Next Article in Journal
Experimental and Numerical Study on the Packing Densification of Metal Powder with Gaussian Distribution
Next Article in Special Issue
Catalytic Degradability of p-Nitrophenol Using Ecofriendly Silver Nanoparticles
Previous Article in Journal
Formation Mechanism of Micro- and Nanocrystalline Surface Layers in Titanium and Aluminum Alloys in Electron Beam Irradiation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Strengthening of Nanocrystalline Al with Al3Zr Core-Shell Structure
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Interfacial Aspects of Metal Matrix Composites Prepared from Liquid Metals and Aqueous Solutions: A Review

Institute of Metallurgy, Metal Forming and Nanotechnology, University of Miskolc, H-3515 Miskolc, Hungary
Metals 2020, 10(10), 1400; https://doi.org/10.3390/met10101400
Submission received: 26 September 2020 / Revised: 15 October 2020 / Accepted: 20 October 2020 / Published: 21 October 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Metallic Nanocomposites)

Abstract

:
The paper reviews the preparation of the different metallic nanocomposites. In the preparation of composites, especially in the case of nanocomposites, interfacial phenomena play an important role. This review summarizes the literature on various interfacial phenomena, such as wettability and reactivity in the case of casting techniques and colloidal behavior in the case of electrochemical and electroless methods. The main contribution of this work lies in the evaluation of collected interfacial phenomena and difficulties in the production of metal matrix composites, for both nano-sized and micro-sized reinforcements. This study can guide the composite maker in choosing the best criteria for producing metal matrix composites, which means a real interface with good adhesion between the matrix and the reinforcement. This criterion results in desirable mechanical and physical properties and homogenous dispersion of the reinforcement in the matrix.

1. Introduction

Metal matrix composites are made up of a metal matrix and a reinforcing substance, which may be metal or another substance. Composites can be classified in various ways; some examples are formation type, preparation method and matrix type. According to the formation of the composites, we can group them into in-situ [1] and ex-situ composites [2]. The reinforcement could be graphite [3], graphene [4,5,6,7,8,9], carbon nanotubes [10,11,12,13], ceramics [14,15,16,17], metallic nano-sized particles [18,19,20] or fibers, whereas the matrix materials could be aluminum [21,22], magnesium [23], steel [24], copper [25], etc.
According to the preparation method [26,27], we can group composites into stir casting [28,29,30,31,32], assisted stir casting [33], pressure infiltration [34,35,36,37], pressureless infiltration [38], laser melting [39], electrochemical [40], electroless deposition [41,42,43] and powder metallurgy [44,45,46,47,48,49,50] methods. Based on the physical state of the matrix material, we can form three groups, namely the molten matrix (in the case of stir casting, pressure infiltration, pressureless infiltration, laser melting), the aqueous or non-aqueous solution of the matrix element (electro- and electroless deposition) and solid phase matrix (powder metallurgy). The methods and interfacial phenomena of metal matrix composite preparation are shown in Figure 1.
During the preparation of nanocomposites (using classification by the physical state of the matrix), the interfacial phenomena have the most important role. The following sections show the effect of interface on the structure of nanocomposites prepared by casting and aqueous methods.

2. Using Melted Metal Matrix for the Preparation of the Composite

2.1. Role of the Wettability of the Reinforcement by Molten Metal

In metal matrix nanocomposites (MMNCs), the second ceramic phase is used as the reinforcing phase. This may have a particulate, fibrous or needle structure and at least one of the characteristic dimensions is less than 100 nm. The consequence of the size of the reinforcement is that in the manufacturing of MMNCs, interfacial phenomena—forces [51,52] and energies [53]—play a decisive role in the interaction of the reinforcement and the (molten) matrix metal. In the nanoscale range, the gravitational force and the difference in density between the melt and the particle no longer affect the subsidence of the particle. In such a case, the interfacial phenomena acting between the components influence the movement, penetration and incorporation of the reinforcement into the matrix. As a result of these interfacial interactions, the structure of the composite is formed, which decisively determines the strength and mechanical properties of the composite materials.
Based on thermodynamic formulations, we can derive the necessary criteria as appropriate parameters, including the interfacial energies [54]. The contact angle is characteristic of the interfacial behavior of solid–liquid phases when they are in contact. It is best observed when a small drop of molten metal is placed on the surface of a flat solid ceramic. The molten metal then assumes a characteristic shape, which may be spherical, hemispherical or fully spread, depending on the surface tension and adhesion energy prevailing in the system. The formed drop shape can be characterized by the contact angle, which is the angle between the tangent to the contour of the liquid drop at the point of contact of the liquid, the solid phase and the gas phase (the “triple line”). The contact angle is the angle between the tangent and the solid phase in the direction of the liquid phase (Figure 2).
Young’s equation is valid between the contact angle and the interfacial energies:
c o s θ = σ c v σ c l σ l v
where
  • σ c v —the surface energy between the ceramic and the vacuum, J/m2
  • σ c l —the interfacial energy between the ceramic and the melt, J/m2
  • σ l v —the surface tension of the melt, J/m2.
Equation (1) is significantly simplified if we take into account the so-called adhesion energy, which is by definition:
W = σ c v + σ l v σ c l
Adhesion energy is always a more positive number than 0; its unit is also J/m2. The higher the value of W, the stronger the mutual attraction between the molten metal and the ceramic, i.e., the adhesion. In the production of metal–matrix composites, it is theoretically worthwhile to use only metal–ceramic pairs that stably form two phases in contact with each other, i.e., for whom the value is certainly positive. Thus, for cermet pairs used in the production of metal matrix composites, the adhesive energy has the following range:
0 < W < σ c v + σ l v
Substituting Equation (2) into Equation (1) gives the following relation for the contact angle:
c o s θ = W σ l v 1
The value of the contact angle can be in the range of 0–180°, whose values as well as the ratios of energies clearly characterize the wetting conditions prevailing in the system. Based on (4), different ranges of the contact angle can be determined:
(a)
≥90°: the melt does not wet the ceramic; the adhesion energy is less than the surface tension of the melt;
(b)
<90°: the melt wets the ceramic; the adhesion energy of the melt surface is greater than the surface tension of the melt (but less than twice the surface tension);
(c)
=0°: the melt completely wets the ceramic; the adhesion energy is at least twice the surface tension of the melt.
One of the crucial points in the production of casting composites is the introduction of the reinforcing phase into the molten metal. Perfect wettability between reinforcement and the molten metal is required for complete immersion of the reinforcement [55,56,57,58]. If the molten metal does not perfectly wet the reinforcement phase, the composite can only be produced by prolonged stirring [59]. Hashim et al. [59] made the following observations during the preparation of die-cast aluminum composites:
-
stirring does not promote the immersion of the particles in the matrix: the particles float on the surface of the molten metal, regardless of the speed of stirring;
-
upon stirring, the ceramic particles are incorporated into the solidifying metal, but during the remelting of the composite, when the metal is completely melted, the composite can be separated;
-
using magnesium improves wetting, but if the magnesium content of the aluminum melt exceeds 1 wt.%, the viscosity of the melt increases.
Another crucial point in the production of casting composites is the agglomeration of the reinforcement [60]. The cause of coagulation of the reinforcement can also be traced back to wetting, i.e., the less the molten metal wets the ceramic surface, the more likely the ceramic particles are to adhere to each other. Avoidance of this unfavorable process, and thus the homogeneous distribution of the reinforcement in the molten metal, can be achieved if the contact angle of the ceramic–molten metal pair is as close as possible to θ = 0°.
In general, one can say that the surface of the frequently used reinforcement is not perfectly wetted by molten metals. To achieve perfect wetting and perfect dispersion of the particles in the matrix, various modifications—for example, coatings or auxiliary phases—must be used in these systems. Another alternative is to modify the production method—for instance, by using an ultrasonic assisted application [60].
Two typical examples of composites for non-wetting and perfect wetting systems are shown here. The left-hand picture in Figure 3 shows non-wetting, where there is no adhesion and/or no common interface between the matrix and the reinforcement; here, there is no connection between the C fiber and the matrix. The right-hand picture shows the perfect wetting state; there are no pores on the matrix/reinforcement interface, as the molten matrix is able to flow around the reinforcement fibers or particles.

