Plating or coating method for producing metal-ceramic coating on a substrate

Abstract

A method for producing a metal-ceramic composite coating with increased hardness on a substrate includes adding a sol of a ceramic phase to the plating solution or electrolyte. The sol may be added prior to and/or during the plating or coating and at a rate of sol addition controlled to be sufficiently low that nanoparticles of the ceramic phase form directly onto or at the substrate and/or that the metal-ceramic coating forms on the substrate with a predominantly crystalline structure and/or to substantially avoid formation of nanoparticles of the ceramic phase, and/or agglomeration of particles of the ceramic phase, in the plating solution or electrolyte. The ceramic phase may be a single or mixed oxide, carbide, nitride, silicate, boride of Ti, W, Si, Zr, Al, Y, Cr, Fe, Pb, Co, or a rare earth element. The coating, other than the ceramic phase may comprise Ni, NiP, NiWP, NiCuP, NiB, Cu, Ag, Au, Pd.

Claims

1. A plating or coating method for producing a metal-ceramic composite coating on a substrate, which includes adding a ceramic phase to the plating solution or electrolyte as a sol in an amount controlled to be sufficiently low that nanoparticles of the ceramic phase form directly onto or at the substrate, and continuously stirring the plating solution or electrolyte, wherein molecules of the ceramic phase exist in a net-structure in the sol, and wherein the metal-ceramic coating forms on the substrate with a predominantly crystalline structure.

2. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 comprising adding the sol at a rate of less than about 0.02 ml/liter of the plating solution or electrolyte.

3. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 comprising adding the sol by dripping the sol into the plating solution.

4. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 wherein the sol has a concentration such that the sol is transparent and particles of the ceramic phase are not visibly present in the sol.

5. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 comprising adding the sol at a controlled rate while carrying out the plating or coating and wherein the sol has a sol concentration of 20 to 250 grams of the ceramic phase per liter of the sol.

6. A plating or coating method according to claim 5 comprising adding the sol at a rate of 30 to 250 mls of sol per liter of the plating solution.

7. A plating or coating method according to claim 5 comprising adding the sol in a ratio of 0.5 to 100 mls of sol per liter of the plating solution.

8. A plating or coating method according to claim 5 comprising adding the sol in a ratio of 1.25 to 25 mls of sol per liter of the plating solution.

9. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 wherein the ceramic phase is a single or mixed oxide, carbide, nitride, silicate, boride of Ti, W, Si, Zr, Al, Y, Cr, Fe, Pb, Co, or a rare earth element.

10. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 wherein the ceramic phase comprises TiO.sub.2, Al.sub.2O.sub.3, ZrO.sub.2, or SiC.

11. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 wherein the coating, other than the ceramic phase comprises Ni, NiP, NiWP, NiCuP, NiB, Cu, Ag, Au, Pd.

12. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 wherein the substrate comprises steel, Mg, Al, Zn, Sn, Cu, Ti, Ni, Co, Mo, Pb or an alloy thereof.

13. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 wherein the substrate comprises a mild steel, alloy steel, or carbon steel.

14. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 wherein the substrate comprises Mg or Al or an alloy thereof.

15. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 which is an electroless plating or coating process.

16. A plating or coating method according to claim 15 wherein the solution comprises as a reducing agent sodium hypophosphite, sodium borohydride, formaldehyde, dextrose, Rochelle salts, glyoxal, or hydrazine sulfate.

17. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 which is a galvanic plating process.

18. A plating or coating method according to claim 17 wherein the current density is in the range 10 mA/cm.sup.2 to 300 mA/cm.sup.2.

19. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 comprising adding the sol while carrying out the plating or coating and at a rate of sol addition controlled to be sufficiently low that nanoparticles of the ceramic phase form directly onto or at the substrate.

20. A plating or coating method according to claim 1 comprising adding the sol at a rate of less than about 0.07 ml/liter of the plating solution or electrolyte.

21. A plating or coating method for producing a metal-ceramic composite coating on a substrate which includes adding a ceramic phase to the plating solution as a sol in an amount controlled to be sufficiently low that nanoparticles of the ceramic phase form directly onto or at the substrate, and to substantially avoid formation of nanoparticles or microparticles of the ceramic phase, and/or agglomeration of particles of the ceramic phase, in the plating solution or electrolyte, and continuously stirring the plating solution or electrolyte, wherein molecules of the ceramic phase exist in a net-structure in the sol, and wherein the metal-ceramic coating forms on the substrate with a predominantly crystalline structure.

22. A plating or coating method according to claim 21 comprising adding the sol at a rate of less than about 0.02 ml/liter of the plating solution or electrolyte.

