperature. It is worth noting that the friction coefficient values reach stable levels earlier at higher temperatures such as 150 °C and 200 °C, compared to lower temperatures such as 25 °C, and 50 °C, similar to the work done by Xia et al. (2019). The oscillation between minimum and peak values of friction coefficients is more evident for 25 °C and 50 °C, but this range is narrower for higher temperatures.
According to Fig. 4, the maximum average friction coefficient value of 0.636 was obtained at 25 °C. When the temperature increased from 25 °C to 50 °C, the average friction coefficient decreased sharply because of the changing wear mechanism of the tested steel. Moreover, the same decreasing trend was also observed between 50°C and 150 °C. The minimum average friction coefficient value of 0.475 was recorded for sample worn at 150°C. At this point, there was an evident conversion of downward trend to an upward trend, and this can be associated with the change of wear mechanism and state of the contact surface.
It is known that the calculation of wear volume and
specific wear rate is crucial when a wear test is examined. Thus, weight of the
specimens was measured before and after each test and mass losses were
obtained. In Fig. 5, the mass loss of each specimen at various test tempera-
Fig. 5. Mass loss of each specimen at various test temperatures.
tures was shared. According to Fig. 5, the average minimum and maximum mass losses were detected as 0.000139 g and 0.00132 g at 50 ⁰C and 150 ⁰C respectively. Hence, it can be pointed out that change of test temperature affects the mass loss remarkably.
Additionally, wear volume of each specimen was calculated by using mass loss data multiplied with density of the bulk material which is 7.98 g/cm3 for AISI 304L based on the supplier info. An illustration of wear volume versus temperature is shown in Fig. 6a, where it can be seen that wear volume gets lower at lower temperatures like 25 °C and 50 °C compared to higher temperatures. By 100 °C, a significant increase was observed at wear volume and it reached the maximum value of 0.166 mm3 at 150 °C. This significant increase might be related to an increase in abrasive wear mechanism’s domination over adhesive and plastic deformation. Besides, surface delamination, which occurs as a result of continuous motion of the alumina pin on tested steel sample, led to an increase in wear volume as well for 150 °C. Subsequently, by change in wear mechanism, wear volume dropped 28 % at 200 °C and this value is still 29 % higher than the wear volume at 100 °C.
After calculation of the wear volume, the specific wear rate was calculated using Eq. (1), where W, V, F, and L indicate the specific wear rate (mm3/N.mm), wear volume (mm3), applied load (N), and total distance covered during test by pin (mm), respectively (Oskari et al., 2019).
(1)
In all calculations, the applied load of 5N and the total distance covered by the pin of 43980 mm were kept constant during the test. When the test time of 2100 seconds is multiplied with the pin speed of 20.9 mm/s, which is one of the test inputs, the total distance covered by the pin during test can be calculated as 43980 mm.
According to calculated specific wear rate values by Eq. (1), specific wear rate versus temperature graph is presented in Fig. 6b and quite similar to Fig. 6a which is about wear volume and parallel to results of another research conducted (Xia et al., 2019). With the increase of the temperature, the wear volume and specific wear rate of the tested steel firstly stayed almost stable till 50⁰C, then increased rapidly until 150 °C, and finally decreased 28% when the experimental temperature reached 200 °C.
Fig. 6. Wear volume at different temperatures (a), Specific wear rate versus temperature (b).
C.Microstructural analysis and wear mechanism
As a result of detailed SEM observations and EDS analysis, it can be alleged that even though typical wear properties of the AISI 304L samples are similar between 25°C and 150°C, this case changes at 200°C. Figure 7 shows the SEM images of the samples worn at 25°C. From Fig. 7, it is clear that plastic deformation is the major mechanism, but mixed type wear behavior composing of adhesive and abrasive characteristics are also observed on the sample surface at the same time. At the beginning of the test carried out at 25°C, adhesive wear is the dominant damage mechanism in comparison with abrasive wear because of plastic deformation and increasing friction time. After the adhesion, some oxidized pits shown in Fig. 7a occurred due to high friction heat between contact surfaces. This can be verified with EDS analysis shown in Fig. 8.