2.2. Improvement of the Wetting Behavior

The wettability of the reinforcement by molten metal can be improved by the modification of the surface of the reinforcement, e.g., by formation of a metallic coating on it. Another opportunity is the application of a molten salt phase, which can prevent the molten metal from further oxidation and can help in the formation of a well-wetted coating on the surface of the reinforcement.

2.2.1. Modification of the Surface of the Reinforcement

Due to the difference in the chemical bonding between the matrix metal and the reinforcement, the molten metal does not wet the surface of the reinforcement. Generally, one can say that molten metal wets well the surfaces of a solid metal or metal-like ceramics. In the case of molten metal/solid metal or molten metal/metal-like ceramic systems, the contact angle is lower than 90°, typically between 0° and 50°. During the selection of the metal for the coating, the main consideration is that the metal providing the coating should be an alloy of the matrix and not form brittle or undesirable phases with the matrix.
In the production of metal matrix composites, the surface of the reinforcement is most frequently covered with a copper or nickel coating [61]. Electroless nickel and copper coatings can be prepared on the surface of metals [62,63], carbon fiber [64,65,66,67], Al2O3 surface [68] and SiC particles [69,70,71,72,73,74]. As with metals, metal-like ceramics such as TiC can be used as coatings [75].
The contact angle of molten aluminum on an SiC surface is θ = 150°; this contact angle is reduced to θ = 115° at 2 h holding time. The contact angle of the molten aluminum on a Ni-coated SiC surface is θ = 12°. The nickel coating also prevents the formation of Al4C3 on the Al/SiC interface [68]. The wetting behavior of different solid materials by a molten matrix is tabulated in Table 1. Perfect wettability or good wetting is the criterion of the preparation of the metal matrix composites from liquid metal. One can see from Table 1 that to reach good wetting behavior of the liquid metal, the oxide layer needs to be removed (e.g., in the case of Al) and one needs to choose a metal or a metal-like ceramic required to be coated on the surface of the reinforcement.

2.2.2. Molten Salt-Assisted Process

Roy et al. [84] investigated the effect of the addition of chloride and fluoride salts to a basic equimolar NaCl-KCl mixture, examining the coalescence of small droplets. Coalescence can occur after the removal of the oxide layer from the molten aluminum droplets. A perfect oxide removal process, i.e., good coalescence, was achieved in the case of fluoride salt addition. The best additives are KF and NaF, LiF, Na3AlF6. One can say that the smaller the Al/salt interfacial energy, the more intensive the oxide removing effect. The same observation has been made in the case of NaCl-KCl-K2TiF6 salt mixture. Under the melted NaCl-KCl-K2TiF6 salt, the molten aluminum can perfectly wet the surface of a graphite [85,86]. The perfect wettability of aluminum on graphite under molten salts is achieved through the next steps:
  • The oxide layer is dissolved from the surface of molten aluminum due to the K2TiF6. In the molten salt, an oxo-fluoro complex compound is formed which prevents the further reaction of Ti ions.
  • As the molten salt/aluminum ratio increases, the Ti content increases in the system (salt/aluminum/graphite). Due to higher Ti content, the free Ti ion number will be raised so the possibility of the exchange reaction also grows.
  • At a critical Ti content and temperature (higher than 0.4 w% Ti in aluminum and above 750 °C), TiC can be formed at the Al/C interface. Due to the TiC nanolayer at the interface, the wettability of graphite by molten aluminum will be increased.
  • During the cooling of the sample, an Al3Ti intermetallic phase will be created due to a decrease in the solubility of Ti.
The wettability of TiC by molten aluminum was investigated by Lopez et al. [87] under Ar gas and molten KF-AlF3 eutectic mixture. They observed that the aluminum does not wet the TiC under Ar but perfectly wets that under molten salt. The role of the molten salt was to clean the surface of Al and TiC of the oxide layer. This observation proves that if one can prepare a TiC coating on the carbon surface, perfect wettability could be achieved. Kennedy and Karantzalis [88] investigated the effect of KAlF4 and K3AlF6 salts on the incorporation of the reinforcement particles in molten aluminum. They observed that the graphite particles have not been incorporated in molten aluminum. From these two observations, we can determine that the oxide layer removal alone is not enough to reach perfect wettability. In addition to the fluoride ion responsible for decomposing the oxide, the molten salts must contain an ion capable of forming a coating on the surface of the reinforcement which can be perfectly wetted by the molten aluminum.
K2TiF6, as mentioned above, is used as an additive to the basic salt, but one can use it as the pure salt as well. Using pure K2TiF6, the reinforcement is mixed with the salt and then this mixture is admixed to the molten aluminum. Another possibility is to prepare a saturated aqueous solution of the K2TiF6 at around 100 °C. The reinforcement is admixed with the saturated solution and then the salt is dried and crystallizes on the surface of the reinforcement, as mentioned in [89] for the case of Al/C, Al/SiC composites.
Lekatou et al. [2,90] prepared an aluminum matrix composite reinforced with TiC and WC nanoparticles using K2TiF6 salt. In their experiments, the salt and carbide particles were mixed and then introduced into the aluminum melt with vigorous stirring. Stirring ensured a homogeneous distribution of the reinforcement phase. Al3Ti and Al5W intermetallic phases were also identified in the aluminum matrix composite using WC particles.
Reactive salts are able to form in-situ metal matrix composites as well. In this case, the reinforcement will be formed due to a chemical reaction between the salt and a component of the matrix or other additives. In the molten salt-assisted in-situ method, (nano) composites can be prepared using different reactive salts [91]. In this procedure, Birol prepared a TiC-reinforced aluminum matrix composite [92], while Mahamani developed in-situ TiB2/ZrB2-reinforced aluminum matrix composites [93]. Other salt-assisted in-situ reinforcements could include TiB2 [94], TiN nanoparticles [95] or Al3Ti [96].

