Professional Documents
Culture Documents
com
CERAMICS
INTERNATIONAL
Department of Mechanical Engineering, St. Mother Theresa Engineering College, Thoothukudi 628102, Tamil Nadu, India
b
Centre for Manufacturing Sciences, National Engineering College, Kovilpatti 628 503. Tamil Nadu, India
c
Department of Production Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli 620015, Tamil Nadu, India
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Renganayagi Varatharaj College of Engineering, Sivakasi 626128, Tamil Nadu, India
Received 17 April 2012; received in revised form 12 July 2012; accepted 12 July 2012
Available online 24 July 2012
Abstract
The tribological behaviour of powder metallurgy-processed Al 20245 wt% SiCx wt% graphite (x0, 5, and 10) hybrid composites
was investigated using a pin-on-disc equipment. An orthogonal array, the signal-to-noise ratio and analysis of variance were employed
to study the optimal testing parameters using Taguchi design of experiments. The analysis showed that the wear loss increased with
increasing sliding distance and load but was reduced with increased graphite content. The coefcient of friction increased with increasing
applied load and sliding speed. The composites with 5 wt% graphite had the lowest wear loss and coefcients of friction because of the
self-lubricating effect of graphite. Conversely, due to the effect of the softness of graphite, there was an increase in wear loss and the
coefcient of friction in composites with 10 wt% graphite content. The morphology of the worn-out surfaces and wear debris was
examined to understand the wear mechanisms. The wear mechanism is dictated by the formation of both a delamination layer and
mechanically mixed layer (MML). The overall results indicated that aluminium ceramic composites can be considered as an outstanding
material where high strength and wear-resistant components are of major importance, particularly in the aerospace and automotive
engineering sectors.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd and Techna Group S.r.l. All rights reserved.
Keywords: B. Composite; C. Friction; C. Wear resistance; D. SiC
1. Introduction
In recent years, aluminium metal matrix composites
(AMMCs) have been used in the aerospace, aircraft and
automotive industries, particularly for lightweight cylinder
liners because AMMCs have many advantages, including
higher strength, higher wear resistance, higher thermal
conductivity and lower coefcient of friction. [1,3,7,9]. An
improvement in the tribological properties of AMMCs has
n
0272-8842/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd and Techna Group S.r.l. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2012.07.041
1170
Table 1
Chemical composition of the matrix alloy.
Element
Cu
Mg
Fe
Mn
Si
Cr
Zn
Al
Content%
4.0
1.8
0.5
0.25
0.5
0.25
0.2
Balance
1171
Fig. 1. SEM micrographs of as-received (a) Aluminium powders (b) SiC particles and (c) Gr particles.
Table 2
Details of reinforcements.
Reinforcement
Density(g/cm3)
SiC
Gr
4353
4360
3.22
2.092.23
Table 3
Mechanical properties of the samples.
Sample no.
Composition (wt%)
Density (g/cm3)
Hardness (BHN)
1
2
3
Al5% SiC
Al5%SiC5% Gr
Al5% SiC10% Gr
2.89
2.84
2.82
55
53
51
1172
Units
Level I
Level II
Level III
A: Gr reinforcement
B: load
C: sliding distance
D: sliding speed
wt%
N
m
m/s
0
10
1000
1
5
15
2000
1.5
10
20
3000
2
Table 5
Experimental design using L27 (213) orthogonal array.
L27 (213)
Friction co-efcient
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
20
20
20
10
10
10
15
15
15
20
20
20
10
10
10
15
15
15
20
20
20
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1000
2000
3000
1.0
1.5
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.5
1.5
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.0
0.0095
0.0110
0.0118
0.0108
0.0134
0.0229
0.0098
0.0163
0.0182
0.0042
0.0048
0.0153
0.0048
0.0129
0.0154
0.0078
0.0121
0.0140
0.0022
0.0119
0.0121
0.0086
0.0092
0.0148
0.0084
0.0126
0.0185
40.4455
39.1721
38.5624
39.3315
37.4579
32.8033
40.1755
35.7562
34.7986
47.5350
46.3752
36.3062
46.3752
37.7882
36.2496
42.1581
38.3443
37.0774
53.1515
38.4891
38.3443
41.3100
40.7242
36.5948
41.5144
37.9926
34.6566
0.153
0.174
0.182
0.192
0.206
0.162
0.216
0.191
0.202
0.158
0.171
0.144
0.159
0.151
0.154
0.198
0.211
0.216
0.172
0.166
0.176
0.181
0.184
0.187
0.193
0.214
0.228
16.30617
15.18902
14.79857
14.33398
13.72266
15.8097
13.31092
14.37933
13.89297
16.02686
15.34008
16.83275
15.97206
16.42046
16.24959
14.0667
13.51435
13.31092
15.28943
15.59784
15.08975
14.84643
14.70364
14.56317
14.28885
13.39172
12.8413
1173
Table 6
Analysis of variance for wear loss, using adjusted SS for tests.