23. A plating or coating method according to claim 21 comprising adding the sol at a rate of less than about 0.07 ml/liter of the plating solution or electrolyte.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

(1) In the subsequent description the following figures are referred to, in which:

(2) FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of apparatus used in the experimental work subsequently described in some examples,

(3) FIG. 2 shows surface morphologies of (a) a conventional NiP coating, and novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at TiO.sub.2 sol dripping rates of (b) 0.02 ml/s, (c) 0.007 ml/s and (d) 0.004 ml/s,

(4) FIG. 3 shows cross-sectional morphologies and elemental distributions of (a1, a2) a conventional NiP coating, and novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at TiO.sub.2 sol dripping rates of (b1, b2) 0.02 ml/s, (c1, c2) 0.007 ml/s, and (d1, d2) 0.004 ml/s,

(5) FIG. 4 shows XRD spectra of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different sol dripping rates of (a) 0.004 ml/s, (b) 0.007 ml/s and (c) 0.02 ml/s, and of (d) a conventional NiP coating,

(6) FIG. 5 shows microhardness of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different sol dripping rates,

(7) FIG. 6 shows wear track images for (a) a conventional NiP coating, and novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with the TiO.sub.2 sol dripping rates of (b) 0.02 ml/s, (c) 0.007 ml/s and (d) 0.004 ml/s,

(8) FIG. 7 shows surface morphologies of (a) a conventional NiP coating, and novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol of (b) 30 ml/L, (c) 60 ml/L, (d) 90 ml/L, (e) 120 ml/L, (f) 150 ml/L, and (g) 170 ml/L,

(9) FIG. 8 shows XRD spectra of (a) a conventional NiP coating, and novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at TiO.sub.2 sol concentrations of: (b) 30 ml/L, (c) 60 ml/L, (d) 90 ml/L, (e) 120 ml/L, (f) 150 ml/L, and (g) 170 ml/L,

(10) FIG. 9 shows microhardness of the novel NiPTiO.sub.2 coatings prepared at different concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol,

(11) FIG. 10 shows wear tracks of (a) a conventional NiP coating, and novel NiPTiO.sub.2 coatings prepared at TiO.sub.2 sol concentrations of (b) 30 ml/L, (c) 60 ml/L, (d) 90 ml/L, (e) 120 ml/L, (f) 150 ml/L, and (g) 170 ml/L,

(12) FIG. 11 shows surface morphologies of (a) a conventional electroplating Ni coating, and NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol: (b) 1.25 ml/L, (c) 2.5 ml/L, (d) 7.5 ml/L, (e) 12.5 ml/L, (f) 50 ml/L.

(13) FIG. 12 shows micro-hardness results of NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol,

(14) FIG. 13 shows wear volume loss of NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol,

(15) FIG. 14 shows the surface morphologies of NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different plating currents: (a) 10 mA/cm.sup.2, (a) 50 mA/cm.sup.2, (a) 100 mA/cm.sup.2.

(16) FIG. 15 shows micro-hardness results of NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different plating currents,

(17) FIG. 16 shows wear volume loss of NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different currents,

(18) FIG. 17 shows the surface morphologies of ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with dripping rates of TiO.sub.2 sol of (a) 0.007 ml/s and (b) 0.004 ml/s.

(19) FIG. 18 shows the cross-sectional morphologies of ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with dripping rates of TiO.sub.2 sol of (a) 0.007 ml/s and (b) 0.004 ml/s.

(20) FIG. 19 shows the reflectance of ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with dripping rates of TiO.sub.2 sol of 0.007 and 0.004 ml/s,

(21) FIG. 20 shows the surface morphologies of ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol at (a) 50 ml/L, (b) 90 ml/L, (c) 120 ml/L and (b) 150 ml/L.

(22) FIG. 21 shows the cross-sectional morphologies of ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol at (a) 50 ml/L, (b) 90 ml/L, (c) 120 ml/L and (b) 150 ml/L.

(23) FIG. 22 shows the reflectance of ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol at 50, 90, 120 and 150 ml/L.

(24) FIG. 23 shows the surface morphologies of (a) a conventional electroless plated NiP coating, (b) a conventional NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating, and (c) a novel NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating with the sol concentration of 120 ml/L.

(25) FIG. 24 shows the XRD spectra of (a) a conventional electroless plated NiP coating, (b) a conventional NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating, and (c) a novel NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating with the sol concentration of 120 ml/L.

(26) FIG. 25 shows the microhardness of (a) a conventional electroless plated NiP coating, (b) a conventional NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating, and (c) a novel NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating with the sol concentration of 120 ml/L.