3. Composite Preparation from Aqueous Solutions

Composite coating, especially Ni and Ni alloy matrix coating, can be prepared by electrodeposition [97,98,99,100,101] or electroless [102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109] methods. Electrodeposition, in contrast to electroless deposition, forces the deposition process on the surface of the cathode using potential difference. The electroless method means that a reducing agent can be used instead of voltage [43]. The potential reducing agents are hydrazine [110], sodium hypophosphite (NaH2PO4) [111,112], sodium-borohydride (NaBH4) [111]. One type of highly investigated electroless Ni composite coating is the phosphorus-containing Ni-P, so the next part of the paper focuses on such composites.
Ni-P coatings prepared by deposition from aqueous solution have good mechanical properties. These can be improved by subjecting the product to heat treatment, during which nano- or micro-Ni3P phases can appear. In this case, one can actually speak of an in-situ composite in which the reinforcement is the second phase formed during the heat treatment. The properties of Ni-P coatings can be further modified by the co-deposition of a well-chosen reinforcement (ex-situ composite). In addition to improving hardness and wear resistance, the presence of a second reinforcing phase also improves the corrosion resistance of the Ni-P coatings [113,114].
Ni-P matrix composites are reinforced using different nano- and microparticles, of which the most common are SiC [115], SiO2 [116], TiO2 [117], ZrO2 [118], WC [119] and, more recently, TiC [120]. Furthermore, graphene [121] and nano-diamonds also appear in the literature as a reinforcement [80]. Electrodeposition enables the deposition of different Ni alloys with different reinforcements, such as Ni-P coating reinforced with CeO2-TiO2 [122], Ni-B/SiC [123], Ni/graphene [124], Ni-W/SiC [125], Ni–W/Si3N4 [126], Ni–Co/WS2 [127] [128], Ni/Al2O3 [129], Ni/SiC [130] or pure Ni-P itself [131,132].
Initial attempts to prepare Ni-P composites failed, as described in the literature. This is because nickel baths very often become unstable due to the high specific surface area of the reinforcement. The unstable bath disintegrates, i.e., the Ni2+ ions precipitate on the surface of the particles in the form of some Ni compounds. Various stabilizers are added to the bath to prevent the bath from disintegrating. Thiourea [133,134], Pb-acetate and maleic acid [135] have been used as stabilizers. Due to the stabilizers, it has become possible to produce Ni-P matrix composites by reduction [136]. One of the reasons for the disintegration of the bath is the electrokinetic behavior of the reinforcement, which is characterized by the zeta potential. The zeta potential in the Ni-P bath-reinforcement dispersion can be modified by the addition of surfactants.
A prerequisite for the production of Ni-P matrix composite coatings with a uniform distribution of the reinforcement and the designed mechanical properties is that the reinforcement phase can be homogeneously dispersed in the Ni-P bath, in both the electro- and electroless deposition methods. To avoid the agglomeration of the particles in the bath, there is a crucial physico-chemical property, namely the zeta potential of the particles in the bath [43,123].
Nano-sized particles easily form agglomerates due to their high specific surface area, zeta potential and wetting properties. Ensuring the proper dispersion of the nanoparticles in the bath can be achieved by the continuous stirring of the bath, sonication treatment, or using surfactants. Regarding the surfactant, cationic, anionic and non-ionic forms are used in practice. As a result of these surfactants, the bath can wet the surface of the reinforcement, and they can also modify the zeta potential value. In the case of increasing the value of the zeta potential by changing the composition and pH of the bath, the particles push away from each other to a greater extent, thus preventing their agglomeration [136,137].
In connection with this, various studies have been carried out in which the properties of the Ni-P bath–particle system were investigated by measuring the zeta potential and the study of the particle size distribution, deposition and the amount of reinforcement in the composite.
Tamilarasan et al. [138] deal with the development of a Ni-P-TiO2 composite coating. They observed that as the surfactant concentration increased, the amount of TiO2 particles in the Ni-P-TiO2 composite varied according to a maximum curve. It was also observed that when using a cationic DTAB (Dodecyltrimethylammonium Bromide) surfactant, the amount of TiO2 nanoparticles in the composite was twice the value of SDS. The changing of the amount of the reinforcement in the composite according to a maximum curve is described for Al2O3 particles using a cationic surfactant [139].
Using CTAB (Cetyltrimethylammonium Bromide), Liu et al. [137] developed Ni–P–Al2O3 composite coatings. The cationic surfactant prevented the Al2O3 particles from agglomerating in the bath. In parallel, however, it was found that the proportion of Al2O3 in the coating decreased significantly with increasing CTAB concentration. In their work, they conclude by stating that the stability of the sol formed by the bath and Al2O3 is due to the fact that CTAB changes the zeta potential of the particle to a positive value. This finding was not supported by measurements. Comparing these results with the results of Necula et al. [140], it can be clearly seen that the measured zeta potential of Al2O3 particles in the nickel bath shows a decreasing trend as a function of the pH range studied by Liu [137] as well. The zeta potential drops from the initial 10 to −2 mV. Comparing these results with the zeta potential value measured in the sol formed by distilled water- Al2O3, which is 50 ± 2 mV, it can be seen to what extent the presence of Ni2+ in the bath deteriorates the zeta potential value and thus the stability of the sol. The 10–(−2) mV zeta potential measured by Necula explains the formation of agglomeration of the particles in the bath, which was also observed by Liu et al. [137].
In the case of Ni-P-TiC composite preparation, it has been reported that the use of an anionic surfactant (linear alkylbenzene sulfonate; LABS) results in the most TiC in the composite, but the nanoparticles are in the composite as agglomeration. In comparison, with the use of polymeric (polyethylene glycol) and cationic (CTAB) surfactants, the particles did not agglomerate, but the amount of TiC deposited lagged behind the results obtained with the anionic surfactant. Together with this observation, it was found that in the anionic case, the separated structure was composed of many spherical (cauliflower) units. This is because the higher amount of TiC provides more nucleating sites for the deposited Ni-P matrix [141,142].
In many cases, it has been published in the literature that the layer thickness of the deposited composite decreases as the concentration of the surfactant in the bath is increased. One reason for this may be that surfactants reach the surface of the liquid and reach the substrate, which also acts as a catalyst, sooner than Ni2+ ions coming from inside the solution. An additional reason may be that by increasing the concentration of the surfactant, in addition to the decrease in the surface tension of the bath, the formation of micelles [43] must also be expected, which may prevent the escape of hydrogen gas during reduction. During reduction deposition, hydrogen gas near the surface of the substrate also inhibits the deposition of Ni2+ ions on the substrate [143]. One can observe a correlation between the wetting angle (θ) measured on the surface of the particles and the zeta potential (ζ) based on data in the literature [43,144,145].

