Post on 02-Jan-2017
transcript
Edwin R. Fuller, Jr.,Mark R. Locatelli, and Ravi Kacker
National Institute of Standards and TechnologyGaithersburg , MD 20899-8522, U.S.A.
<edwin.fuller@nist.gov>
Interface-Related Damage Evolution in Air-Plasma-Sprayed
Thermal Barrier Coatings
Symposium on Durability and Damage Toleranceof Heterogeneous Material Systems
2003 ASME Int‘l Mechanical Engineering CongressWashington, DC - November 17, 2003
GE’s 9H Gas TurbineGE’s 9H Gas Turbine
Combined-Cycle PerformanceNet Output: 480 MW CompressorNet Efficiency: 60% Pressure Ratio: 23:1Firing Temperature: 2600ºF / 1430ºC Air Flow: 1510 lbs/sec
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
•In production since 1997 on 7FA classcoated multiple parts on H class in 1998expanded to service market in 1999
first stage of industrial gas turbine
•Air Plasma-Spray (APS) process used for ZrO2 top coat• bulk temperature reduction ( > 75°C)
significantly increases creep life
•Vacuum Plasma-Spray (VPS) orHigh Velocity Oxy-Fuel (HVOF) process used for MCrAlY bond coat
protection of substrate alloy from oxidation and hot corrosion
Thermal Barrier Coatings (TBC’s)on Gas Turbine Buckets
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Two-layer structure:ceramic top coat: (ZrO2 + Y2O3) thermal barriermetallic bond coat: MCrAlY oxidation protection
Types of Thermal Barrier Coatingsand Deposition Processes
Two deposition processes:air plasma spray (APS) & physical vapor deposition (PVD)
EB-PVD TBC’sAdvanced APS TBCConventional APS TBC
Air Plasma Sprayed TBC’s
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Industrial Needsfor TBC Life Modeling
• Translate laboratory results to enginelife models and life prediction
• Develop microstructural failure models to guide development of improvedmaterials and processing techniques
“… microstructurally-based models are needed,”
“…can be qualitative or quantitative”
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Micromechanical Damage ModelFreborg et al. proposed a failure scenario based
on the stress reversal above asperities with TGO growth.
G. C. Chang, W. Phucharoen & R. A. Miller, "Behavior of thermal barrier coatings For advanced gas-turbine blades," Surface & Coatings Technology, 30 [1]: 13-28 (1987).A. M. Freborg, B. L. Ferguson, W. J. Brindley, G. J. Petrus, "Modeling oxidation induced stresses in thermal barrier coatings," Mat Sci Eng A-Struct 245 [2]: 182-190 (1998).C.-H. Hsueh & E. R. Fuller, Jr., "Residual stresses in thermal barrier coatings: effects of interface asperity curvature/height and oxide thickness," Mat. Sci. Eng. A-Struct 283 [1-2]: 46-55 (2000).J. Rösler, M. Bäker & M. Volgmann, "Stress state and failure mechanisms of thermal barrier coatings: role of creep in thermally grown oxide," Acta Mater., 49 [18]: 3659-3670 (2001). K. Sfar, J. Aktaa & D. Munz, “Numerical investigation of residual stress fields and crack behavior in TBC systems,” Mat. Sci. Eng. A-Struct 333 [1-2]: 351-360 (2002).