(27) FIG. 26 shows surface second-electron morphologies of (a) a conventional NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating, and (b) a novel sol-enhanced NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating. The insets in (a) and (b) are locally magnified backscattered electron images.

(28) FIG. 27 shows the variation of microhardness as a function of the annealing temperature for a conventional NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating and a novel sol-enhanced NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating.

(29) FIG. 28 shows the engineering stress-strain curves for (A) the conventional and (B) the sol-enhanced Ni-TiO.sub.2 composites tested at a strain rate of 110.sup.4s.sup.1.

(30) FIG. 29 shows wear tracks on (a) a conventional Au coating, and (b) a novel sol-enhanced Au coating.

(31) FIG. 30 shows wear tracks on (a) a conventional Au coating, and (b) a novel sol-enhanced Au coating.

(32) FIG. 31 shows the effect of Al.sub.2O.sub.3 sol concentration on the microhardness of coatings.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

(33) The invention comprises a method for producing a metal-ceramic composite coating on a substrate which includes adding a sol of a ceramic phase to the plating solution or electrolyte.

(34) The sol may have a concentration such that the sol is transparent (particles of the ceramic phase are not visibly present in the sol), and may in certain embodiments have a concentration of the ceramic phase of between about 10 to about 200 g/liter, or about 20 to about 100 g/liter.

(35) Where the sol of the ceramic phase is added to the solution or electrolyte during the plating process it may be added throughout the plating or coating process, or in certain embodiments for less than all of the duration of the plating process but at least 80% or at least 70% or at least 60% or at least 50% of the duration of the plating process. Optionally an amount of the sol may also be added to the solution or electrolyte prior to the commencement of plating or coating.

(36) In certain embodiments the sol may be added at a rate of less than about 0.02 ml/liter of the plating solution or electrolyte, and may be added at a rate of less than about 0.01 ml/liter, and preferably less than about 0.07 ml/liter, and in the range about 0.001 to about 0.005 ml/liter. The sol may be added to the plating solution at the required slow rate by dripping or spraying the sol into the plating solution or by any other technique by which the sol can be added at the required slow rate.

(37) It is believed in relation to some embodiments that if the ceramic phase is added as a sol during plating and at a sufficiently slow rate and low concentration, molecules of the ceramic phase from the sol form nanoparticles in situ on or at the surface of the substrate, and that a metal-ceramic composite coating having a largely crystalline rather than an amorphous structure is formed.

(38) In certain embodiments the ceramic phase is a single or mixed oxide, carbide, nitride, silicate, boride of Ti, W, Si, Zr, Al, Y, Cr, Fe, Pb, Co, or a rare earth element.

(39) In certain embodiments the substrate is a metal substrate such as mild steel, alloy steel, Mg, Al, Zn, Sn, Cu, Ti, Ni, Co, Mo, Pb or an alloy. In other embodiments the substrate is a non-metallic substrate such as a plastics and ceramic substrate.

(40) The plating or coating may be carried out to provide improved abrasion or wear resistance or corrosion resistance to an item or surface, to provide an electrically conductive coating on a surface or item, or to alter optical properties, for decorative purposes, for example.

(41) By the process of the invention we have been able to achieve NiPTiO.sub.2 coatings having microhardness of about 1025 HV. In a conventional electroplating process in which TiO.sub.2 nanoparticles are added to the plating solution before the commencement of the plating and not in a sol, hardness of the order of 670-800 HV is typically achieved.

(42) In another particular embodiment where the substrate is mild carbon steel, the substrate plated or coated by the process of the invention has very low light reflection i.e. is ultra-black.

(43) The plating process may be an electroless plating or coating process, in which the anode comprises the plating metal, the cathode the item to be plated or coated, and the ceramic phase is added as a sol to the solution comprising a reducing agent such as sodium hypophosphite, sodium borohydride, formaldehyde, dextrose, rochelle salts, glyoxal, hydrazine sulfate.

(44) The plating process may alternatively be a galvanic plating process in which the anode comprises the plating metal, or ions of the plating metal are provided in the electrolyte, the cathode comprises the item to be plated, and the ceramic phase is added to the electrolyte as a sol.

