https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1646-4443
![Sample our Physical Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110819/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Physical-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Thin film coatings are extensively used to enhance the physical and chemical properties of various materials by depositing a thin layer of coatings of different materials onto various substrates. Several deposition processes are available which are widely adopted by many manufacturing industries to meet such demands. To exploit the fullest potential of those deposition processes, it is often advised to operate them with the optimal combination of process parameters. In this research, a modified PROMETHEE (preference ranking organisation method for enrichment evaluation) method as an effective multi-objective optimisation tool is applied for identifying the optimal parametric combinations of two thin film deposition processes: silicon carbonitride thin film coating using a thermal chemical vapour deposition process and zirconium-containing diamond-like-carbon thin film coating using an unbalanced magnetron sputtering process. The derived optimal parametric combinations are validated based on developed regression equations, which exhibit that the proposed approach can attain better response values as compared to other popular optimisation techniques. The analysis of variance results and the developed surface plots further illustrate the influence of various deposition parameters on coating quality.
Abbreviations
| PROMETHEE | = | Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation |
| CVD | = | Chemical Vapor Deposition |
| PVD | = | Physical Vapor Deposition |
| PECVD | = | Plasma-Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition |
| MCDM | = | Multi-Criteria Decision Making |
| RSM | = | Response Surface Methodology |
| PSO | = | Particle Swarm Optimization |
| GA | = | Genetic Algorithm |
| GRA | = | Grey Relational Analysis |
| DR | = | Deposition Rate |
| SR | = | Surface Roughness |
| CdS | = | Cadmium Sulphide |
| DLC | = | Diamond-like-Carbon |
| Zr-DLC | = | Zirconium-Containing Diamond-like-Carbon |
| ZnO | = | Zinc Oxide |
| TiC-N | = | Titanium Nitride Carbide |
| TiN | = | Titanium Nitride |
| TiO2 | = | Titanium Dioxide |
| DoE | = | Design of Experiment |
| TOPSIS | = | Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution |
| SiCN | = | Silicon Carbonitride |
| ANOVA | = | Analysis Of Variance |
| Pj(a,b) | = | Preference Function |
| ρ+(a) | = | Positive Outranking Flow |
| ρ–(a) | = | Negative Outranking Flow |
| wi | = | Weights |
| NOF | = | Net Outranking Flow |
| H | = | Hardness |
| YM | = | Young’s Modulus |
| G-peak | = | Graphite-like Carbon Peak |
| D-peak | = | Defective Carbon Peak |
| CoF | = | Coefficient of Friction |
| WR | = | Wear Rate |
| WCA | = | Water Contact Angle |
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to the experts who have helped in the MCDM process. The author would also like to thank Kumar et al. [6], and Yang and Huang [7] for giving permission to use their experimental data for this analysis.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).