Research PaperNo Access

Department of Machine and Metal Technologies, Hitit University, Technical Vocational School, Çorum, Türkiye

E-mail Address: cicekbunyamin78@gmail.com

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

Tuna Aydoğmuş

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8736-2949

Department of Electric and Energy, Hitit University, Technical Vocational School, Çorum, Türkiye

Search for more papers by this author

, and

Seyfi Şevik

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4063-0456

Department of Electric and Energy, Hitit University, Technical Vocational School, Çorum, Türkiye

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S2251237324500199Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

This study investigates the installation and operation of an automated electrophoretic deposition (EPD) unit for applying Ca coatings on aluminum alloy parts, with a focus on optimizing electrode distance and deposition parameters. The dynamic adjustment of the anode–cathode distance during the process was crucial in influencing the uniformity and adhesion of the Ca coating. The electrolyte solution consisted of 50% acetone, 50% distilled water and 5g/500ml of pure Ca. The average thickness of the Ca coating was approximately 180 microns. Immersion corrosion tests revealed that after a 48h period, the coated sample lost 0.5g of weight, while the uncoated sample lost 1.1g. These findings demonstrate that the thickness and uniformity of the Ca coating significantly influence its protective properties. In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into the optimization of EPD parameters and the role of Ca coatings in enhancing corrosion resistance in industrial applications.

Keywords:

References

1. V. B. Mišković-Stanković, Electrophoretic deposition of ceramic coatings on metal surfaces, in Electrodeposition and Surface Finishing: Fundamentals and Applications (Springer, 2014), pp. 133–216. Crossref, Google Scholar
2. L. Yao et al., Surf. Rev. Lett. 13, 103 (2006). Link, Google Scholar
3. M. Cannio et al., Electrophoretic deposition: An effective technique to obtain functionalized nanocoatings, in Handbook of Modern Coating Technologies (Elsevier, 2021), pp. 209–230. Crossref, Google Scholar
4. W. D. Yang, J. F. Huang, L. Y. Cao and C. K. Xia, Mater. Rev. 24, 44 (2010). Google Scholar
5. S. A. B. Ab. Aziz et al., Adv. Mater. Res. 488, 1358 (2012). Crossref, Google Scholar
6. M. Ammam, Rsc Adv. 2, 7633 (2012). Crossref, Google Scholar
7. A. Laska and M. Bartmański, Inż. Materiałowa 1, 20 (2020). Google Scholar
8. I. Aznam et al., J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A 19, 811 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
9. Y. Sakka and T. Uchikoshi, KONA Powder Particle J. 28, 74 (2010). Crossref, Google Scholar
10. S. S. Djokić, Electroless deposition of metals and alloys, in Modern Aspects of Electrochemistry (Springer, 2002), pp. 51–133. Crossref, Google Scholar
11. A. R. Boccaccini and I. Zhitomirsky, Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci. 6, 251 (2002). Crossref, Google Scholar
12. E. Pabjańczyk-Wlazło and M. Boguń, Eng. Biomater. 19, 102 (2016). Google Scholar
13. V. Miskovic-Stankovic, Macedonian J. Chem. Chem. Eng. 31, 183 (2012). Crossref, Google Scholar
14. U. Scheer, R. Freitag and H. Fritz, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 61, 3863 (1990). Crossref, Google Scholar
15. J.-M. Yang, J. Li and K. Lee, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 48, 329 (2008). Crossref, Google Scholar
16. Z. Munui, L. Wang and R. Chen, Mater. Sci. Eng. Chem. 139, 109541 (2010). Google Scholar
17. R. Uphaus, J. Phys. E. Sci. Instrum. 14, 1099 (1981). Crossref, Google Scholar
18. L. F. Mondolfo, Aluminum Alloys: Structure and Properties (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2013). Google Scholar
19. H. McShane, C. Lee and T. Sheppard, Mater. Sci. Technol. 6, 428 (1990). Crossref, Google Scholar
20. G. Wu, K. Chen and P. Liu, Corros. Sci. 155, 97 (2019). Crossref, Google Scholar
21. M. Maksimović, V. Mišković-Stanković and N. V. Krstajić, Surf. Coat. Technol. 27, 89 (1986). Crossref, Google Scholar
22. H. J. Biswal, P. R. Vundavilli and A. Gupta, IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 653, 012046 (2019). Crossref, Google Scholar
23. G. Nagasubramanian and D. Doughty, J. Power Sources 150, 182 (2005). Crossref, Google Scholar
24. I. Shitanda, K. Lee and M. Watanabe, Surf. Technol. 63, 694 (2012). Google Scholar
25. A. S. Tijani, N. A. Barakat and H. Kim, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 44, 27177 (2019). Crossref, Google Scholar
26. L. Cifuentes, J. Simpson and F. Hernandez, Rev. Metal. 39, 304 (2003). Crossref, Google Scholar
27. S. Shinobu and S. Meguro, Met. Surf. Technol. 17, 270 (1966). Google Scholar
28. T. Ito and S. Kahei, Met. Surf. Technol. 20, 165 (1969). Google Scholar
29. T. Fisher and C. Fisher, Surf. Technol. 12, 107 (1981). Crossref, Google Scholar
30. K. Kamada, M. Mukai and Y. Matsumoto, Mater. Lett. 57, 2348 (2003). Crossref, Google Scholar
31. N. N. Nazarenko and A. G. Knyazeva, Math. Models Comput. Simul. 9, 613 (2017). Crossref, Google Scholar
32. N. Nashrah, K. Lee and T. Wang, Appl. Surf. Sci. 497, 143772 (2019). Crossref, Google Scholar
33. J. Pech and B. Hannoyer, Surf. Interface Anal. 30, 585 (2000). Crossref, Google Scholar
34. V. Provenzano, K. Li and J. Smith, Surf. Coat. Technol. 36, 61 (1988). Crossref, Google Scholar
35. N. N. Nazarenko and A. G. Knyazeva, Phys. Mesomech. 14, 71 (2011). Google Scholar
36. M. S. Lavine, Science 360, 45 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
37. J. Lehmann and G. Ziegler, Oxide-based ceramic composites, in Developments in the Science Technology of Composite Materials (Springer, Stuttgart, 1990), pp. 1–8. Crossref, Google Scholar
38. F. Peltier and D. Thierry, Coatings 12, 518 (2022). Crossref, Google Scholar
39. A. Conde, M. A. Arenas and J. J. de Damborenea, Electrochim. Acta 53, 7760 (2008). Crossref, Google Scholar
40. D. Stathokostopoulos, P. Zhang and K. Lee, Coatings 11, 337 (2021). Crossref, Google Scholar
41. W. I. A. Santos, L. Wang and R. Chen, Corros. Prot. 12, 125 (2022). Google Scholar