EXAMPLES

(45) The following description of experimental work further illustrates the invention by way of example:

Example 1

NiPTiO2 Composite Coating on Mg Alloy by Electroless Plating, at Different Sol Rates

(46) A transparent TiO.sub.2 sol was prepared in the following way: 8.68 ml of titanium butoxide (0.04 g/ml) was dissolved in a mixture solution of 35 ml of ethanol and 2.82 ml diethanolamine. After magnetic stirring for 2 hours, the obtained solution was hydrolyzed by the addition of a mixture of 0.45 ml deionized water and 4.5 ml ethanol dropwise under magnetic stirring. After stirring for 2 hours, the TiO.sub.2 sol was kept in a brown glass bottle to age for 24 hours at room temperature.

(47) The transparent TiO.sub.2 sol was added into 150 ml of a conventional NiP electroless plating (EP) solution by dripping at a controlled rate during plating (1 drop=0.002 ml approx). During plating the solution was continuously stirred by magnetic stirring at the speed of 200 r/min. The solution temperature was kept at 80-90 C. and the plating time was 90 min FIG. 1 shows the experimental apparatus used. In FIG. 1the following reference numerals indicate the following parts: 1. Separatory funnel 2. TiO.sub.2 sol outlet 3. Lids 4. Erlenmeyer 5. Beaker 6. Water 7. Electroless plating solution 8. Samples 9. Bracket 10. Magnetic stirrer 11. Siderocradle 12. Funnel stand

(48) The plating process was repeated at different sol dripping rates and sol concentrations.

(49) On analysis the coatings were found to be mainly crystalline, and to have micro-hardness up to 1025 HV.sub.0.2, compared to 590 HV.sub.0.2 for conventional NiP coatings and 700 HV.sub.0.2 for conventional NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings. The width of the wear tracks of the coating was reduced to about 160 m in some cases, compared to the corresponding width for the conventional composite coating of about 500 m.

(50) FIG. 2 shows surface morphologies of the NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings produced at sol dripping rates of 0.004, 0.007, 0.02 ml/s, at a concentration of TiO.sub.2 sol 120 ml/L.

(51) Referring to FIG. 2a the conventional EP NiP coating has a typical cauliflower-like structure with some pores caused by formation of H.sub.2 in the EP process as shown by the arrows.

(52) With TiO.sub.2 sol dripped into the EP NiP solution at a rate of 0.02 ml/s, the cauliflower structure became smallersee FIG. 2b Clusters of micro-Ni crystals formed in the interfaces, indicating that the TiO.sub.2 sol addition promoted the nucleation of Ni crystals and prevented the growth of Ni crystals.

(53) FIG. 2c shows the coating produced at a sol dripping rate of 0.007 ml/s. It was compact and smooth coating of FIG. 2a. Well-dispersed white nano-particles were distributed on the surface as shown by the arrows on the right top inset in FIG. 2c. It is believed that these particles are TiO.sub.2 nano-particles.

(54) At a TiO.sub.2 sol dripping rate of 0.004 ml/s, the coating was also compact and smoothsee FIG. 2d. Loose TiO.sub.2 particles congregated in the interfaces between Ni crystals as shown by the arrows in the FIG. 2d.

(55) FIG. 3 shows cross-sectional morphologies and elemental distributions of an NiP coating, and of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at the different dripping rates of TiO.sub.2 sol.

(56) The conventional NiP coating is compact with a thickness of 25 msee FIG. 3a1, and good adhesion to the Mg substrate. The Ni and P elements have homogeneous distributions along the coatingsee FIG. 3a2.

(57) FIGS. 3b1 and 3b2 show the microstructure and elemental distributions of the NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coating prepared with a sol dripping rate of 0.02 ml/s. The coating was thinner than the NiP coating. The thickness further decreased, from about 23 m to around 20 m at a sol dripping rate of 0.007 ml/sFIGS. 3c1 and 3c1, and to 18 m at a dripping rate of 0.004 ml/ssee FIG. 3d1.

(58) FIGS. 4a-c show the XRD spectra for the NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at the different dripping rates, and FIG. 4d for the NiP coating. The conventional EP medium P content coating possesses a typical semi-crystalline structure, i.e. mixture of amorphous phase and crystallized phase, while the NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings possess fully crystalline phase structures.

(59) The composite coatings produced by the process of the invention possess hardness up to about 1025 HV.sub.200, compared to about 710 HV.sub.200 for composite coatings prepared by powder methods and about 570 HV.sub.200 for conventional NiP coatings. FIG. 5 shows the microhardness of the NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at sol dripping rates of from 0.004 ml/s to 0.02 ml/s. Greatest hardness was obtained at the dripping rate of 0.007 ml/s.

(60) In FIG. 6a the width of wear track of the conventional NiP coating was about 440 m. Many deep plough lines are observed. In contrast, the novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings possessed better wear resistance as seen from FIGS. 6b, c and d. The wear track of the composite coatings had a narrower width of about 380 m at 0.02 ml/s, 160 m at 0.007 ml/s, and 340 m at 0.004 ml/s. The novel composite coatings also had very few plough lines compared with the conventional NiP coatings.