4. Conclusions

According to the physical state of the matrix, we can group the metal matrix composite methods as follows: techniques using a molten matrix, powder metallurgy and aqueous solution-assisted methods. The interface between the reinforcement and the matrix plays a crucial role. The most important physicochemical parameters are wettability and reactivity, and in the case of the aqueous method, electrokinetic behavior, i.e., the zeta potential. In the casting method and powder metallurgy, it is a well-known fact that the surface of the matrix is covered by an oxide layer. The first step in these methods is to remove the oxide layer or avoid its formation. Using a melted matrix, the second step is modifying the surface of the reinforcement to avoid the chemical reaction between the reinforcement and the matrix and reach better wettability (closer to θ = 0). In the third group, using aqueous solutions, one needs to calculate the zeta potential, which correlates to the contact angle of the reinforcement in the aqueous solution. Zeta potential is responsible for the homogeneous dispersion of the reinforcement in the bath (aqueous solution) and also in the matrix.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

The research work presented is based on the results achieved within the GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00027 “Sustainable operation of the workshop of excellence for the research and development of crystalline and amorphous nanostructured materials” project implemented in the framework of the Szechenyi 2020 program. The realization of this project is supported by the European Union.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Wang, T.; Zou, C.; Chen, Z.; Li, M.; Wang, W.; Li, R.; Kang, H. In situ synthesis of TiB2 particulate reinforced copper matrix composite with a rotating magnetic field. Mater. Des. 2015, 65, 280–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Lekatou, A.; Karantzalis, A.E.; Evangelou, A.; Gousia, V.; Kaptay, G.; Gácsi, Z.; Baumli, P.; Simon, A. Aluminium reinforced by WC and TiC nanoparticles (ex-situ) and aluminide particles (in-situ): Microstructure, wear and corrosion behaviour. Mater. Des. 2015, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Varol, T.; Canakci, A. The effect of flake microstructure on the preparation and properties of Cu-graphite sintered nanocomposites. Powder Metall. Met. Ceram. 2016, 55, 426–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wen, X.; Joshi, R. 2D materials-based metal matrix composites. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2020, 53, 423001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhao, Z.; Bai, P.; Du, W.; Liu, B.; Pan, D.; Das, R.; Liu, C.; Guo, Z. An overview of graphene and its derivatives reinforced metal matrix composites: Preparation, properties and applications. Carbon N. Y. 2020, 170, 302–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Güler, Ö.; Bağci, N. A short review on mechanical properties of graphene reinforced metal matrix composites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 6808–6833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tabandeh-Khorshid, M.; Ajay, K.; Omrani, E.; Kim, C.; Rohatgi, P. Synthesis, characterization, and properties of graphene reinforced metal-matrix nanocomposites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2020, 183, 107664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Saboori, A.; Pavese, M.; Badini, C.; Fino, P. Development of Al- and Cu-based nanocomposites reinforced by graphene nanoplatelets: Fabrication and characterization. Front. Mater. Sci. 2017, 11, 171–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Alipour, M.; Eslami-Farsani, R. Synthesis and characterization of graphene nanoplatelets reinforced AA7068 matrix nanocomposites produced by liquid metallurgy route. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2017, 706, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Shu, R.; Jiang, X.; Shao, Z.; Sun, D.; Zhu, D.; Luo, Z. Fabrication and mechanical properties of MWCNTs and graphene synergetically reinforced Cu–graphite matrix composites. Powder Technol. 2019, 349, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bakshi, S.R.; Lahiri, D.; Agarwal, A. Carbon nanotube reinforced metal matrix composites—A review. Int. Mater. Rev. 2010, 55, 41–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Faria, B.; Guarda, C.; Silvestre, N.; Lopes, J.N.C. CNT-reinforced iron and titanium nanocomposites: Strength and deformation mechanisms. Compos. Part B Eng. 2020, 187, 107836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Azarniya, A.; Safavi, M.; Sovizi, S.; Azarniya, A.; Chen, B.; Madaah Hosseini, H.; Ramakrishna, S. Metallurgical Challenges in Carbon Nanotube-Reinforced Metal Matrix Nanocomposites. Metals 2017, 7, 384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Choudhary, R.; Kumar, A.; Raj, H.; Kumar, S.; Tiwari, S.; Khan, S.; Sharma, V. Fabrication and characterization of stir cast Al2024/SiCp metal matrix composite. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 26, 3316–3320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Saxena, A.; Singh, N.; Kumar, D.; Gupta, P. Effect of Ceramic Reinforcement on the Properties of Metal Matrix Nanocomposites. Mater. Today Proc. 2017, 4, 5561–5570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Taherzadeh Mousavian, R.; Azari Khosroshahi, R.; Yazdani, S.; Brabazon, D.; Boostani, A.F. Fabrication of aluminum matrix composites reinforced with nano- to micrometer-sized SiC particles. Mater. Des. 2016, 89, 58–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Zhang, F.; Du, M.; Fan, K.; Ye, C.; Zhang, B. Fabrication and mechanical properties of network structured titanium alloy matrix composites reinforced with Ti2AlC particulates. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2020, 776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhang, W.W.; Hu, Y.; Wang, Z.; Yang, C.; Zhang, G.Q.; Prashanth, K.G.; Suryanarayana, C. A novel high-strength Al-based nanocomposite reinforced with Ti-based metallic glass nanoparticles produced by powder metallurgy. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2018, 734, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Janovszky, D.; Kristaly, F.; Miko, T.; Sveda, M.; Sycheva, A. Development of novel Ultrafine Grain Cu metal matrix composites reinforced with Ti-Cu-Co-M (M: Ni, Zr) amorphous-nanocrystalline powder. J. Min. Metall. Sect. B Metall. 2018, 54, 349–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Czel, G.; Tomolya, K.; Sveda, M.; Sycheva, A.; Kristaly, F.; Roosz, A.; Janovszky, D. Synthesis and characterization of Zr-based in situ crystal precipitated and liquid phase separated bulk metallic glass composite. J. Non. Cryst. Solids 2017, 458, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Manivannan, I.; Ranganathan, S.; Gopalakannan, S.; Suresh, S.; Nagakarthigan, K.; Jubendradass, R. Tribological and surface behavior of silicon carbide reinforced aluminum matrix nanocomposite. Surf. Interfaces 2017, 8, 127–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Maleki, A.; Taherizadeh, A.R.; Issa, H.K.; Niroumand, B.; Allafchian, A.R.; Ghaei, A. Development of a new magnetic aluminum matrix nanocomposite. Ceram. Int. 2018, 44, 15079–15085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Jabbari, A.H.; Delavar, H.; Sedighi, M. High cycle fatigue behavior of magnesium matrix nanocomposite at elevated temperatures. Mech. Mater. 2020, 142, 103278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. AlMangour, B.; Grzesiak, D.; Yang, J.M. Nanocrystalline TiC-reinforced H13 steel matrix nanocomposites fabricated by selective laser melting. Mater. Des. 2016, 96, 150–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Fathy, A.; Elkady, O.; Abu-Oqail, A. Microstructure, mechanical and wear properties of Cu–ZrO2 nanocomposites. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2017, 33, 2138–2146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chawla, K.K. Composite Materials: Science and Engineering, 3rd ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2012; ISBN 9780387743653. [Google Scholar]