According to EDS results of worn and unworn zones depicted in Fig. 8a, Fig. 8b and Fig. 8c, it is seen that there is an apparent difference between their oxygen amounts (40.71 wt.% for worn zone and 1.04 wt.% for unworn zone). In addition, some free hard particles causing abrasion can be seen on the sample surfaces as indicated in Fig. 7b. Aside from these mechanisms, some short and random fatigue cracks are also observed depending on the test conditions like loading force and duration.
Fig. 7. Different SEM images of worn samples at 25°C: 1000x (a) and 5000x (b).
Fig. 8. EDS analysis of worn sample at 25°C: measurement areas (a), unworn sample (b) and worn sample (c).
Fig. 9. Different SEM images of worn samples at 50°C: 1000x (a) and 5000x (b).
Fig. 10. EDS analysis of worn sample at 50°C: measurement areas (a), unworn sample (b) and worn sample (c).
When the ambient temperature reaches 50°C, although plastic deformation and the effects of fatigue continue similar to the case occurred at 25°C, surface structure of worn sections on the sample differs in a noteworthy manner as shown in Fig. 9a. Depending on dominant adhesive wear and increasing merging tendency of abrasive particles pointed in Fig. 9b due to friction heat, smearing effect resulting in filling of pits is observed and condition of the contact surface evolves from steel/alumina matching to steel/steel matching. This situation can be attributed to material transfer between the pin and the sample. Furthermore, Fig. 9a illustrates that there are oxide scales on the sample surface because of loading force and friction heat. EDS analysis shown in Fig. 10 also disclose this in detail. From Fig. 10b and Fig. 10c, it is evident that worn zones and unworn surfaces have quite different oxygen compositions with 25.04 wt.% and 0.95 wt.%, respectively. As emphasized in some other studies (Guoqing et al., 2012; Xia et al., 2019; Hager and Evans, 2015; Olafinjana et al., 2016), those oxide layers play an important role like a lubricant layer and facilitate diminishment of the average friction coefficient. By way of the oxide scales, direct contact between main wear surfaces reduces and wear rate slows down.
At the ambient temperature
of 100°C, main wear behavior is very similar to that observed for sample at
50°C, and the mixed wear characteristic is dominated by adhesion can be seen in
Fig. 11a and Fig. 11b. However, the continuity and spreading feature of the
oxide scales throughout the worn surfaces is higher than the
Fig. 11. Different SEM images of worn samples at 100°C: 1000x (a) and 5000x (b).
Fig. 12. EDS analysis of worn sample at 100°C: measurement areas (a), unworn sample (b) and worn sample (c).
Fig. 13. Different SEM images of worn samples at 150°C: 1000x (a) and 5000x (b).
first two temperatures, so the lubricating effect of the oxide scales increases. This condition leads to a drop in average friction coefficient of the contact surfaces. EDS analysis given in Fig. 12 indicate oxygen difference between worn (19.91 wt.%) and unworn (1 wt.%) surfaces. Besides, standard and specific wear rates are prone to go up compared to values calculated at 25°C and 50 °C. This can be attributed to the existence of some localized surface delamination zones illustrated in Fig. 11a. As from 100°C, based on increasing deformability of the steel samples as a consequence of bigger contact area and effect of fatigue, amount and size of the surface delamination zones begin to escalate.
As can be also seen from
Fig. 13a and Fig. 13b, it is observed that structure of the mixed wear
mechanism detected on the sample begins to change as of 150°C. As from that
ambient temperature, influences of abrasive wear increase prominently despite
the fact that localized oxide scales illustrated in Fig. 14 are still present
on the sample surface (24.26 wt.% oxygen for worn surface and 0.92 wt.% oxygen
for unworn surface). Thanks to the increasing role of abrasion, a large number
of thin and short grooves can be seen on the worn surface of the steel sample.