Example 2

NiP TiO2 Composite Coatings on Mg by Electroless Plating, at Different Sol Concentrations

(61) The effect of TiO.sub.2 concentration in the sol was also studied. NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings were prepared as described in Example 1 but with a constant sol dripping rate of 0.007 ml/s and at sol concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol at 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 170 ml/L (1.2, 2.4, 3.6, 4.8, 6.0, 6.8 g/L).

(62) FIG. 7 shows surface morphologies of a conventional NiP coating and the novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different TiO.sub.2 sol concentrations.

(63) FIG. 7a shows the typical cauliflower-like structure of the conventional NiP coating with some pores on the surface due to the formation of H.sub.2 in the EP process as shown by the arrows.

(64) FIGS. 7b and 7c show the surface morphologies of the composite coatings with TiO.sub.2 sol dripped into the EP solution at concentrations of 30 ml/L and 60 ml/L, respectively. No white TiO.sub.2 particles were observed in the EP solution during the process. Many micro-sized Ni crystallites formed and congregated on the big Ni grains or in the low-lying interfaces between Ni grainssee FIG. 7b. At a sol concentration of 60 ml/L, many well-dispersed and micro-sized Ni crystallites formed on the surface with no congregationsee FIG. 7c, and the Ni crystallites became smaller with a smoother surface. White TiO.sub.2 particles were formed in the EP solution as the sol concentration increased.

(65) FIG. 7d shows the surface morphology of the coating produced at a sol concentration of 90 ml/L. Micro-sized Ni crystallites are smaller with good dispersion. Large-scale Ni crystals were observed with many small and well-dispersed Ni crystallites on them as shown by the arrows in FIG. 7d. At a sol concentration of 120 ml/L, micro-sized Ni crystals almost disappearedsee FIG. 7e, and nano-sized TiO.sub.2 particles were observed on the surface with good dispersion as shown by the arrows in the inset of FIG. 7e.

(66) FIG. 8 shows XRD spectra of the conventional NiP coating and the novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings at the different concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol. The conventional EP NiP coating has a typical semi-crystallized structure, i.e. a mixture of amorphous and crystalline phasessee FIG. 5a, while the novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings have different phase structures with better crystallinity at the lower concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol as shown in FIGS. 8b, 8c, 8d and 8e. The coatings have a semi-crystalline structure at higher sol concentrations of 150 and 170 ml/Lsee FIGS. 8f and 8g.

(67) The effect of sol concentration on the microhardness of the composite coatings is shown in FIG. 9. At relatively low TiO.sub.2 sol concentrations of 30-60 ml/L, the microhardness was about 700 HV.sub.200. No white TiO.sub.2 particles were observed. At sol concentrations of from 60 to 120 ml/L white TiO.sub.2 particles were observed in the EP solution, and the microhardness increased to a peak of about 1025 HV.sub.200.

(68) Images of wear tracks on the conventional NiP coating and the novel NiPTiO.sub.2 composite produced at different concentrations of TiO.sub.2 sol are shown in FIG. 10.

(69) At sol concentrations of 30-60 ml/L the wear tracks became discontinuous as shown in FIGS. 10b and 10c, and almost no plough lines are observed. At sol concentrations of 90-120 ml/L the tracks became narrower (but more continuous)the width of tracks decreased from 240 m to 160 m. FIGS. 10d and 10e show the wear tracks on coatings produced at sol concentrations of 150 and 170 ml/L.

(70) We observed that when the sol was dripped into the EP solution it fast diluted under stirring. The solution was kept transparent and no white particles could be seen by the naked eye, implying that the TiO.sub.2 particles are very small. The TiO.sub.2 nano-particles have no opportunity to agglomerate together to form clusters. Therefore nano-sized TiO.sub.2 particles are deposited together with Ni, forming a metal/nano-oxide composite coating. The nano-particle dispersion also contributes to the improved hardness and wear resistance.

Example 3

NiTiO2 Coating on Mild Steel by Electroplating, at Different Sol Concentrations

(71) A NiTiO.sub.2 electroplating coating was formed on carbon steel by adding a TiO.sub.2 sol prepared as described in example 1 into a traditional Ni electroplating solution at the commencement of electroplating. The bath composition and electroplating parameters are listed in the table below. 12.5 ml/l of transparent TiO.sub.2 sol solution prepared as described in example 1 was added to the electroplating solution, and then NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings were formed on carbon steels with a current of 50 mA/cm.sup.2. Ni and NiTiO.sub.2 coatings were prepared without sol addition for comparison. The NiTiO.sub.2 coating was prepared with a concentration of TiO.sub.2 nano-particles (diameter<25 nm) of 10 g/L.