  27. Sharma, D.K.; Mahant, D.; Upadhyay, G. Manufacturing of metal matrix composites: A state of review. Mater. Today Proc. 2019, 26, 506–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sharma, A.K.; Bhandari, R.; Aherwar, A.; Pinca-Bretotean, C. A study of fabrication methods of aluminum based composites focused on stir casting process. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 27, 1608–1612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Guan, Z.; Hwang, I.; Li, X. Highly Concentrated WC Reinforced Ag Matrix Nanocomposite Manufactured by Molten Salt Assisted Stir Casting. Proc. Manuf. 2018, 26, 146–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Chandra Kandpal, B.; Kumar, J.; Singh, H. Manufacturing and technological challenges in Stir casting of metal matrix composites—A Review. Mater. Today Proc. 2018, 5, 5–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kandpal, B.C.; Kumar, J.; Singh, H. Fabrication and characterisation of Al2O3/aluminium alloy 6061 composites fabricated by Stir casting. Mater. Today Proc. 2017, 4, 2783–2792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kumar Koli, D.; Agnihotri Professor, G.; Professor, A. Properties and Characterization of Al-Al2O3 Composites Processed by Casting and Powder Metallurgy Routes (Review) Rajesh Purohit. Int. J. Latest Trends Eng. Technol. 2013, 2, 486–496. [Google Scholar]
  33. Prasad Reddy, A.; Vamsi Krishna, P.; Rao, R.N. Mechanical and Wear Properties of Aluminum-Based Nanocomposites Fabricated through Ultrasonic Assisted Stir Casting. J. Test. Eval. 2020, 48, 20170560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Etemadi, R.; Wang, B.; Pillai, K.M.; Niroumand, B.; Omrani, E.; Rohatgi, P. Pressure infiltration processes to synthesize metal matrix composites–A review of metal matrix composites, the technology and process simulation. Mater. Manuf. Process. 2018, 33, 1261–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Orbulov, I.N.; Németh, Á.; Dobránszky, J. Composite production by pressure infiltration. Mater. Sci. Forum 2008, 589, 137–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Blucher, J.T.; Dobranszky, J.; Narusawa, U. Aluminium double composite structures reinforced with composite wires. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2004, 387–389, 867–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Blucher, J.T.; Narusawa, U.; Katsumata, M.; Nemeth, A. Continuous manufacturing of fiber-reinforced metal matrix composite wires—Technology and product characteristics. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2001, 32, 1759–1766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Cramer, C.L.; Edwards, M.S.; McMurray, J.W.; Elliott, A.M.; Lowden, R.A. Lightweight TiC–(Fe–Al) ceramic–metal composites made in situ by pressureless melt infiltration. J. Mater. Sci. 2019, 54, 12573–12581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Yu, W.H.; Sing, S.L.; Chua, C.K.; Kuo, C.N.; Tian, X.L. Particle-reinforced metal matrix nanocomposites fabricated by selective laser melting: A state of the art review. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2019, 104, 330–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Li, B.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, W.; Huan, Y. Preparation of Ni-W/SiC nanocomposite coatings by electrochemical deposition. J. Alloys Compd. 2017, 702, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Fayyad, E.M.; Hassan, M.K.; Rasool, K.; Mahmoud, K.A.; Mohamed, A.M.A.; Jarjoura, G.; Farhat, Z.; Abdullah, A.M. Novel electroless deposited corrosion—Resistant and anti-bacterial NiP–TiNi nanocomposite coatings. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2019, 369, 323–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Farzaneh, A.; Ehteshamzadeh, M.; Can, M.; Mermer, O.; Okur, S. Effects of SiC Particles Size on Electrochemical Properties of Electroless Ni-P-SiC Nanocomposite Coatings 1. Prot. Met. Phys. Chem. Surf. 2016, 52, 632–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Czagány, M.; Baumli, P. Effect of surfactants on the behavior of the Ni-P bath and on the formation of electroless Ni-P-TiC composite coatings. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2019, 361, 42–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Canakci, A.; Varol, T.; Erdemir, F.; Canakci, B.A. The Effect of Flake Powder Metallurgy on the Microstructure and Densification Behavior of B4C Nanoparticle-Reinforced Al-Cu-Mg Alloy Matrix Nanocomposites. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2016, 41, 1781–1796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ramachandra, M.; Abhishek, A.; Siddeshwar, P.; Bharathi, V. Hardness and Wear Resistance of ZrO2 Nano Particle Reinforced Al Nanocomposites Produced by Powder Metallurgy. Procedia Mater. Sci. 2015, 10, 212–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Casati, R.; Bonollo, F.; Dellasega, D.; Fabrizi, A.; Timelli, G.; Tuissi, A.; Vedani, M. Ex situ Al-Al2O3 ultrafine grained nanocomposites produced via powder metallurgy. J. Alloys Compd. 2015, 615, S386–S388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Toozandehjani, M.; Matori, K.; Ostovan, F.; Abdul Aziz, S.; Mamat, M. Effect of Milling Time on the Microstructure, Physical and Mechanical Properties of Al-Al2O3 Nanocomposite Synthesized by Ball Milling and Powder Metallurgy. Materials 2017, 10, 1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Akbarpour, M.R.; Pouresmaeil, A. The influence of CNTs on the microstructure and strength of Al-CNT composites produced by flake powder metallurgy and hot pressing method. Diam. Relat. Mater. 2018, 88, 6–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Akbarpour, M.R. Analysis of Load Transfer Mechanism in Cu Reinforced with Carbon Nanotubes Fabricated by Powder Metallurgy Route. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2016, 25, 1749–1756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sadooghi, A.; Hashemi, S.J. Investigating the influence of ZnO, CuO, Al2O3 reinforcing nanoparticles on strength and wearing properties of aluminum matrix nanocomposites produced by powder metallurgy process. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kaptay, G. Interfacial Forces in Dispersion Science and Technology. J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 2012, 33, 130–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Kaptay, G. Classification and general derivation of interfacial forces, acting on phases, situated in the bulk, or at the interface of other phases. J. Mater. Sci. 2005, 40, 2125–2131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kaptay, G. A coherent set of model equations for various surface and interface energies in systems with liquid and solid metals and alloys. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2020, 283, 102212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Eustathopoulos, N.; Nicholas, M.G.; Drevet, B.B. Wettability at High Temperatures; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1999; Volume 3, ISBN 0080421466. [Google Scholar]
  55. Delannay, F.; Froyen, L.; Deruyttere, A. The wetting of solids by molten metals and its relation to the preparation of metal-matrix composites. J. Mater. Sci. 1987, 22, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kaptay, G. Interfacial phenomena during melt processing of ceramic particle-reinforced metal matrix composites part I. Introduction (incorporation) of solid particles into melts. Mater. Sci. Forum 1996, 215–216, 459–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Asthana, R.; Tewari, S.N. Interfacial and capillary phenomena in solidification processing of metal-matrix composites. Compos. Manuf. 1993, 4, 3–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kaptay, G. Interfacial Aspects to Produce Particulate Reinforced Metal Matrix Composites. In Affordable Metal-Matrix Composites for High Performance Applications II; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013; pp. 71–99. [Google Scholar]
