Bimetallic Barrel Benchmark Xaloy vs. Reiloy May 28th, 2013
Scope available parts X-102 barrel Ø 35 mm x 1010 mm X-800 barrel Ø 40 mm x 1010 mm R121 barrel internally RP19.5 R216 barrel evaluated properties dimensions, straightness, surface roughness microstructure and hardness wear resistance 2
Dimensions, Straightness, Surface Roughness X-102 barrel, Ø 35 mm x 1010 mm length inner diameter: 35.035 (35.025 ±0.025) outer diameter: 109.930 (109.937 ±0.02) length: 1,010.100 straightness: with mandrel surface roughness: Ra=0.178 (0.000-0.400) runout of nozzle counterboring not X-800 barrel, Ø 40 mm x 1010 mm length inner diameter: 40.045 (40.025 ±0.025) outer diameter: 109.930 (109.937 ±0.02) length: 1,010.100 straightness: with mandrel surface roughness: 0.266 (0.000-0.400 µm) runout of nozzle counterboring 3
Microstructure X-102 vs. R121 Wear-Resistant Lining, Polished X-102: pores and shrinkage cavities throughout the complete cross-section and length of the barrel clogged on the surface by the honing operation porosity leads to reduced mechanical strength layer thickness 2.1 mm is comparably thick (dilution from shell material) 4
Microstructure X-102 vs. R121 Wear-Resistant Lining, Etched X-102 microstructure: hypoeutectic (>2.1% C-content) solidified microstructure dendrites with martensitic structure even next to the bore diameter darker appearance means more susceptible for etching agent means less corrosion resistant due to less chromium content 5
Chemical Composition X-102 vs. R121 X-102 C 2.4 Si 0.6 Mn 0.6 Cr 0.8 Mo 0,1 Ni 3.1 B 2.8 Fe bal. R121 C 1.6 Si 1.4 Mn 0.3 Cr 8.2 Mo 3.1 Ni 3.0 B 3.4 Fe bal. R121 is a carefully balanced alloy that contains elements to give strength and resistance against wear and corrosion 6
Microstructure X-102 vs. R121 Wear-Resistant Lining, Hardness Testing X-102 microstructure: X-102 hardness is lower than R121 inhomogenious microstructure: dark areas (martensitic) are softer (deformed indentation shape) 7
Microstructure X-102 vs. R121 Lining and Shell, Compound Layer at High Magnification X-102: softer martensitic microstructure weakens the compound layer between lining and shell 8
Microstructure X-102 vs. R121 Shell, Polished and Etched X-102: very coarse grained microstructure with grain boundary ferrite indicates long exposure to high temperature and reduced mechanical properties R121: fine grained microstructure is conserved by the quick inductive heating process 9
Microstructure X-102 vs. R121 Shell, Hardness Testing X-102: manganese alloyed steel strength 900 MPa R121: chrome-vanadium alloyed steel strength 952 MPa 10
Microstructure X-800 vs. R216 Tungsten Carbide Reinforced Nickel Alloy Matrix X-800: made from agglomerated tungsten carbides, partly deagglomerated by the process deagglomerated carbides move next to the bore diameter due to the lower density pores and slag inclusions R216: homogeneously distributed fine tungsten carbides 11
Microstructure X-800 vs. R216 Bore Diameter at High Magnification X-800: partly unreinforced areas due to centrifugal separation 12
Microstructure X-800 vs. R216 Shell, Polished and Etched X-800: longitudinal arrangement of segregation bands from casting process (concentration differences) 13
Microstructure X-800 vs. R216 Shell, Hardness Testing X-800: manganese alloyed steel strength 740 MPa R216: chrome-vanadium alloyed steel strength 950 MPa 14
Wear in Plastics Processing is a mixture of different wear types abrasion adhesion corrosion surface fatigue.. is process dependent resin type and filler fraction temperature, pressure and tribological counterpart.. Wear is depending on the complete system Important: Prediction of lifetime cannot be precise, because laboratory tests are a simplification of the real conditions 15
Wear-Testing: Pin-On-Disk test is performed since 1992, initiated as quick validation test for alloy development and benchmarking purposes good data collection wear performance is derived from measured weight loss wide spread of the data universal wear quantification, independent of tribological counterpart simple test piece geometry, can be manufactured from all types of wear subjected components 16
Wear-Testing: Pin-On-Disc specimen SiC-paper SiC-paper grade: 220 surface pressure: 0.3 MPa test duration: 4 x 90 sec with fresh paper weight loss volume loss the smaller the number, the longer the lifetime 17
Wear-Testing: Benchmark Data X-102 weight loss: 0.54 g volume loss: 73.36 mm³ R121 weight loss: 0.36 g volume loss: 48.72 mm³ X-800 weight loss: 0.018 g volume loss: 1.67 mm³ R216 weight loss: 0.009 g volume loss: 0.87 mm³ 18
Conclusions Overall appearance and dimensions of the benchmarked barrels were mainly. Microstructure was not. The Reiloy centrifugal casting technology is designed to produce bimetallic barrels with the highest wear resistance and the highest strength of the shell material. R121 is the better iron-based lining material and is suitable to cover 90% of all applications. R121 is equivalent to Bernex AC333 (AC333: 6% higher volume loss than R121 in former wear tests) R121 is used interchangeable to Bernex AC333 by European PETmanufacturers. R216 is the better tungsten-carbide reinforced premium quality for extreme abrasive wear. 19