Author Affiliations
1Institute of Photonics and Photon-Technology, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, Shaanxi, China2State Key Laboratory of Photon-Technology in Western China Energy, Xi’an 710127, Shaanxi, China3Shaanxi Engineering Technology Research Center for Solid State Lasers and Application, Xi’an 710127, Shaanxi, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Schematic of laser melting unit, where the inset shows laser beam scanning path and two-dimensional energy distribution
Fig. 2. Macroscopic and microscopic images of laser melting layer
Fig. 3. Dynamic potential polarization curves of laser melting layer at different laser single pulse energy densities and spot overlap rates
Fig. 4. SEM images of laser melting layers with optimal laser single pulse energy density and different spot overlap rates for a single laser scanning. (a) β=70%; (b) β=80%; (c) β=90%
Fig. 5. Dynamic potential polarization curves of laser melting layer with different laser scanning times (Eopt=3.82 J/cm2 and β=80%)
Fig. 6. SEM images of laser melting layers with different laser scanning times n (Eopt=3.82 J/cm2 and β=80%). (a) n=1; (b) n=2;
Fig. 7. Sectional SEM image of optimal laser melting layer
Fig. 8. EDS spectra and XRD patterns of tested samples. (a) EDS spectrum of substrate; (b) EDS spectrum of alkaline blackening layer; (c) EDS spectrum of optimal laser melting layer; (d) XRD patterns
Fig. 9. Electrochemical test of corrosion resistant layers. (a) Dynamic potential polarization curves; (b) Nyquist curves; (c) Bode plots
Fig. 10. EIS equivalent circuit
Fig. 11. Microscopic morphologies of two corrosion resistant layers. (a)(d) Thickness of cut surfaces; (b)(e) three-dimensional
Average power /W | Energy density /(J·cm-2) |
---|
10 | 1.27 | 20 | 2.55 | 30 | 3.82 | 40 | 5.09 | 50 | 6.36 |
|
Table 1. Single pulse energy density at different average laser powers
Spot overlap rate β/% | E /(J·cm-2) | Ecorr /V | Icorr /(A·cm-2) |
---|
70 | 1.27 | -1.240 | 2.649×10-5 | 2.55 | -1.220 | 2.506×10-5 | 3.82 | -1.006 | 3.069×10-6 | 5.09 | -1.122 | 9.840×10-6 | 6.36 | -1.130 | 9.705×10-5 | 80 | 1.27 | -1.224 | 1.352×10-5 | 2.55 | -1.206 | 9.120×10-6 | 3.82 | -0.973 | 2.449×10-6 | 5.09 | -1.095 | 1.845×10-5 | 6.36 | -1.085 | 1.368×10-5 | 90 | 1.27 | -1.189 | 3.388×10-5 | 2.55 | -1.222 | 5.495×10-5 | 3.82 | -0.985 | 3.707×10-6 | 5.09 | -1.098 | 1.901×10-5 | 6.36 | -1.103 | 1.892×10-5 |
|
Table 2. Parameters related to kinetic potential polarization curves at different laser single pulse energy densities and spot overlap rates in a single laser scanning
The number of laser scanning n | Ecorr /V | Icorr /(A·cm-2) |
---|
1 | -0.973 | 2.449×10-6 | 2 | -0.948 | 2.265×10-6 | 3 | -0.943 | 1.990×10-6 | 4 | -0.936 | 1.644×10-6 | 5 | -1.017 | 5.848×10-6 | 6 | -1.032 | 7.967×10-6 |
|
Table 3. Parameters related to kinetic potential polarization curves with different laser scanning times (Eopt=3.82 J/cm2 and β=80%)
Layer No. | Point No. | Mass fraction /% |
---|
Fe | O | C |
---|
Layer a | a1 | 97.61 | 1.34 | 1.05 | a2 | 97.62 | 1.26 | 1.12 | a3 | 97.60 | 1.29 | 1.11 | Layer b | b1 | 90.27 | 8.75 | 0.98 | b2 | 90.20 | 8.79 | 1.01 | b3 | 90.07 | 8.91 | 1.02 | Layer c | c1 | 83.83 | 15.24 | 0.93 | c2 | 83.48 | 15.53 | 0.99 | c3 | 84.03 | 15.03 | 0.94 | Layer d | d1 | 83.25 | 15.84 | 0.91 | d2 | 82.97 | 16.09 | 0.94 | d3 | 83.24 | 15.87 | 0.89 |
|
Table 4. EDS analysis data at different thicknesses on the section of optimal laser melting layer
Sample | Mass fraction /% |
---|
Fe | O | C |
---|
Substrate | 97.66 | 1.24 | 1.10 | Alkaline blackening layer | 86.18 | 12.87 | 0.95 | Laser melting layer | 83.87 | 15.20 | 0.93 |
|
Table 5. EDS analysis data of samples to be tested
Specimen | R1 /(Ω·cm2) | Q1 /μS | m1 | R2 /(Ω·cm2) | Q2 /μS | m2 | Rct /(Ω·cm2) | χ2 /10-3 |
---|
Alkaline blackening layer | 29.2 | 127 | 0.8 | 19 | 410.2 | 0.76 | 520.9 | 1.21 | Laser melting layer | 25.1 | 224 | 0.9 | 25 | 274.2 | 0.85 | 1536.7 | 2.91 |
|
Table 6. Fitting parameter values of EIS equivalent circuit