  59. Hashim, J.; Looney, L.; Hashmi, M.S.J. Metal matrix composites: Production by the stir casting method. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1999, 92–93, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Li, X.; Yang, Y.; Cheng, X. Ultrasonic-assisted fabrication of metal matrix nanocomposites. J. Mater. Sci. 2004, 39, 3211–3212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Rajan, T.P.D.; Pillai, R.M.; Pai, B.C. Reinforcement coatings and interfaces in aluminium metal matrix composites. J. Mater. Sci. 1998, 33, 3491–3503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Takács, D.; Sziráki, L.; Török, T.I.; Sólyom, J.; Gácsi, Z.; Gál-Solymos, K. Effects of pre-treatments on the corrosion properties of electroless Ni-P layers deposited on AlMg2 alloy. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2007, 201, 4526–4535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Czagány, M.; Baumli, P.; Kaptay, G. The influence of the phosphorous content and heat treatment on the nano-micro-structure, thickness and micro-hardness of electroless Ni-P coatings on steel. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2017, 423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Xia, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Mao, Z.; Shang, B. Fabrication of fiber-reinforced metal-matrix composites by variable pressure infiltration. Metall. Trans. B 1992, 23, 295–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rams, J.; Ureña, A.; Escalera, M.D.; Sánchez, M. Electroless nickel coated short carbon fibres in aluminium matrix composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2007, 38, 566–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ureña, A.; Rams, J.; Escalera, M.D.; Sánchez, M. Effect of copper electroless coatings on the interaction between a molten Al-Si-Mg alloy and coated short carbon fibres. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2007, 38, 1947–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Alten, A.; Erzi, E.; Gürsoy, Ö.; Hapçı Ağaoğlu, G.; Dispinar, D.; Orhan, G. Production and mechanical characterization of Ni-coated carbon fibers reinforced Al-6063 alloy matrix composites. J. Alloys Compd. 2019, 787, 543–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. León, C.A.; Drew, R.A.L. The influence of nickel coating on the wettability of aluminum on ceramics. In Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2002; Volume 33, pp. 1429–1432. [Google Scholar]
  69. Kretz, F.; Gácsi, Z.; Kovács, J.; Pieczonka, T. The electroless deposition of nickel on SiC particles for aluminum matrix composites. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2004, 180–181, 575–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Trespaillé-Barrau, P.; Suéry, M. Microstructural and mechanical characterisation of aluminium matrix composites reinforced with Ni and NiP coated SiC particles via liquid processing. Mater. Sci. Technol. 1994, 10, 497–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Huang, C.W.; Huang, Y.F.; Aoh, J.N. Strengthening mechanisms of aluminum matrix composite containing Cu-coated SiC particles produced by friction stir processing. J. Chinese Inst. Eng. Trans. Chin. Inst. Eng. A 2019, 42, 653–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Huang, C.-W.; Aoh, J.-N. Friction Stir Processing of Copper-Coated SiC Particulate-Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composite. Materials 2018, 11, 599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Abolkassem, S.A.; Elkady, O.A.; Elsayed, A.H.; Hussein, W.A.; Yehya, H.M. Effect of consolidation techniques on the properties of Al matrix composite reinforced with nano Ni-coated SiC. Results Phys. 2018, 9, 1102–1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zou, G.; Cao, M.; Lin, H.; Jin, H.; Kang, Y.; Chen, Y. Nickel layer deposition on SiC nanoparticles by simple electroless plating and its dielectric behaviors. Powder Technol. 2006, 168, 84–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Körner, C.; Schäff, W.; Ottmüller, M.; Singer, R.F. Carbon Long Fiber Reinforced Magnesium Alloys. Adv. Eng. Mater. 2000, 2, 327–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Xu, Q.G.; Guo, L.W.; Zhang, L.; Liu, H. Wettability of zirconium-coated alumina by molten aluminum. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2016, 302, 150–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Kaptay, G.; Báder, E.; Bolyán, L. Interfacial forces and energies relevant to production of metal matrix composites. Mater. Sci. Forum 2000, 329, 151–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Ip, S.W.; Sridhar, R.; Toguri, J.M.; Stephenson, T.F.; Warner, A.E.M. Wettability of nickel coated graphite by aluminum. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 1998, 244, 31–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Silva, V.L.; Fernandes, C.M.; Senos, A.M.R. Copper wettability on tungsten carbide surfaces. Ceram. Int. 2016, 42, 1191–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Kong, B.; Fan, T.; Ru, J. Improved wetting and thermal properties of graphite-Cu composite by Cr-solution immersion method. Diam. Relat. Mater. 2016, 65, 191–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Zhao, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Shen, P. Reactive wetting and infiltration of polycrystalline WC by molten Zr2Cu alloy. Scr. Mater. 2011, 64, 229–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Lin, Q.; Sui, R. Wetting of carbide ceramics (B4C, SiC, TiC and ZrC) by molten Ni at 1753 K. J. Alloys Compd. 2015, 649, 505–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Wang, H.; Yang, J.; Meng, J.; Yang, Y.; Zhou, Y. Wettability and interfacial reactions of a low Hf-containing nickel-based superalloy on Al2O3-based, SiO2-based, ZrSiO4, and CoAl2O4 substrates. Ceram. Int. 2020, 46, 22057–22066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Roy, R.R.; Sahai, Y. Coalescence behavior of aluminum alloy drops in molten salts. Mater. Trans. JIM 1997, 38, 995–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Juhasz, K.L.; Baumli, P.; Kaptay, G. Fabrication of carbon fibre reinforced, aluminium matrix composite by potassium iodide (KI)—Potassium hexafluoro-titanate (K2TiF6) flux. Materwiss. Werksttech. 2012, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Baumli, P.; Sychev, J.; Budai, I.; Szabo, J.T.; Kaptay, G. Fabrication of carbon fiber reinforced aluminum matrix composites via a titanium-ion containing flux. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2013, 44, 47–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. López, V.H.; Kennedy, A.R. Flux-assisted wetting and spreading of Al on TiC. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2006, 298, 356–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Kennedy, A.R.; Karantzalis, A.E. The incorporation of ceramic particles in molten aluminium and the relationship to contact angle data. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 1999, 264, 122–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Rocher, J.P.; Quenisset, J.M.; Naslain, R. Wetting improvement of carbon or silicon carbide by aluminium alloys based on a K2ZrF6 surface treatment: Application to composite material casting. J. Mater. Sci. 1989, 24, 2697–2703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Lekatou, A.; Gkikas, N.; Karantzalis, A.E.; Kaptay, G.; Gacsi, Z.; Baumli, P.; Simon, A. Effect of Wetting Agent and Carbide Volume Fraction on the Wear Response of Aluminum Matrix Composites Reinforced by WC Nanoparticles and Aluminide Particles. Arch. Metall. Mater. 2017, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Mohan, P.; Azhagesan, N.; Sivapragash, M. The preparation and mechanical properties of Al metal matrix composites by in-situ method. Int. J. Comput. Aided Eng. Technol. 2018, 10, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Birol, Y. In situ synthesis of Al-TiCp composites by reacting K2TiF6 and particulate graphite in molten aluminium. J. Alloys Compd. 2008, 454, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Mahamani, A.; Jayasree, A.; Mounika, K.; Prasad, K.R.; Sakthivelan, N. Evaluation of mechanical properties of AA6061-TiB2/ZrB2 in-situ metal matrix composites fabricated by K2TiF6-KBF4-K2ZrF6 reaction system. Int. J. Microstruct. Mater. Prop. 2015, 10, 185–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Mallikarjuna, C.; Shashidhara, S.M. The Precipitation Of TiB2 in Aluminum Alloy Melts from the Exothermic Reaction of K2TiF6 and KBF4 Halide Salts and Evaluation of Its Mechanical Properties. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2007; Newswood Limited: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2007; pp. 189–194. ISBN 9789889867164. [Google Scholar]
