A Comparative Study on Al[sub.0.6]Ti[sub.0.4]N Coatings Deposited by Cathodic Arc and HiPIMS in End Milling of Stainless Steel 316L

• Published in: Coatings (Basel) Vol. 14; no. 7
• Main Authors: Saciotto, Victor, He, Qianxi, Guimaraes, Monica C, DePaiva, Jose M, Kohlscheen, Joern, Fontana, Luis C, Veldhuis, Stephen C
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 01.07.2024
• Subjects: Hardness; Machining; Surface energy; Tribology
• ISSN: 2079-6412; 2079-6412
• DOI: 10.3390/coatings14070811

The machining of austenitic stainless steel alloys is usually characterized by high levels of adhesion and built-up edge; therefore, improving tribological conditions is fundamental to obtaining higher tool life and better surface finish. In this work, three different Al[sub.0.6]Ti[sub.0.4]N coatings are compared, two deposited by Cathodic Arc Evaporation (CAE) and one with High-Power Impulse Magnetron Sputtering (HiPIMS). The effects of the micromechanical properties and the microstructure of the coatings were then studied and related to the machining performance. Both arc-deposited coatings (CAE 1 and 2) exhibited similar average tool life, 127 min and 128 min, respectively. Whereas the HiPIMS lasted for only 21.2 min, the HiPIMS-coated tool had a much shorter tool life (more than six times lower than both CAE coatings) due to the intense adhesion that occurred in the early stages of the tool life. This higher adhesion ultimately caused built-up edge and chipping of the tool. This was confirmed by the cutting forces and more deformation on the shear band and undersurface of the chips, which are related to higher levels of friction. The higher adhesion could be attributed to the columnar structure of the HiPIMS and the (111) main texture, which presents a higher surface energy when compared to the dominant (200) from both arc depositions. Studies focused on tribology are necessary to further understand this relationship. In terms of micromechanical properties, tools with the highest plasticity index performed better (CAE 2 = 0.544, CAE 1 = 0.532, and HiPIMS = 0.459). For interrupted cutting machining where adhesion is the main wear mechanism, a reserve of plasticity is beneficial to dissipate the energy generated during friction, even if this was related to lower hardness levels (CAE 2 = 26.6 GPa, CAE 1 = 29.9 GPa, and HiPIMS = 33.6 GPa), as the main wear mechanism was adhesive and not abrasive.