(72) TABLE-US-00001 Bath composition/ parameters Quantity NiSO.sub.46H.sub.2O 300 g/L NiCl.sub.26H.sub.2O 45 g/L H.sub.3BO.sub.3 40 g/L TiO.sub.2 sol 12.5 mL/L pH 3.8 Temperature Room temperature (20 C.) Current i 50 mA/cm.sup.2 Time 10 min

(73) The NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating formed had a micro-hardness of 428 HV.sub.100, compared to 356 HV.sub.100 for the NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating formed conventionally and 321 HV.sub.100 for the Ni coating.

(74) Coatings were prepared at TiO.sub.2 sol concentrations of 0, 1.25, 2.5, 7.5, 12.5 and 50 ml/L (0, 0.05, 0.0625, 0.3, 0.5, 2 g/L).

(75) FIG. 11 shows surface morphologies of the NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at sol concentrations of 0, 1.25, 2.5, 7.5, 12.5 and 50 ml/L.

(76) FIG. 12 shows microhardness of the NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at sol concentrations of 0, 1.25, 2.5, 7.5, 12.5 and 50 ml/L. The microhardness of the Ni coating was nearly 320 HV.sub.100. The NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings had increased microhardness, up to 428 HV.sub.100, at the sol concentrations of 1.25 ml/L to 12.5 ml/L.

(77) Referring to FIG. 13 the Ni coating had the worst wear volume loss at about 810.sup.3 mm.sup.3. The NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings had better wear resistance.

Example 4

NiTiO2 Coating on Mild Steel by Electroplating, at Different Currents

(78) Coatings were prepared as in Example 3 but at different plating currents. FIG. 14 shows the surface morphologies of NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with 12.5 ml/L TiO.sub.2 sol addition at currents of 10, 50, 100 mA/cm.sup.2.

(79) FIG. 15 shows the microhardness of NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared with 12.5 ml/L TiO.sub.2 sol addition at currents of 10, 50, 100 mA/cm.sup.2. At 10 mA/cm.sup.2 the coating had a microhardness of about 300 HV.sub.100, the microhardness increased to 428 HV.sub.100 at 50 mA/cm.sup.2, and the microhardness was about 380 HV.sub.100 at current of 100 mA/cm.sup.2.

(80) FIG. 16 shows wear volume loss of the NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings. The coating had best wear resistance at 50 mA/cm.sup.2, with a wear volume loss of about 0.004 mm.sup.3.

Example 5

Ultra-Black NiPTiO2 Composite Coating on Carbon Steel, by Electroless Plating

(81) An NiPTiO.sub.2 electroless coating with ultra-black surface was formed on carbon steel through adding TiO.sub.2 sol prepared as in example 1 into a conventional Ni electroless solution at a controlled rate. When 90 ml/L (3.6 g/L) transparent TiO.sub.2 solution was added at a rate of 0.007 ml/s to a plating solution of 150 ml, a NiPTiO.sub.2 electroless coating with an ultra-black surface with the lowest reflectance at 0.1-0.5% of visible light was formed.

(82) FIG. 17 shows the surface morphologies of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different sol addition rates of 0.007 and 0.004 ml/s.

(83) FIG. 18 shows the cross-sectional morphologies of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different sol addition rates.

(84) FIG. 19 shows the reflectance of the ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different sol addition rates, in the range of visible light. Lower reflectance was obtained when the TiO.sub.2 sol was added at 0.007 ml/s.

(85) FIG. 20 shows the surface morphologies of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different sol concentrations of 50, 90, 120 and 150 ml/L.

(86) FIG. 21 shows the cross-sectional morphologies of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings prepared at different sol concentrations.

(87) FIG. 22 shows the reflectance of ultra-black surfaces of NiPTiO.sub.2 composite coatings in the range of visible light prepared at different sol concentrations.

Example 6

CuTiO2 Coatings on Carbon Steel, by Electroplating

(88) A small amount of TiO.sub.2 sol prepared as in example 1 was added into a conventional electroplating Cu solution, leading to the in situ synthesis of CuTiO.sub.2 composite coatings. This novel CuTiO.sub.2 composite coating had a micro-hardness of 210 HV, compared to 150 HV of the traditional Cu coating, showing 40% increase.

