Comparative analysis reveals CMT cladding outperforms TIG and MIG in corrosion resistance and mechanical strength.
This study conducted a comparative evaluation of ERNiCrMo-4 filler alloy cladded onto AISI 316 stainless steel using Tungsten Inert Gas (TIG), Metal Inert Gas (MIG), and Cold Metal Transfer (CMT) cladding processes. A comprehensive analysis was performed, assessing surface morphology, cross-sectional microstructure, mechanical performance, and electrochemical behavior. The microstructural analysis showed that CMT cladding resulted in the finest grain structure followed by TIG cladding, while MIG cladding resulted in more coarse grains due to higher heat input and increased dilution. TIG cladding exhibited the highest carbide precipitation, contributing to localized hardening. The mechanical evaluation showed that CMT cladding achieved the highest tensile and impact strength, attributed to fine grains, high dislocation density, and strain hardening effects, followed by TIG and MIG cladding. However, in microhardness testing, TIG cladding depicted the highest values, due to significant carbide formation, followed by MIG cladding, while CMT cladding exhibited the lowest hardness due to minimal carbide precipitation. The electrochemical analysis showed that CMT cladding exhibited superior corrosion resistance because of its refined microstructure with minimal carbide precipitation, and thus, higher resistance to intergranular corrosion. In contrast, TIG cladding, with its extensive carbide formation, showed higher susceptibility to intergranular attack, while MIG cladding, though moderately resistant, was affected by higher dilution and coarser grains, making it less corrosion-resistant than CMT cladding. Overall, CMT cladding outperformed TIG and MIG cladding in terms of tensile strength, impact resistance, and corrosion protection, whereas TIG cladding excelled in microhardness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kavishwar et al. (2025) studied this question.