  95. Kim, D.Y.; Lee, Y.J.; Lee, T.H.; Lee, K.H.; Nersisyan, H.H.; Han, M.H.; Jeong, S.U.; Kang, K.S.; Bae, K.K.; Lee, J.H. Aluminothermic reduction of K2TiF6 to prepare TiC, TiB2, and TiN nanoparticles. Combust. Sci. Technol. 2014, 186, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Gupta, R.; Chaudhari, G.P.; Daniel, B.S.S. Strengthening mechanisms in ultrasonically processed aluminium matrix composite with in-situ Al3Ti by salt addition. Compos. Part B Eng. 2018, 140, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Li, D.; Li, B.; Du, S.; Zhang, W. Synthesis of a novel Ni–B/YSZ metal-ceramic composite coating via single-step electrodeposition at different current density. Ceram. Int. 2019, 45, 24884–24893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Li, B.; Zhang, W.; Huan, Y.; Dong, J. Synthesis and characterization of Ni-B/Al2O3 nanocomposite coating by electrodeposition using trimethylamine borane as boron precursor. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2018, 337, 186–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Ratajski, T.; Kalemba-Rec, I.; Indyka, P.; Ledwig, P.; Szczerba, M.J.; Dubiel, B. Effect of PDDA surfactant on the microstructure and properties of electrodeposited SiO2/Ni nanocomposites. Mater. Charact. 2020, 163, 110229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Qu, N.S.; Zhu, D.; Chan, K.C. Fabrication of Ni-CeO2 nanocomposite by electrodeposition. Scr. Mater. 2006, 54, 1421–1425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Rasooli, A.; Safavi, M.S.; Babaei, F.; Ansarian, A. Electrodeposited Ni–Fe–Cr2O3 nanocomposite coatings: A survey of influences of Cr2O3 nanoparticles loadings in the electrolyte. J. Alloys Compd. 2020, 822, 153725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Fayyad, E.M.; Abdullah, A.M.; Mohamed, A.M.A.; Jarjoura, G.; Farhat, Z.; Hassan, M.K. Effect of electroless bath composition on the mechanical, chemical, and electrochemical properties of new NiP–C3N4 nanocomposite coatings. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2019, 362, 239–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Dhakal, D.R.; Gyawali, G.; Kshetri, Y.K.; Choi, J.H.; Lee, S.W. Microstructural and electrochemical corrosion properties of electroless Ni-P-TaC composite coating. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2020, 381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Hanachi, M.; Seyedraoufi, Z.S.; Abouei, V. Advanced Ceramics Progress Investigation of Microstructure, Hardness, and Corrosion Resistance of Ni-P-GO Electroless Nanocomposite Coating on AZ31D Alloy Surface. Adv. Ceram. Prog. 2020, 6, 55–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Gholizadeh-Gheshlaghi, M.; Seifzadeh, D.; Shoghi, P.; Habibi-Yangjeh, A. Electroless Ni-P/nano-WO3 coating and its mechanical and corrosion protection properties. J. Alloys Compd. 2018, 769, 149–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Akyol, A.; Algul, H.; Uysal, M.; Akbulut, H.; Alp, A. A novel approach for wear and corrosion resistance in the electroless Ni-P-W alloy with CNFs co-depositions. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2018, 453, 482–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. MacLean, M.; Farhat, Z.; Jarjoura, G.; Fayyad, E.; Abdullah, A.; Hassan, M. Fabrication and investigation of the scratch and indentation behaviour of new generation Ni-P-nano-NiTi composite coating for oil and gas pipelines. Wear 2019, 426–427, 265–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. León-Patiño, C.A.; García-Guerra, J.; Aguilar-Reyes, E.A. Tribological characterization of heat-treated Ni-P and Ni-P-Al2O3 composite coatings by reciprocating sliding tests. Wear 2019, 426–427, 330–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Hashemi, S.H.; Ashrafi, A. Characterisations of low phosphorus electroless Ni and composite electroless Ni-P-SiC coatings on A356 aluminium alloy. Trans. Inst. Met. Finish. 2018, 96, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Sudagar, J.; Lian, J.; Sha, W. Electroless nickel, alloy, composite and nano coatings—A critical review. J. Alloys Compd. 2013, 571, 183–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. Kaya, B.; Gulmez, T.; Demirkol, M. Study on the electroless Ni-B nano-composite coatings. AIP 2009, 1127, 62–73. [Google Scholar]
  112. Wang, L.Y.; Tu, J.P.; Chen, W.X.; Wang, Y.C.; Liu, X.K.; Olk, C.; Cheng, D.H.; Zhang, X.B. Friction and wear behavior of electroless Ni-based CNT composite coatings. Wear 2003, 254, 1289–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Xu, H.; Yang, Z.; Li, M.K.; Shi, Y.L.; Huang, Y.; Li, H.L. Synthesis and properties of electroless Ni-P-Nanometer Diamond composite coatings. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2005, 191, 161–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Chintada, V.B.; Koona, R. Preparation and properties of composite electroless Ni-P-ZnO coatings. Mater. Res. Innov. 2020, 24, 67–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Franco, M.; Sha, W.; Aldic, G.; Malinov, S.; Çimenoğlu, H. Effect of Reinforcement and Heat Treatment on Elevated Temperature Sliding of Electroless Ni–P/SiC Composite Coatings; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  116. Dong, D.; Chen, X.H.; Xiao, W.T.; Yang, G.B.; Zhang, P.Y. Preparation and properties of electroless Ni-P-SiO2 composite coatings. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2009, 255, 7051–7055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Gadhari, P.; Sahoo, P. Optimization of Coating Process Parameters to Improve Microhardness of Ni-P-TiO2 Composite Coatings. Mater. Today Proc. 2015, 2, 2367–2374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Zielińska, K.; Stankiewicz, A.; Szczygieł, I. Electroless deposition of Ni-P-nano-ZrO2 composite coatings in the presence of various types of surfactants. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2012, 377, 362–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Hamid, Z.A.; El Badry, S.A.; Aal, A.A. Electroless deposition and characterization of Ni-P-WC composite alloys. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2007, 201, 5948–5953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Dhakal, D.R.; Gyawali, G.; Kshetri, Y.K.; Choi, J.-H.; Lee, S.W. Influence of SiC and TiC nanoparticles reinforcement on the microstructure, tribological, and scratch resistance behavior of electroless Ni-P coatings. Nanotechnology 2020, 31, 104001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Rana, A.R.K.; Farhat, Z. Preparation and tribological characterization of graphene incorporated electroless Ni-P composite coatings. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2019, 369, 334–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Zadeh, K.M.; Shakoor, R.A.; Radwan, A.B. Structural and Electrochemical Properties of Electrodeposited Ni-P nanocomposite Coatings Containing Mixed Ceramic Oxide Particles. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2016, 11, 7020–7030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Salari Mehr, M.; Akbari, A.; Damerchi, E. Electrodeposited Ni-B/SiC micro- and nano-composite coatings: A comparative study. J. Alloys Compd. 