Example 7

NiPZrO2 Composite Coating on Mg Alloy, by Electroless Plating

(89) A transparent ZrO.sub.2 sol was prepared in the following way: 45 ml of zirconium propoxide was dissolved in a mixture solution of 124 ml of ethanol and 11.3 ml diethanolamine. After magnetic stirring for 2 hours, the obtained solution was hydrolyzed by the addition of a mixture of 1.84 ml deionized water and 16.2 ml ethanol dropwise under magnetic stirring. After stirring for 2 hours, the ZrO.sub.2 sol was kept in a brown glass bottle to age for 24 hours at room temperature. The transparent ZrO.sub.2 sol was added into a conventional NiP electroless plating (EP) solution by dripping at a controlled rate during plating (1 drop=0.002 ml approx). During plating the solution was continuously stirred by magnetic stirring at the speed of 200 r/min. The solution temperature was kept at 80-90 C. and the plating time was 90 min.

(90) FIG. 23 shows surface morphologies of the NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coatings produced at sol dripping rates of 0.007 ml/s, at a concentration of ZrO.sub.2 sol 120 ml/L.

(91) FIG. 24 show the XRD spectra of the NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coatings produced at sol dripping rates of 0.007 ml/s, at a concentration of ZrO.sub.2 sol 120 ml/L.

(92) The traditional electroless plated NiP and NiPZrO.sub.2 coatings possessed a typical semi-crystallization, i.e. the mixture of crystallization and amorphous state, as shown in FIG. 24 a and b. In contrast, the NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating had a fully crystallized state as shown in FIG. 24c.

(93) FIG. 25 shows the mechanical properties of the NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coatings produced at sol dripping rates of 0.007 ml/s, at a concentration of ZrO.sub.2 sol 120 ml/L.

(94) The microhardness of the NiPZrO2 composite coating was increased to 1045 HV.sub.200 compared to 590 HV.sub.200 of the conventional NiP coating and 759 HV.sub.200 of the conventional NiPZrO.sub.2 composite coating.

Example 8

NiTiO2 Composite Coatings on Mild Carbon Steel

(95) A NiTiO.sub.2 electroplating coating was deposited on mild carbon steel by adding a TiO.sub.2 sol prepared as described in example 1 into a traditional Ni electroplating solution during electroplating and at a low and controlled rate. 12.5 ml/l of transparent TiO.sub.2 sol solution was added into the electroplating solution, and then NiTiO.sub.2 composite coatings were formed on carbon steels with a current of 50 mA/cm.sup.2. NiTiO.sub.2 coatings were prepared with solid TiO.sub.2 nano-particles (diameter<25 nm) of 10 g/L for comparison.

(96) FIG. 26 shows surface second-electron morphologies of: (a) a conventional NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating, and (b) the sol-enhanced NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating. The insets in (a) and (b) are locally magnified backscattered electron images. The traditional NiTiO.sub.2 coating exhibited a quite rough and uneven surface (FIG. 26a). Large spherical Ni nodules with the size of 4 m were clearly seen, on which there were many superfine Ni nodules (300 nm) as shown in the inset in FIG. 1a. Large clusters of TiO.sub.2 nano-particles (400 nm) were incorporated in the Ni nodules, as pointed by the arrows in the inset (BSE image). In contrast, the sol-enhanced NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating had a much smoother surface (FIG. 26b). Two shapes of Ni nodules, i.e. spherical and pyramid-like, were displayed on the surface. The pyramid-like Ni nodules with 1.5 m size were relatively uniformly distributed in the spherical Ni nodules. It can be clearly seen from the inset in FIG. 1b that the size of the spherical Ni nodules was quite small, 200 nm.

(97) FIG. 27 shows the variation of microhardness as a function of the annealing temperature: .square-solid.conventional NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating; sol-enhanced NiTiO.sub.2 composite coating. The as-deposited sol-enhanced coating possessed a high microhardness of 407 HV.sub.50 compared to 280 HV.sub.50 of the conventional coating. The microhardness of the conventional coating was 280 HV.sub.50 after low-temperature annealing (up to 150 C.), followed by a relatively steady decline to 180 HV.sub.50 when the coating was annealed at 400 C. for 90 min. In contrast, for the sol-enhanced coating, the high microhardness (407 HV.sub.50) can be stabilized up to 250 C.

(98) FIG. 28 shows the engineering stress-strain curves for (A) the conventional and (B) the sol-enhanced NiTiO.sub.2 composites tested at a strain rate of 110.sup.4 s.sup.1. The sol-enhanced composite shows a significantly increased tensile strength of 1050 MPa with 1.4% strain, compared to 600 MPa and 0.8% strain of the traditional composite.