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Spallation Failure Mechanismfor Thermal Barrier Coating
Metal
Ceramic TBC: Stress Free at Temperature
cooling
Tension
Compression
Metal
Substrate: Mechanically Loaded
High-Temperature OperationStresses in TBC-Substrate System:
Result from mechanical loading, thermal expansion mismatch, & TGO growth
Stress relaxation time in TBC is short compared to engine operation time, but long compared to engine cool-down time
TGO
TGO
heating
Low-Temperature Shutdown
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Spallation Failure Mechanismfor Thermal Barrier Coating
Ceramic
Tension
Compressionlarge inter-facial flaw
TBC: Stress Free at Temperature
Substrate: Mechanically Loaded
cooling
Coating Failure: when pieces of the top coat spall
Damage accumulates near metal-ceramic interface due to mechanical, thermal expansion, & TGO growth stresses
When damage produces a critical-size crack, the top coat locally buckles and spalls, due to large in-plane stresses
TGO
Metal
Metal
TGO
High-Temperature Operation
heating
Low-Temperature Shutdown
Air Plasma Spray TBC on HVOF CoNiCrAlY100 cycles
50 µm
740 cycles
50 µm
0 cycles
50 µm
350 cycles
50 µmCourtesy of Jim Ruud, GE CR&D
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Residual StressesAbove Asperities on Cooling
Tensile Normal Residual Stress
top coat
bond coat
NiCrAlY bond coat
air-plasma-sprayed 8 wt% Y2O3 partially
stabilized ZrO2 topcoat
René N5 substrate (not shown)(Compressive In-Plane
Residual Stress)
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Cooling fromstrain-freetemperature
Residual Stresses from Thermal Misfit Strains
YSZ
Bond Coat
< CTE =10.0 ppm/K >
< CTE =15.2 ppm/K >Bond Coat
YSZ
tens
ion
com
pres
sion
Compressive NormalResidual Stress
(Compressive In-Plane Residual Stress)
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Stress Reversal with TGO Growth
top coat
bondcoat
TGO
NiCrAlY bond coat
air-plasma-sprayed 8 wt% Y2O3 partially
stabilized ZrO2 topcoat
René N5 substrate (not shown)
α-Al2O3 thermally grown oxide scale
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Residual Stresses from Thermal Misfit Strains
Alumina< CTE =8.0 ppm/K >
YSZ< CTE =10.0 ppm/K >
Alumina
YSZ
com
pres
sion
tens
ion
Cooling fromstrain-freetemperature
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
This Process Can Be Modeled With Three Concentric
Spherical Shells
C.-H. Hsueh & E. R. Fuller, Jr.,Scripta Mater., 42 (2000) 781.
YSZ CTE = 10.0
CTE = 8.0Bond Coat
CTE = 15.2
TGO
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Effective CTE of the Inner Two ShellsEf
fect
ive
CTE
(10-6
/K)
Normalized TGO Thickness, (tTGO / RBC)
CTE of YSZ
Effective CTE ofBond Coat and TGO
CTE of Bond Coat
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Residual Radial Interfacial Stress
Res
idua
l Rad
ial I
nter
face
Stre
ss (M
Pa)
Normalized TGO Thickness, (tTGO / RBC)
RYSZ / RBC = 20
3 spheres
Bond Coat - TGO interface
TGO - YSZ interface
RYSZ / RBC = 5RYSZ / RBC = 20
RYSZ / RBC = 5
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Failure Scenario based onStress Reversal above Asperities
with TGO Growth
Tensile Residual Stresstop coat
bond coat
Compressive Residual Stresstop coat
bondcoat
TGO
A. M. Freborg, B. L. Ferguson, W. J. Brindley, G. J. Petrus, "Modeling oxidation induced stresses in thermal barrier coatings," Mat Sci Eng A-Struct 245 [2]: 182-190 (1998).
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Fracture Mechanics ModelDetermine crack stability from an appropriate set of fracture mechanics expressions:
∫=a
TGOI dxtyxK0
),;,( etc.geometry,asperity σ)axG(
σ dx
σ dxxasperity tension
tTGO < tcritical
y
( )∫−
=1
021
12 ζζσζπ
π daaKIaGriffith crack:ax
=ζ
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Crack Stability for Tensile Stresses
σ dx/w
KIC
KI(a/w)
x/w and a/w
σ(x/w)
x/wa/wa/w
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Fracture Mechanics ModelDetermine crack stability from an appropriate set of fracture mechanics expressions:
∫=a
cTGOI dxtyxK ),;,( etc.geometry,asperity σ)
ac,
axG(
Fazil Erdogan, “On the stress distribution in plates with collinear cuts under arbitrary loads,”in Proceedings of Fourth U.S. National Congress of Applied Mechanics, pp. 547-553 (1962).
y
crack closure due tocompressive stresses
σ dx
σ dxxasperity compression
tTGO > tcritical
ac
( )∫=1
),(2
ac
daGcK ac
cIa ζζσζπ
π( )∫=1
),(2
ac
daGcK ac
cIc ζζσζπ
π
ax
=ζ
Crack Stabilityfor Compressive Stresses
σ dx/w
KIC
KI(a/w)
x/w, c/w, and a/w
σ(x/w)
KIclosure(c/w, a/w)
crack closure
x/wc/wa/w
c/w
a/w
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Crack Stabilityfor Compressive Stresses
σ dx/w
KI(a/w)
x/w, c/w, and a/w
σ(x/w)
crack closure x/wa/w
KI(a/w)neglecting closure
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Three-Parameter Roughness Model2w
tan(Ψ)
h2H
RvRp
Ψ
1
wΗ
(Rp / Rv)
after D. R. Clarke and W. Pompe, “Critical Radius for Interface Separation of a Compressively Stressed Film from a Rough Surface,” Acta mater., 47 [6], 1749-1756 (1999).
