## 3 Results  
The results section details the findings from metallographic tests, surfacing parameters analysis, dilution factor assessments, and hardness tests. These analyses provide crucial insights into the microstructural characteristics, optimal surfacing conditions, material mixing ratios, and mechanical properties such as hardness. Together, these results contribute to a comprehensive evaluation of the surfacing process and its impact on the final properties of the welded or surfaced material [25]. Figure 4 shows selected samples during metallographic measurements. It is noticeable that the shape of the stresses varies considerably. Table 5 presents a summary of the parameters of the samples in Figure 4 in order from largest to smallest dilution factor value. The metallographic tests were carried out on a Zeiss Smart Zoom 5 microscope (Warsaw, Poland). Figure 4: Metallographic examples of selected samples. Figure 3: Second stage of sample preparation for testing. The results show that the same wire feed rate of 3.9 m/min occurred for samples 1, 11, and 18, and that there is also overlap in the first two samples between the arc current of 160 A and the hardfacing speed of 0.50 m/min. The results of the dilution factor for all the samples are shown in Table 6.  
The highest dilution factor among all the surfacing tests carried out was achieved by test number 12 (Figure 5) and the lowest by test number 14 (Figure 6). The detailed parameters of these two trials are shown in Table 7. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Sample No.** & **D [\(-\)]** \\ \hline  
\hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Results of measurement of the dilution factor of all samples. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample No.** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Arc** \\ **Intensity** \\ **[A]** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Arc Voltage [V]** \\ **Arc Voltage [V]** \\ **Speed [m/min]** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Plasma** \\ **Surfacing** \\ **Material [m/min]** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Feed Speed of** \\ **from Work Surface** \\ **[m/min]** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Torch Distance** \\ **from Work Surface** \\ **D [\(-\)]** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
1 & 160 & 28 & 0.50 & 3.9 & 12 & 0.430 \\ \hline
11 & 160 & 32 & 0.50 & 3.9 & 20 & 0.373 \\ \hline
18 & 140 & 35 & 0.25 & 3.9 & 16 & 0.303 \\ \hline
15 & 120 & 35 & 0.50 & 2.5 & 20 & 0.288 \\ \hline
16 & 140 & 28 & 0.75 & 2.5 & 20 & 0.265 \\ \hline
6 & 120 & 35 & 0.75 & 39 & 12 & 0.093 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Summary of parameters of selected samples. Figure 5: Cross-section of specimen number 12. (The green and red lines are the areas of the surface and the yellow lines are the heights). Figure 6: Cross-section of specimen number 14. (The green and yellow lines are the surface areas, while the red lines are the heights). By comparing the parameters and dilution factor results for test pieces 12 and 14, it can be seen that the arc intensity of the plasma surfacing process has a strong influence on the shape of the padding weld. A higher arc intensity can result in a faster melting of the deposit, which can be advantageous in the case of hard-welded materials such as C45 steel. In addition, as test No. 14 shows, insufficient melting of the material can occur if the surfacing speed is too low, leading to poor coating quality and poor adhesion to the substrate. Excessively high surfacing and supplementary material feed rates can result in uneven material deposition, excessive spatter, and loss of process control, leading to an imperfect coating and reduced process efficiency. Therefore, it is important too maintain appropriate process parameters to ensure the quality and efficiency of plasma surfacing. Hardness measurements were performed on a FM-800 micro hardness tester in accordance with PN-EN ISO 6507-1:2018 [26] and PN-EN ISO-9015-2:2016 [27].