Effect of Ti interlayer on the bonding quality of W and steel HIP joint
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Tungsten (W) and steel bonding is one of the key technologies for blanket First Wall (FW) manufacture in thermal fusion reactor. The W/Steel joints are prone to fail without interlayer for the different thermo physical properties. To study the effect of titanium (Ti) interlayer on the bonding quality of W and steel joints, W/Steel Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIP) experiments with Ti interlayer were conducted under 930 °C, 100 MPa for 2 h. Intermetallics caused by atom interdiffusion would affect the bonding quality of W/Ti/Steel HIP joints, the bonding quality was evaluated by microstructure analysis and mechanical tests. All the HIP joints were well bonded and results showed no intermetallics occurred between W/Ti interfaces, meanwhile multiply phases were found between Ti/Steel interfaces. Shear tests indicated when Ti thickness was 100–500 μm, the maximum shear strength of W/Ti/Steel HIP joints would be up to around 151 MPa. Charpy impact tests showed the W/Ti/Steel HIP joints all broke in a brittle manner and the maximum Charpy impact energy was ∼0.192 J. Nano-indentation tests demonstrated W/Ti interfaces could be enhanced by solid solution hardening and formation of brittle phases has conducted high hardness across the Ti/Steel interfaces.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Fusion materials and technologies · Nuclear Materials and Properties · Metal and Thin Film Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (20)
Show source-provided references
1. Wan · IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. · 2014 · 42 · 49510.1109/TPS.2013.2296939 ↗
2. Liu · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2014 · 89 · 138010.1016/j.fusengdes.2014.01.065 ↗
3. Rigal · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2008 · 83 · 126810.1016/j.fusengdes.2008.06.021 ↗
4. Salavy · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2010 · 85 · 189610.1016/j.fusengdes.2010.06.017 ↗
5. Cardella · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2004 · 329–333 · 13310.1016/j.jnucmat.2004.04.014 ↗
6. Basuki · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 417 · 52410.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.12.121 ↗
7. Basuki · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2011 · 86 · 258510.1016/j.fusengdes.2011.03.017 ↗
8. Basuki · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2012 · 429 · 33510.1016/j.jnucmat.2012.05.049 ↗
9. Zhong · J. Alloy. Compd. · 2010 · 489 · 54510.1016/j.jallcom.2009.09.105 ↗
10. Basuki · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2014 · 455 · 63510.1016/j.jnucmat.2014.09.007 ↗
11. Jung · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2014 · 89 · 102910.1016/j.fusengdes.2014.02.063 ↗
12. Jung · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2013 · 88 · 245710.1016/j.fusengdes.2013.02.049 ↗
13. Park · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2013 · 442 · S54110.1016/j.jnucmat.2013.02.033 ↗
14. Wang · Fusion Eng. Des. · 2016 · 112 · 6710.1016/j.fusengdes.2016.07.012 ↗
15. Ghosh · Mater. Charact. · 2005 · 54 · 32710.1016/j.matchar.2004.12.007 ↗
16. Ghosh · Mater. Sci. Eng. A · 2005 · 390 · 21710.1016/j.msea.2004.08.039 ↗
17. Yoon · Fusion Sci. Technol. · 2012 · 62 · 2910.13182/FST12-A14107 ↗
18. Raghavan · 1987 · vol. 1
19. Kundu · Metall. Mater. Trans. A · 2007 · 38 · 205310.1007/s11661-007-9273-8 ↗
20. Ghosh · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2003 · 322 · 23510.1016/j.jnucmat.2003.07.004 ↗