It is one of the typical signs of the abrasive wear mechanism as stated in
other researches (Long et al., 2020; Parinya et al., 2017). On
the other hand, at 150°C, some surface delamination zones with different
sizes/shapes are also noticed just like emerged on the sample tested at
100°C.Since total area and number of the independent surface delamination zones
are much more than those of the others, and
Fig. 14. EDS analysis of worn sample at 150°C: measurement areas (a), unworn sample (b) and worn sample (c).
Fig. 15. Different SEM images of worn samples at 200°C: 1000x (a) and 5000x (b).
Fig. 16. EDS analysis of worn sample at 200°C: measurement areas (a), unworn sample (b) and worn sample (c).
functionality of the abrasive wear mechanism steps up, standard and specific wear rates reach the peak value at 150°C.
When the test temperature rises up to 200°C, it can be asserted from Fig. 15a and Fig. 15b that dominant wear characteristic converts to abrasive style from adhesive mechanism. Moreover, as the temperature increases from 150 °C to 200 °C, with the effect of existing adhesion mechanism, some amount of material transition was observed from sample to alumina pin, which might lead to increased abrasive wear. Figure 15a shows that as an apparent indication of the dominant abrasion, there are some scratched structures formed due to the hard particles separated from the deformed sample surface. As long as the ambient temperature rises, the amount of hard abrasive particles that emerge after adhesive wear and fatigue also increase (Dalmau et al., 2018; Erding et al., 2019) and a similar case may have been occurred in this study too. These kinds of hard particles and their oxidized versions formed after the friction heat can cause different deep grooves on the worn surface (Fig. 15b). What’s more, debris clusters pointed in Fig. 15a can also be asserted as a secondary evidence of abrasive wear. Since the number of free hard abrasive particles detached from the sample escalate and become widespread compared to the case at 150°C, average friction coefficient value exhibits an upward tendency as stated in other literature studies (Xia et al., 2019). Also, like reported in previous works (Zabala et al., 2019; Jiang and Arnell, 2000), changing surface morphology and roughness may affect the damage progress. Figure 16 represents the EDS analysis of tested sample and illustrates that effects of fatigue and adhesive wear are relatively limited, although oxidation occurs in certain zones of the steel surface (19.06 wt.% oxygen for worn surface and 1.01 wt.% oxygen for unworn surface).
IV. CONCLUSION
The remarkable consequences of this experimental research in which wear properties of AISI 304L steel at different temperatures were investigated, are listed as:
1) Although some parameters like loading force, pin type, rotational speed and lubrication condition remain constant during the pin-on-disc test, typical wear mechanisms observed on the tested samples change together with the ambient temperature.
2) Even though friction coefficient values fluctuate during the wear tests for each temperature levels, friction curves get stable earlier at high temperatures such as 150°C and 200°C than low temperatures.
3) It can be pointed out that average friction coefficient values show a sharp decrease from 25°C to 150°C because of the alteration of wear characteristic and presence of oxide layers that act like a lubricated layer. After that point, this downward trend changes into an upward trend at 200°C.
4) Between 25°C and 150°C, together with plastic deformation and fatigue, principal wear mechanism has a mixed type characteristic consisting of adhesive and abrasive wear. At lower temperatures, it can be asserted that adhesive wear is dominant.
5) At 150°C, general structure of the mixed type wear mechanism detected on the steel specimen begins to differ and influences the abrasive wear increase. On the other side, at that temperature, there are many independent surface delamination zones playing an important role for the total wear rate on the steel sample.
6) On account of increased number of free hard abrasives, deep grooves and lots of debris zones, which are the most serious abrasive wear evidences, are seen at 200°C.
