P. Rückeshäuser¹, S. Kolozsvari², P. Polcik², K. Fadenberger³, K. Boebel³, H. Riedl^1
1 TU Wien, Vienna, Austria
²Plansee Composite Materials GmbH, Lechbruck am See, Germany
³Oerlikon Surface Solutions AG, Balzers, Liechtenstein
The interactions between hydrogen and materials are subjects of significant interest in both research and industry. Consequently, charging samples with hydrogen and detecting hydrogen are crucial aspects of this field. Currently, there are two primary methods for hydrogen charging: electrochemical charging and pressurized hydrogen charging.
In electrochemical charging, atomic hydrogen is produced through the dissociation of water, while in pressurized charging, hydrogen is introduced in gaseous form and subsequently thermally dissociated. Although these two methods are based on fundamentally different principles, they ultimately achieve the same goal: the absorption and permeation of atomic hydrogen in the sample. However, most studies tend to focus on either one method or the other. Thus, it becomes essential to explore the correlation between these methods and identify equivalent charging conditions for specific hydrogen permeation characteristics.
In this study, we conducted hydrogen permeation tests using both electrochemical and pressurized setups. We applied nitride such as TiN or CrN coatings to steel substrates using physical vapor deposition (PVD) techniques such as cathodic arc evaporation and HiPIMS and compared the permeation performance of the two charging methods. This comparison involved determining key parameters such as diffusion coefficients and permeation reduction factors. Additionally, we characterized the coating properties using secondary electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, and linear sweep voltammetry.