Source
Degrees
of freedom
Sum
of squares
Adjusted sum
of squares
Adjusted mean
of squares
F-ratio
P-value
Percentage
of contribution
A
B
C
D
AB
AC
BC
Error
Total
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
6
26
0.0000646
0.0000793
0.0003285
0.0000715
0.0000103
0.0000030
0.0000066
0.0000114
0.0005753
0.0000646
0.0000793
0.0003285
0.0000715
0.0000103
0.0000030
0.0000066
0.0000114
0.0000323
0.0000397
0.0001643
0.0000358
0.0000026
0.0000008
0.0000016
0.0000019
16.97
20.84
86.31
18.80
1.35
0.40
0.87
0.003
0.002
0.000
0.003
0.353
0.805
0.535
11.23
13.78
57.12
12.43
1.79
0.52
1.15
1.98
100
Table 7
Analysis of variance for friction coefcient, using adjusted SS for tests.
Source
Degrees
of freedom
Sum
of squares
Adjusted Sum
of squares
Adjusted Mean
of squares
F-ratio
P-value
Percentage
of contribution
A
B
C
D
AB
AC
BC
Error
Total
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
6
26
0.0012336
0.0085696
0.0001202
0.0012349
0.0011062
0.0004036
0.0005569
0.0007171
0.0139420
0.0012336
0.0085696
0.0001202
0.0012349
0.0011062
0.0004036
0.0005569
0.0007171
0.0006168
0.0042848
0.0000601
0.0006174
0.0002766
0.0001009
0.0001392
0.0001195
5.16
35.85
0.50
5.17
2.31
0.84
1.16
0.050
0.000
0.628
0.050
0.172
0.545
0.412
8.84
61.47
0.86
8.86
7.93
2.90
4.00
5.14
1174
Fig. 2. Main effects plot of factors (a) Wear of AlSiCGr hybrid composites and (b) friction coefcient of AlSiCGr hybrid composites.
1175
Fig. 3. Interaction plots for (a) wear loss and (b) Co efcient of friction (m).
1176
Table 8
Response table for signal-to-noise ratios: smaller is better.
Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank
Wear response
37.61
40.91
40.31
3.30
4
42.04
38.74
38.05
3.99
2
43.56
39.12
36.15
7.40
1
37.75
39.56
41.53
3.78
3
14.64
15.30
14.51
0.79
3
15.61
15.18
13.67
1.94
1
14.94
14.70
14.82
0.24
4
15.23
14.81
14.41
0.82
2
Table 9
Results of conrmation tests.
Level
Initial parameter
combination
Experimentation
Wear (gm)
0.0162
SN ratio (dB)
35.8097
Improvement of S/N ratio: 15.563
0.00287
50.8423
0.0027
51.3727
A3B3C3D3
Friction (l)
0.0162
SN ratio (dB)
12.4317
Improvement of S/N ratio: 4.4011
A2B1C1D1
0.1466
16.6773
0.144
16.8328
A3B3C3D3
Fig. 4. SEM morphologies of Al5% SiC composite at applied load of 20 N. (a) Worn surface and (b) wear debris.
1177
Fig. 5. SEM morphologies of Al5% SiC10% Gr composite at applied load of 20 N (a) worn surface and (b) wear debris.
Fig. 6. SEM morphologies of the worn surface of Al5% SiC5% Gr composite at applied load of 20 N (a) worn surface and (b) wear debris.