Example 9

AuTiO2 Composite Coating on Ni-Coated Brass

(99) A small amount of TiO.sub.2 sol prepared as described in example 1 was added into the a conventional 1 electroplating Au solution, leading to the synthesis of AuTiO.sub.2 composite coatings. The microhardness and wear resistance were greatly improved as summarised in the table below.

(100) TABLE-US-00002 Microhardness of traditional Au and sol-enhanced AuTiO.sub.2 composite coatings Group I Group II Condition: 10 mA/cm.sup.2, 6.5 min Condition: 50 mA/cm.sup.2, 2.5 min Microhardness Wear volume Microhardness Wear volume loss (HV.sub.10) loss (10.sup.-3 mm.sup.3) (HV.sub.10) (10.sup.-3 mm.sup.3) Conventional 242 6 1.58 0.02 248 4 1.62 0.02 Au Novel sol- 269 7 1.43 0.02 293 10 0.82 0.03 enhanced Au Improvement 11% 10.5% 18% 98% or reduced or reduced to 90% to 50.6%

(101) FIG. 29 shows the wear tracks on (a) the conventional Au coating, and (b) the sol-enhanced Au coating. The electroplating was carried out with a current density of 10 mA/cm.sup.2 for 6.5 min. The wear volume loss was measured and calculated from the width of the wear track. It was found that the wear volume loss of the conventional Au coating was 1.5810.sup.3 mm.sup.3, compared to 1.4310.sup.3 mm.sup.3 of the sol-enhanced Au coating.

(102) FIG. 30 shows the wear tracks on (a) the conventional Au coating, and (b) the sol-enhanced Au coating. The electroplating was carried out with a current density of 50 mA/cm.sup.2 for 2.5 min. It was calculated that the wear volume loss of the conventional Au coating was 1.6210.sup.3 mm.sup.3, compared to 0.8210.sup.3 mm.sup.3 of the sol-enhanced Au coating, indicating that the wear resistance of sol-enhanced coatings was significantly improved.

Example 10

CuZrO2 Composite Coating on Carbon Steel

(103) ZrO.sub.2 sol prepared as described in example 7 was added into a conventional electroplating Cu solution, leading to the synthesis of CuZrO.sub.2 composite coatings. Cu and CuZrO.sub.2 (solid-particle mixing) coatings were also prepared with a concentration of ZrO.sub.2 nano-particles (diameter<25 nm) of 10 g/L. The table below lists the microhardness and electrical resistance of the Cu, conventional (solid-particle mixing) and sol-enhanced CuZrO.sub.2 composite coatings. The sol-enhanced CuZrO.sub.2 composite coating had a significantly increased microhardness of 153 HV.sub.50 compared to 133 HV.sub.50 of the conventional CuZrO.sub.2 coating.

(104) TABLE-US-00003 Electrical resistance Microhardness ( .Math. cm) (HV.sub.50) Cu 1.76 123 Conventional CuZrO.sub.2 2.92 133 sol-enhanced CuZrO.sub.2 2.33 153

Example 11

CuAl2O3 Composite Coating on Carbon Steel

(105) CuAl.sub.2O.sub.3 composite coating was prepared by adding Al.sub.2O.sub.3 sol into a conventional electroplating Cu solution. The Al.sub.2O.sub.3 sol was synthesized with Al tri-sec-butoxide ((C.sub.2H.sub.5CH(CH.sub.3)O).sub.3Al) as the precursor. A small amount of absolute ethanol was added to 1.7017 g of 97% Al tri-sec-butoxide in a beaker and the increment of mass of 8.0630 g was recorded as the weight of absolute ethanol. The mol ratio of aluminium iso-propoxide and water was 0.01:12.4. Under magnetic stirring, 158 mL of de-ionized water was slowly added into the mixture of Al tri-sec-butoxide and ethanol and a few drops of 30% nitric acid were added into the solution to adjust the pH value to 3.5. At this stage, the solution contained white precipitate and it was stirred on a hot plate of 60 C., until all white precipitate dissolved. Finally, a clear aluminium oxide sol was prepared.

(106) FIG. 31 shows the effect of Al.sub.2O.sub.3 sol concentration on the microhardness of coatings. The sol-enhanced CuAl.sub.2O.sub.3 coating has a peaking microhardness of 181 HV.sub.50 compared to 145 HV.sub.50 of the Cu coating, indicating 25% improvement.

(107) The foregoing describes the invention including embodiments and examples thereof. Alterations and modifications as will be obvious to those skilled in the art are intended to be incorporated in the scope hereof as defined in the accompanying claims.