7) At all test temperatures, different oxidation zones are observed on the samples due to high friction heat between contact surfaces. These oxide scales are often found on the surface, but, sometimes, they can also be detected in the pits.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We acknowledge the assistance of the team in characterization unit at Suleyman Demirel University, Innovative Technologies and Application Research Center (YETEM), Isparta, Turkey.
REFERENCES
Bahrami, A., and Taheri, P. (2019) A study on the failure of AISI 304 stainless steel tubes in a gas heater unit. Metals, 9, 969.
Bi, H.Y., Li, S.Z. and Zhang, X.X. (1998) The Effect of Deformation Strengthening on Wear Resistance of Stainless Steel in Dry Sliding and Corrosive Environment. Tribology. 18, 327-331.
Chengru, L., Xiangtao, D., Long, H., Ye, J. and Zhaodong, W. (2020) Effect of temperature on microstructure, properties and sliding wear behavior of low alloy wear-resistant martensitic steel. Wear. 442-443, 203125
Dalmau, A., Richard, C. and Igual-Muñoz, A. (2018) Degradation mechanisms in martensitic stainless steels: Wear, corrosion and tribocorrosion appraisal. Tribology International. 121, 167-179.
Davis, J.R. (1994) ASM Specialty Handbook-Stainless Steels, ASM International.
Dehsorkhi, R.N., Sabooni, S., Karimzadeh, F., Rezaeian, A. and Enayati, M.H. (2014) The effect of grain size and martensitic transformation on the wear behavior of AISI 304L stainless steel. Materials & Design. 64, 56-62.
Erding, W., Renbo, S. and Changhong, C. (2019) Study of the three-body impact abrasive wear behaviour of a low alloy steel reinforced with niobium. Journal of Manufacturing Process. 46, 185-193.
Guoqing, C., Yanhui, W., Shan, L. and Wenlong, Z. (2012) Friction and wear mechanism of unlubricated 304L austenitic stainless steel at room temperature. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology-Mater. Sci. Ed. 27, 222-226.
Hager, C.H. and Evans D.R. (2015) Friction and wear properties of black oxide surfaces in rolling/sliding contacts. Wear, 338-339, 221-231.
Hu, C.Y., Wan, X.L., Wan, K.M., Xu, D.M., Li, G.Q., Xu, G. and Misra, R.D.K. (2020) On the impacts of grain refinement and strain-induced deformation on three-body abrasive wear responses of 18Cr–8Ni austenitic stainless steel. Wear. 446-447, 203181.
Jiang, J. and Arnell, R.D. (2000) The effect of substrate surface roughness on the wear of DLC coatings. Wear. 239, 1-9.
Kang, A.S. (2020) Wear performance of hydroxyapatite coatings deposited on AISI 304L using detonation gun spray. Mater Today-Proc. 32, 304-310.
Karjalainen, L.P., Taulavuori, T., Sellman, M. and Kyröläinen, A. (2018) Some strengthening methods for austenitic stainless steels. Steel Res. Int. 79, 404-412.
Lei, Y.X., Yi, G., Qi, T. and Zhen-Guo, Y. (2020) Failure analysis on abnormal bursting of heat transfer tubes in spiral-wound heat exchangers for nuclear power plant. Engineering Failure Analysis. 108, 104298.
Long, H., Xiangtao, D., Ye, J., Chengru, L. and Zhaodong, W. (2020) Solidification and sliding wear behavior of low-alloy abrasion-resistant steel reinforced with TiC particles. Wear. 458-459.
Luder, D., Hundhausen, T., Kaminsky, E., Shor, Y., Iddan, N., Ariely, S. and Yalin, M. (2016) Failure analysis and metallurgical transitions in SS 304L air pipe caused by local overheating. Eng. Fail. Anal. 59, 292-303.
Martin, C.L. and Ajayi, O.O. (2014) Effect of SiC particle impact nano-texturing on tribological performance of 304L stainless steel. Appl Surf Sci. 315, 287-291.