1178
Fig. 7. SEM image of mixed layer (a) Al5% SiC10% Gr composite at applied load of 20 N and (b) Al5% SiC5% Gr composite at applied load of 20 N.
Fig. 8. Optical micrographs of the worn surface of disc mated with Al5% SiC composite with a speed of 1.5 m/s at (a) applied load of 10 N and
(b) applied load of 20 N.
Fig. 9. Optical micrographs of the worn surface of disc mated with Al5% SiC-10% composite with a speed of 1.5 m/s at (a) applied load of 10 N and
(b) applied load of 20 N.
1179
Fig. 10. Optical micrographs of the worn surface of disc mated with Al5% SiC5% Gr composite with a speed of 1.5 m/s at (a) applied load of 10 N and
(b) applied load of 20 N.
lower wear rates when compared with the other composites. A decrease in wear loss with an increase in sliding
velocity is mainly caused by the solid lubrication of
graphite particles, which are released during sliding and
form a tribolayer at the contact surfaces [2,12,31]. With
greater than 5% graphite reinforcement, the wear loss
tends to increase. This tendency may be attributed to a
decrease in the fracture toughness of the composite
[2,12,30,31]. Under all studied sliding velocities, the Al/
5SiC/5Gr composites demonstrated the lowest wear rates.
4.3. Effect of applied load on wear loss
The variation of wear loss with applied load at a
constant sliding speed of 3 m/s and for a xed sliding
distance of 5000 m is shown in Fig. 14. It was observed
that the wear loss of the hybrid composites increased
gradually with an increase in load up to 15 N; after which,
there was a steep rise in the wear loss. The increase in wear
loss with increased load of all the materials studied can be
attributed to the larger amount of plastic deformation and
delamination wear at higher loads. Moreover, the composites with higher graphite content are more easily fractured
or undergo matrix breakdown during sliding, which led to
a higher wear loss with the Al5% SiC10% Gr composites. Under all of the studied loads and for a given
reinforcement content, Al/5SiC/5Gr composites demonstrated the lowest wear loss.
4.4. Coefficient of friction with the effect of applied load
The coefcient of friction increased when the applied
load was increased from 10 to 20 N, as shown in Fig. 15
(a and b). It is evident from this gure that the coefcients
of friction of the Al/5SiC/5Gr and Al/5SiC/10Gr composites were less than those of the Al/5SiC composite. A
higher coefcient of friction was exhibited by the Al5%
SiC composite under all of the load conditions. An
increase in the coefcient of friction with an increase in
the sliding distance can be mainly attributed to increased
surface temperature [6,14,32]. Moreover, in the case of
hybrid composites, the graphite was smeared on the
contact surface, thereby reducing the metal-to-metal contact [33,34]. Due to the inherent self-lubrication properties
1180
% of Graphite
reinforcement
0
5
10
Wear loss, gm
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005
0
1000
2000
3000
Sliding Distance, m
4000
5000
Fig. 12. Variation of wear loss against sliding distance at constant load of
15 N at 3 m/s.
Wear loss, gm
0.0175
0.0150
0.0125
0.0100
0.0075
0.0050
0
2
3
Sliding velocity, m/s
Fig. 13. Variation of wear loss against sliding velocity at constant load of
15 N for a constant sliding distance of 5000 m.
5. Conclusions
Fig. 11. EDX spectrum of worn surfaces at a sliding velocity of 2 m/s
(a) Al5% SiC composite (b) Al5% SiC10% Gr composite and (c) Al
5% SiC5% Gr composite.
Wear loss, gm
0.0175
0.0150
0.0125
0.0100
0.0075
0.0050
0
10
15
Load, N
20
25
Fig. 14. Variation of wear loss with applied load at a sliding speed of
3 m/s for a sliding distance of 5000 m.
Co-efficient of friction,
0.18
Gr.wt%
0
5
10
0.17
0.16
0.15
0.14
500
0.23
Co-efficient of friction,
1181
1000
1500
2000
Sliding Distance, m
2500
3000
1500
2000
Sliding Distance, m
2500
3000
Gr.wt%
0
5
10
0.22
0.21
0.20
0.19
0.18
500
1000
1182