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Three-Parameter Roughness Model
(Rp+ Rv) = w / sin(Ψ)h = w cot(Ψ)
peak-to-valley amplitude2H = w tan(Ψ/2)
h2H
RvRpΨ
tan(Ψ)1
valley-to-peak curvature ratio: (Rp/Rv)
wΗ
(Rp / Rv)
2wwavelength
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Factorial Experimental Design
twelve (12) simulated interface microstructures
wavelength, w
amplitude, H
curvatureratio: Rp/Rv
60 µm
90 µm
45 µm
20 µm
0.5 1.0 2.0
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Only the roughness parameters H/w & Rp/Rv have a significant effect on the stress distribution
Residual Stress as a Functionof Microstructure: R p/R v
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Ratio = 0.5 Ratio = 2.0
Mod
e I S
tres
s (G
Pa)
x/w
Ratio = 2.0
RpRv
Ratio = 0.5
2w
2H
σyy
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Residual Stress versus Oxide Thickness
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
-100 -50 0 50 100
No Oxide 2 µm Oxide 8 µm Oxide 12 µm Oxide
Position (µm)
t = 00 µm t = 04 µm t = 08 µm t = 12 µm
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Fracture Mechanics Results
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
90-45-2 (w-H-Ratio)
t = 0t = 6t = 12 t = 18
Mod
e I S
tres
s (G
Pa)
x/w
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
90-45-2
KI
(MPa
•m1/
2 )
a/w
t = 0t = 6t = 12 t = 18
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Influences of YSZ Microcrack Sintering
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
90-45-1
0 oxide 6 oxide 12 oxide 18 oxide
KI (M
Pa•m
1/2 )
a/W 0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Stiffened YSZ90-45-1
Stiff 0 oxide Stiff 6 oxide Stiff 12 oxide Stiff 18 oxide
KI (M
Pa•m
1/2 )
a/W
Modeling Real Microstructures
normal stress: σ yy
-1.5 GPa +1.5 GPa0
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Interface-RelatedDamage Evolution in APS TBC’s
SUMMARY:A damage evolution mechanism proposed by Freborg et al. was quantitatively analyzed with a fracture mechanics weight function approach Reversal in residual stress distribution above interface asperities drives damage evolutionMicrostructural variables studied with a three parameter roughness model:
Wavelength AmplitudePeak Sharpness TGO Thickness
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
SUMMARY:
Interface-RelatedDamage Evolution in APS TBC’s
Crack closure enhances the crack-tip stress intensity factorHowever, calculated KI-fields are still below the expected threshold for crack growthTop coat sintering enhances damage evolutionSeveral other factors are under investigation, e.g., top coat sintering, TGO growth strain, bond coat creep, crack path
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory
Abstract
INTERFACE-RELATED DAMAGE EVOLUTIONIN AIR-PLASMA-SPRAYED THERMAL BARRIER COATINGS
Edwin R. Fuller, Jr.,* Mark R. Locatelli, and Ravi KackerNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyGaithersburg, Maryland 20899-8520, U.S.A.
<edwin.fuller@nist.gov>
Spallation of air-plasma-sprayed (APS) thermal barrier coatings (TBC’s) typically stems from the damage that accumulates near the metal-ceramic and ceramic-ceramic interfaces in these coatings. Damage evolution is driven by stresses perpendicular to the interface that result from rough interfaces in combination with thermal-expansion-anisotropy and oxide-growth strains. These stresses are incorporated into a fracture-mechanics weight-function formalism to quantify the driving forces for crack growth near the interface. Residual stresses as a function of interfacial structure are derived for both periodic and random structures, and are used to derive crack-driving, stress-intensity-factor fields as a function of the interfacial, thermally grown oxide (TGO) thickness, and other microstructural parameters. Residual stresses and associated stress intensity factors are presented for both model and real interfaces, attempting to identify critical microstructural features for predicting damage evolution, and hence, reliability of TBC's.
Materials Science & Engineering Laboratory