Olofinjana, B., Ajayi, O., Lorenzo-Martin, C. and Ajayi, E.O.B. (2016) ‘Experimental investigation of friction and wear behaviour of 304L stainless steel sliding against different counterface in dry contact. Ife Journal of Science. 18, 763-773.
Oskari, H., Kati, V., U. Sampo, A., Jaakko, H., Tommi, L. and Jukka, K. (2019) Effect of tempering on the impact-abrasive and abrasive wear resistance of ultra-high strength steels. Wear, 440-441, 203098.
Parinya, S., Charnnarong, S., Anurat, W. and Ditsayut, P. (2017) Reciprocating two-body abrasive wear behavior of DC magnetron sputtered Mo-based coatings on hard-chrome plated AISI 316 stainless steel. Wear. 378-379, 96-105.
Qi, Y.H., Ma, Y.Q., Zhang, Z.P., Hei, Z.-P and Quin, Y. (2000) TEM Observation of the Worn Surface Layer in Metastable Austenite Fe-C-Cr-Mn Cast Iron. Tribology, 20, 92-96.
Qin, X., Guo, X., Lu, J., Chen, L., Qin, J. and Lu, W. (2017) Erosion-wear and intergranular corrosion resistance properties of AISI 304L austenitic stainless steel after low-temperature plasma nitriding”, Journal of Alloys and Compounds. 698, 1094-1101.
Qin, W., Li, J., Mao, Q., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., Jiang, W. and Kang, J. (2019) Evolution of tribological mechanisms of nano-grained 304L stainless steel under dry and polyalphaolefin lubrication conditions. Mater. Lett. 242, 147-151.
Rai, P.K., Shekhar, S., Nakatani, M., Ota, M., Vajpai, S.K., Ameyama, K. and Mondal, K. (2017) Wear behavior of harmonic structured 304L stainless steel. J. of Materi. Eng and Perform. 26, 2608-2618. D
Ravindranath, K. and Alazemi, R. (2019) Failure of stainless steel 304L air cooler tubes due to stress corrosion cracking caused by organic chlorides. Engineering Failure Analysis. 102, 79-86.
Rozing, G., Alar, V., Marusic, V. and Samardzic, I. (2016) Tribocorrosion wear of austenitic and martensitic steels. Metalurgija. 55, 441.
Saada, F.B., Antar, Z., Elleuch, K., Ponthiaux, P. and Gey, N. (2018a) The effect of nanocrystallized surface on the tribocorrosion behavior of 304L stainless steel. Wear. 394–395, 71-79.
Saada, F.B., Elleuch, K. and Ponthiaux, P. (2018b) On the Tribocorrosion Responses of Two Stainless Steels. Tribol. T. 61, 53-60.
Wang, J., Xiong, J., Peng, Q., Fan, H., Wang, Y., Li, G. and Shen, B. (2009) Effects of DC plasma nitriding parameters on microstructure and properties of 304L stainless steel. Materials Characterization. 60, 197-203.
Wang, Z., Li, Y.B., Bai, F., Wang, C.W. and Zhao, Q.Z. (2016) Angle-dependent lubricated tribological properties of stainless steel by femtosecond laser surface texturing. Opt Laser Technol. 81, 60-66.
Wensley, A. (2000) NACE Corrosion. 589, Houston, CA, USA.
Wensley, A., Leavitt, A. and Paoliello, F. (2008) Stress corrosion cracking of stainless steel in continuous digesters, TAPPI Engineering Conference. Portland OR.
Xia, D., Pei, Y., Wang, S., Cong, L., Wang, X. and Wang, D. (2019) Effects of Temperature on the Tribological Properties of NM600 under Sliding Wear. Materials. 12, 4009.
Zabala, N.A., Castro P. and Tuckart, W. (2019) Influence of Roughness on the Tribological Behavior of Steel-Steel Couple Lubricated with Thread Compound. Latin American Applied Research, 49, 193-200.