2019, 782, 477–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Xiang, L.; Shen, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Bai, W.; Nie, C. One-step electrodeposited Ni-graphene composite coating with excellent tribological properties. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2019, 373, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Wasekar, N.P.; Bathini, L.; Sundararajan, G. Tribological Behavior of Pulsed Electrodeposited Ni-W/SiC Nanocomposites. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2018, 27, 5236–5245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Li, B.; Zhang, W. Microstructural, surface and electrochemical properties of pulse electrodeposited Ni–W/Si3N4 nanocomposite coating. Ceram. Int. 2018, 44, 19907–19918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. He, Y.; Wang, S.; Sun, W.; Reed, P.A.S.; Walsh, F.C. Synthesis and properties of electrodeposited Ni-Co/WS2 nanocomposite coatings. Coatings 2019, 9, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  128. Liu, C.; Wei, D.; Xu, R.; Mai, Y.; Zhang, L.; Jie, X. Electroplated Co-Ni/WS2 Composite Coating with Excellent Tribological and Anticorrosion Performance. Tribol. Trans. 2020, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Góral, A. Nanoscale structural defects in electrodeposited Ni/Al2O3 composite coatings. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2017, 319, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Pavlatou, E.A.; Stroumbouli, M.; Gyftou, P.; Spyrellis, N. Hardening effect induced by incorporation of SiC particles in nickel electrodeposits. J. Appl. Electrochem. 2006, 36, 385–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Mahalingam, T.; Raja, M.; Thanikaikarasan, S.; Sanjeeviraja, C.; Velumani, S.; Moon, H.; Kim, Y.D. Electrochemical deposition and characterization of Ni-P alloy thin films. Mater. Charact. 2007, 58, 800–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Gwon, Y.G.; Lee, J.W.; Shin, H.C. Template-free, single-step electrochemical synthesis of nickel phosphide thin films with one-dimensional nano-pore channels. J. Appl. Electrochem. 2020, 50, 139–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. He, Y.D.; Fu, H.F.; Li, X.G.; Gao, W. Microstructure and properties of mechanical attrition enhanced electroless Ni-P plating on magnesium alloy. Scr. Mater. 2008, 58, 504–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Cheong, W.J.; Luan, B.L.; Shoesmith, D.W. Protective coating on Mg AZ91D alloy—The effect of electroless nickel (EN) bath stabilizers on corrosion behaviour of Ni-P deposit. Corros. Sci. 2007, 49, 1777–1798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  135. Cheong, W.J.; Luan, B.L.; Shoesmith, D.W. The effects of stabilizers on the bath stability of electroless Ni deposition and the deposit. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2004, 229, 282–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Balaraju, J.N.; Sankara Narayanan, T.S.N.; Seshadri, S.K. Electroless Ni-P composite coatings. J. Appl. Electrochem. 2003, 33, 807–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Liu, D.; Yan, Y.; Lee, K.; Yu, J. Effect of surfactant on the alumina dispersion and corrosion behavior of electroless Ni-P-Al2O3 composite coatings. Mater. Corros. 2009, 60, 690–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Tamilarasan, T.R.; Rajendran, R.; Rajagopal, G.; Sudagar, J. Effect of surfactants on the coating properties and corrosion behaviour of Ni-P-nano-TiO2 coatings. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2015, 276, 320–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Shahbazi, H.; Mahdavi, M.; Alirezaei, S.; Tabatabaei, F. Corrosion behavior of Ni-P-Ag and Ni-P-Al2O3 composite coatings. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 085076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Necula, B.S.; Apachitei, I.; Fratila-Apachitei, L.E.; Teodosiu, C.; Duszczyk, J. Stability of nano-/microsized particles in deionized water and electroless nickel solutions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2007, 314, 514–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Afroukhteh, S.; Dehghanian, C.; Emamy, M. Corrosion behavior of Ni–P/nano-TiC composite coating prepared in electroless baths containing different types of surfactant. Prog. Nat. Sci. Mater. Int. 2012, 22, 480–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Afroukhteh, S.; Dehghanian, C.; Emamy, M. Preparation of the Ni-P composite coating co-deposited by nano TiC particles and evaluation of it’s corrosion property. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2012, 258, 2597–2601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Chen, B.H.; Hong, L.; Ma, Y.; Ko, T.M. Effects of surfactants in an electroless nickel-plating bath on the properties of Ni-P alloy deposits. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2002, 41, 2668–2678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Amaral, M.; Lopes, M.A.; Santos, J.D.; Silva, R.F. Wettability and surface charge of Si3N4-bioglass composites in contact with simulated physiological liquids. Biomaterials 2002, 23, 4123–4129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Nishizawa, K.; Toriyama, M.; Suzuki, T.; Kawamoto, Y.; Yokogawa, Y.; Nagae, H. Effects of the surface wettability and zeta potential of bioceramics on the adhesiveness of anchorage-dependent animal cells. J. Ferment. Bioeng. 1993, 75, 435–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Methods and interfacial phenomena of metal matrix composite preparation.
Figure 1. Methods and interfacial phenomena of metal matrix composite preparation.
Metals 10 01400 g001
Figure 2. Interpretation of contact angle: (a) non-wetting; (b) wetting; (c) in case of perfect wetting.
Figure 2. Interpretation of contact angle: (a) non-wetting; (b) wetting; (c) in case of perfect wetting.
Metals 10 01400 g002
Figure 3. The reinforcement (C-fiber) and the matrix (aluminum) position in the case of a “non-wetting” and a “perfect wetting” system.
Figure 3. The reinforcement (C-fiber) and the matrix (aluminum) position in the case of a “non-wetting” and a “perfect wetting” system.
Metals 10 01400 g003
Table 1. The wettability of the different materials by molten metal matrix.
Table 1. The wettability of the different materials by molten metal matrix.
Liquid PhaseSolid PhaseTemperatureContact AngleReference
AlAl2O3700 °C140°[76]
Al (oxide layer free)Al2O3710 °C63°[77]
AlZr700 °C~10°[76]
Al670 nm thick Zr-coated alumina700 °C20°[76]
Al (oxide layer free)SiO2710 °C23°[77]
Al (oxide layer free)TiB2710 °C[77]
Al (oxide layer free)TiB2710 °C10°[77]
AlGraphite740 °C140°[78]
AlNi740 °C45°[78]
AlNi-coated graphite740 °C27°–45°[78]
CuWC1080 °C25°[79]
CuWC1133 °C[77]
CuWC-Co1080 °C[79]
CuGraphite1227 °C140°[80]
CuCr3C21227 °C[80]
Zr2CuWC1150 °C28°[81]
NiB4C1480 °C102°[82]
NiZrC1480 °C73°[82]
NiTiC1480 °C25.5°[82]
NiSiC1480 °C104°[82]
Ni-based superalloyAl2O3-based1500 °C141°[83]
Ni-based superalloySiO2-based1500 °C143°[83]
Ni-based superalloyZrSiO41500 °C136°[83]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Baumli, P. Interfacial Aspects of Metal Matrix Composites Prepared from Liquid Metals and Aqueous Solutions: A Review. Metals 2020, 10, 1400. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10101400

AMA Style

Baumli P. Interfacial Aspects of Metal Matrix Composites Prepared from Liquid Metals and Aqueous Solutions: A Review. Metals. 2020; 10(10):1400. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10101400

Chicago/Turabian Style

Baumli, Peter. 2020. "Interfacial Aspects of Metal Matrix Composites Prepared from Liquid Metals and Aqueous Solutions: A Review" Metals 10, no. 10: 1400. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10101400

APA Style

Baumli, P. (2020). Interfacial Aspects of Metal Matrix Composites Prepared from Liquid Metals and Aqueous Solutions: A Review. Metals, 10(10), 1400. https://doi.org/10.3390/met10101400

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop