Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Inuence of graphite ller on two-body abrasive wear behaviour of carbon

fabric reinforced epoxy composites
B. Suresha a,*, B.N. Ramesh b, K.M. Subbaya c, B.N. Ravi Kumar d, G. Chandramohan e
a

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The National Institute of Engineering, Mysore 570 008, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Adichunchanagiri Institute of Technology, Chikkamagalur 577 102, India
c
Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, The National Institute of Engineering, Mysore 570 008, India
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bangalore Institute of Technology, Bangalore 560 004, India
e
Karpagam College of Engineering, Coimbatore 641 032, India
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 17 July 2009
Accepted 1 November 2009
Available online 10 November 2009
Keywords:
Graphite lled carbonepoxy
Wear
Analysis of variance
Worn surface morphology

a b s t r a c t
The inuence of graphite ller additions on two-body abrasive wear behaviour of compression moulded
carbonepoxy (CE) composites have been evaluated using reciprocating wear unit and pin-on-disc wear
unit under single pass and multi-pass conditions respectively. The carbon fabric used in the present study
is a plain one; each warp ber pass alternately under and over each weft ber. The fabric is symmetrical,
with good stability and reasonable porosity. Abrasive wear studies were carried out under different loads/
abrading distance using different grades of SiC abrasive paper (150 and 320 grit size). Graphite ller in C
E reduced the specic wear rate. Further, the wear volume loss drops signicantly with increase in graphite content. Comparative wear performance of all the composites showed higher specic wear rate in
two-body wear (single-pass conditions) compared to multi-pass conditions. Further, the tribo-performance of CE indicated that the graphite ller inclusion resulted in enhancement of wear behaviour signicantly. Wear mechanisms were suggested and strongly supported by worn surface morphology using
scanning electron microscopy.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The need for the use of newer materials to combat wear situations has resulted in the emergence of polymer based composite
materials. Fiber reinforced polymeric composites (FRPCs) are the
most rapidly growing class of materials, due to their good combination of high specic strength and modulus. They are widely used
for variety of engineering applications. The importance of tribological properties convinced many researchers to study the wear
behaviour and to improve the wear resistance of polymeric composites. For ber reinforced polymer matrix composites, the process of material removal in abrasive wear process involves four
different mechanisms microploughing, microcutting, microfatigue
and microcracking [1].
Wear is dened as damage to a solid surface, generally involving progressive loss of material, due to relative motion between
that surface and contacting substance or substances [2]. Abrasive
wear is the most important among all the forms of wear because
it contributes almost 64% of the total cost of wear [3]. Abrasive
wear is caused due to hard particles or hard protuberances that
are forced against and move along a solid surface [4]. In two-body
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 821 2480475/2481220; fax: +91 821 2485802.
E-mail address: sureshab2004@yahoo.co.in (B. Suresha).
0261-3069/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2009.11.006

abrasion, wear is caused by hard protuberances on one surface

which can only slide over the other.
Polymer and their composites are nding ever increasing usage
for numerous industrial applications such as bearing material, rollers, seals, gears, cams, wheels and clutches [5]. Different types of
polymer show different friction and wear behaviour. However,
neat polymer is very rarely used as bearing materials and wearresistant materials because of unmodied polymer could not satisfy the demands arising from the situations wherein a combination of good mechanical and tribological properties is required
[6]. Among the wear types, abrasive wear situation encountered
in vanes and gears, in pumps handling industrial uids, sewage
and abrasive-contaminated water, roll neck bearings in steel mills
subjected to heat, shock loading; chute liners abraded by coke, coal
and mineral ores; bushes and seals in agricultural and mining
equipment, have received increasing attention [7]. The bi-directional fabric reinforcement offers a unique solution to the ever
increasing demands on the advanced materials in terms of better
performance and ease in processing [8].
A notable advance in the polymer industries has been the use of
ber and particulate llers as reinforcement in polymer matrix.
However, the matrix materials also play an important role as is
the case for thermoset resin matrix composites which can be designed for specic applications by properly selecting the polymer.

1834

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

Some of the commonly used polymers include polytetraouroethylene (PTFE), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), vinyl ester, unsaturated
polyester, epoxy, etc. [914]. Among these epoxies posses excellent
mechanical properties and good chemical/corrosion resistance.
Also epoxies in moulded or cast form have excellent dimensional
stability and low shrinkage. Further, it has been reported that
epoxies reinforced with llers and bers possess very good
mechanical and tribological properties. Many investigations have
shown that the incorporation of ber reinforcement improved
the wear resistance and reduced the coefcient of friction [15
18]. In most cases, carbon ber proves better in this respect than
the more abrasive glass ber. Carbon ber is graphitized carbon
with the hexagonal planes of its crystals aligned perpendicular to
the ber axis. The lubricating function of the graphitized carbon
is thought to be responsible for the reduction of friction coefcient
and wear rate as the composites slide against the mating surface.
Besides the lubricating function, carbon ber also enhances the
thermal conductivity and the mechanical properties of the polymer
matrix, which is believed to be benecial to the wear resistance as
well.
The modication of tribological behaviour of ber-reinforced
polymers by the addition of ller material has been reported [19
22] to be quite encouraging. Most studies on the inuence of ller
material, in the case of polymer composites sliding against metallic
counter faces have reported on the reduction of wear rate and coefcient of friction. In addition to the higher mechanical strength obtained due to the addition of llers in polymeric composites, there
is direct cost reduction due to the less consumption of resin material. A literature survey indicated that the short ber reinforcement,
in general, led to the deterioration in the abrasive wear resistance of
the matrix [23]. Fabric reinforcement, on the other hand, improved
the abrasion resistance of the polymers. Many researchers studied
the two-body wear behaviour for polymers in general and polymer
composites in particular [2430]. Chand and Pandey [24] reported
the wear behaviour of Polypropylene (PP) and its blends with polystyrene (PS). They found that PP exhibited lowest wear rate while
PS had improved the wear rate of PP. Cirino et al. [25,26] investigated the sliding and abrasive wear behaviour of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) with different continuous bers and reported that
the wear rate decreased with increase in the ber content. The
abrasive wear behaviour of short carbon/glass ber reinforced with
PEEK/polyphenylene sulphide (PPS) thermoplastic polymers were
studied by Lhymn et al. [27]. They have concluded that the wear
rate is sensitive to the orientation of the ber axis with respect to
the sliding direction. Wang et al. [28] studied the mechanical and
tribological behaviour of the blend of PA66/UHMWPE with compatibilizer. The results showed that the addition of UHMWPE reduced
the wear rate. Friedrich [29] investigated the abrasive wear behaviour of epoxy reinforced with carbon, glass and aramid fabrics and
reported the wear performance of the fabrics in the order aramid > glass > carbon. Harsha and Tewari [30] investigated the
two-body and three-body abrasive wear behaviour of polyaryletherketone composites.
Some investigations have demonstrated that, under certain conditions, gaps formed between the ller and matrix and that surface
deterioration of the ller occurs as a result of water sorption and
hydrolytic degradation (3134). Adrian et al. [31] studied the inuence of water exposure on the three-body wear of composite
restoratives. Three-body wear instrumentation was used to investigate the wear resistance of ve composite restoratives (Silux Plus
(SX), Z100 (ZO), Ariston pHc (AR), Surel (SF) and Tetric Ceram
(TC)) with and without exposure to water. They found that the
ranking of wear resistance was as follows: without water exposure: DA > ZO > SF > AR > SX > TC; with water exposure: DA > ZO > SX > SF > AR > TC. Wear factor ranged from 2.20 for ZO to
7.13 for TC without water exposure and from 46.00 for ZO to

143.00 for TC with exposure to water. Exposure to water signicantly increased three-body wear for all composite restoratives,
but did not affect wear of the amalgam alloy. Sarret et al. [32]
investigated the water and abrasive effects on three-body wear
resistance of a hybrid, a small-particle, and a micro-lled composite. They concluded that the hybrid composite showed no loss of
wear resistance, the small-particle composite showed a decrease
in wear resistance against silicon carbide (SiC) abrasive, and micro-lled composite showed decrease in wear resistance when
tested with a soft (CaCO3) or a hard (SiC) abrasive. Research by
Soderholm [33] and Soderholm et al. [34] has shown that sorption
of water into dental composites occurs and has a deleterious effect
on the polymerller interface over time.
Incorporation of bers and llers in polymers affects the tribo
performance, but it is found that to be benecial under some wear
conditions while detrimental in some other wear situations [35].
Incorporation of llers and bers in most polymer composites
are found to improve the abrasive wear performance severely
[36,37]. Amount of ller added, ller matrix interaction, and type
of the matrix used affect the abrasive wear performance [3843].
Most of the above ndings are based on randomly oriented, unidirectionally oriented or woven fabric reinforced polymer composites. Woven fabric reinforced composites are gaining popularity because of their balanced properties in the fabric plane as well as
their ease of handling during fabrication. Mody et al. [44] have
shown that the simultaneous existence of parallel and perpendicular oriented carbon bers in a woven conguration leads to a synergistic effect on the enhancement of the wear resistance of the
composite. Carbon fabric reinforcement and graphite ller are
good choice since for bearing applications both high modulus
and high strength are desirable. Hence, in the present research article, carbon (T300) woven fabric reinforced epoxy composite with
powdered graphite as ller material has been taken up for investigation with the intention of characterizing them for their two-body
abrasive wear in single-pass and multi-pass modes.
2. Experimental details
2.1. Specimen details
The composite material investigated in the present study, consists of bi-directional carbon fabric of about 68 lm diameter as
reinforcement. LY 556 epoxy resin with HY951 grade room temperature curing hardener with diluent DY 021 (all supplied by Hindustan Ciba Geigy) mix was employed for the matrix material. The
ller material used is graphite powder of particle size in the range
2025 lm. Eight layers of fabrics were used to obtain about
2.5 mm thick laminates. The panels have been fabricated by autoclave mould technique. The percentage of carbon ber in the composite is 60 2 by weight. The details of the composites including
measured density are listed in Table 1. Two-body wear test samples of size 6  6  2.5 mm3 were prepared from the laminate
using a diamond tipped cutter.
2.2. Test details
A pin-on-disc setup (as per ASTM G-99 standard, Make: Magnum Engineers, Bangalore) used for two-body wear multi-pass
Table 1
Composites selected for the present study.
Material (designation)

Epoxy (wt.%)

Graphite (wt.%)

Density (g/cc)

Carbonepoxy (CE)
Graphite lled CE (CE-1)
Graphite lled CE (CE-2)

40
35
30

5
10

1.412
1.431
1.465

1835

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

Table 2
Details of the two-body wear test conditions employed in this study.
Test conditions

Multi-pass

Single-pass

Load (N)
Abrading distance (m)
Speed

10 and 20
75300
200 rpm

20
2.811.2
500 mm/min

2.3. Scanning electron microscopy

New SiC papers (150 and 320 grit) and worn surface of composite samples were examined using a scanning electron microscope
(JSM 840A model and JEOL make). Before the examinations, a thin
gold lm was deposited on the tensile fractured surface. A scanning electron micrographs of SiC abrasive paper of 150 and 320 grit
sizes before the wear test is shown in Fig. 3a and b respectively.
Fig. 1. Two-body abrasive wear tester.

2.4. Design of experiments

condition tests. However, for two-body wear single-pass condition

tests the test setup used is shown in Fig. 1 (Make: Magnum Engineers, Bangalore). The surface of 6 mm  6 mm  2.5 mm composite specimen, glued to a pin of 6 mm diameter and 22 mm length
comes in contact with abrasive paper xed on a rotating disc.
The sample, in which the fabric perpendicular to SiC paper parallel
and anti-parallel with respect to the abrading direction as shown
in Fig. 2. Prior to testing, the test samples were polished against
a 600 grade SiC paper to ensure proper contact with the countersurface. The surfaces of both the sample and the disc were cleaned
with a soft paper soaked in acetone and thoroughly dried before
the test. The pin assembly was initially weighed to an accuracy
of 0.0001 g in an electronic balance (Mettler Toledo). The difference between the initial and nal weights is the measure of slide
wear loss. For each condition, at least three tests were performed
and the mean value of weight loss is reported. The experimental
test parameters used in the present study are listed in Table 2.
The wear was measured by the loss in weight, which was then converted into wear volume using the measured density data. The specic wear rate (Ks) was calculated from the equation:

Ks

DV
LD

m3 =N m

where DV is the volume loss in m3, L is the load in Newton and D

is the abrading distance in meters.

Fig. 2. Rotating disc with SiC paper and composite sample.

A two factor, four level full factorial method was adopted to

evaluate the inuence of four major factors inuencing abrasion
under multi-pass condition namely the grit size of SiC paper, normal applied load, type of material and abrading distance. By levels
e mean the values taken by the factors. The orthogonal array chosen was L16 (24) which have 16 rows corresponding to the number
of tests (15 degree of freedom) with ve columns. The factors and
their interactions are assigned as per standard practice [45]. The
experimental results were compared with the predicted values
using conrmation test. The design for the full factorial was developed and analyzed using MINITAB-14 software [46]. Table 3
gives normalized order and conditions of the L16 (24), which was
used in the present study.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Wear volume
The variation in abrasive wear volume of composites worn on
150 and 320 grit SiC paper at 10 and 20 N against abrading distance under multi-pass condition is shown in Figs. 4a, b and 5a,
b respectively. The wear data of the composites reveal that the
wear volume tends to increase near linearly with increasing abrading distance and strongly depends on the grit size of the abrasive
paper.
Abrasive wear of composites is strongly inuenced by the ller
loading and operating parameters [12,1719,2124,30,3741].
Suresha et al. [38,39,4143] investigated the wear behaviour of
particulate lled glass/carbon fabric reinforced epoxy composites.
The above investigations were concentrated on sliding and threebody/two-body abrasive wear studies. The silica sand was used
as dry and loose abrasives in three-body wear tests. In abrasive
wear situations, the wear rate depends on the experimental test
parameters such as load and abrading distance. The llers such
as cenosphere and graphite were observed to be detrimental to
abrasive wear performance. Graphite ller in carbonepoxy composite provides better wear resistance under dry sliding wear tests.
The interaction of both parameters inuences the abrasive wear
behaviour [47]. In order to obtain optimal wear properties without
compromising the benecial properties of the matrix material, an
accurate prediction of the wear of composites is essential. Unfortunately, for abrasive wear, existing models for composites are highly
simplied and do not readily predict the role of the composite
microstructure [48]. The wear behaviour of a composite is not
dominated by a single phase [49]. Instead, the contribution from
each component is linearly proportional to its volume fraction in

1836

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

Fig. 3. (a) 150 grit and (b) 320 grit SiC papers used before abrasion test.

Table 3
Assigned full factorial L16 (24) with the acquired data (multi-pass conditions) [45].
Run order

Load (N)

Abrading
distance (m)

Grit of
SiC

Material

Wear volume  103

(mm3)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

75
75
75
75
150
150
150
150
75
75
75
75
150
150
150
150

150
150
320
320
150
150
320
320
150
150
320
320
150
150
320
320

CE
CE-2
CE
CE-2
CE
CE-2
CE
CE-2
CE
CE-2
CE
CE-2
CE
CE-2
CE
CE-2

0.168
0.131
0.0196
0.0115
0.191
0.139
0.0242
0.014
0.195
0.145
0.046
0.033
0.212
0.152
0.051
0.036

the composite. The presence of the worn particles may even

change the wear mechanisms from two-body single-pass condition
to a three-body process. In the present study, the lubricating nature of graphite ller played an important role on the abrasive wear
behaviour of CE composites. Figs. 4a, b and 5a, b, it is obvious that
the wear volume of composites worn on two different SiC papers
increased with increasing abrading distance. Wear volume of un-

lled CE is much higher than those of lled CE (CE-1 and C

E-2) composites and also the wear volume decreased with increasing weight percentage of ller. In addition, the highest wear volume is obtained in specimens worn on 150 grit SiC paper (Fig. 4a
and b). As shown in Figs. 4a, b and 5a, b, the wear volume of composites is 1.752.5 times higher at 20 N compared to 10 N. In the
specimen worn at a load of 10 N, wear debris did not adhere to
the SiC paper. However, in the specimen worn under a high load
of 20 N, some abrasive particles penetrated more into the matrix.
The coarse particles which were detached from the countersurface (SiC paper) ll the cavities and modied the surface. Therefore,
the wear volume at higher load exhibited rather slowly increased
compared to the lower load. The wear volume is less in graphite
lled CE composites and it can be attributed to inherent better
mechanical properties and self lubricating nature of graphite. The
chemical interaction between the graphite particles and the cross
linking of epoxy matrix leading to better adhesion because of
greater polymerller interaction. Also, CE composites with
graphite ller addition, improved the mechanical properties such
as specic stiffness, specic strength, excellent resistance to corrosion and fatigue performance and in turn results in excellent wear
behaviour.
The variation in abrasive wear volume of composites worn on
150 and 320 grit SiC paper at 20 N under single-pass condition is
shown in Fig. 6a and b respectively. As seen from these gures,
with increase in abrading distance the wear volume tends to increase nonlinearly and strongly depends on the grit size of the

0.3

0.2
0.15
0.1

C-E
C-E-1

0.05

C-E-2

0
75

150

225

Abarding distance (m)

300

Wear volume x 103 (mm3)

Wear volume x 103 (mm3)

0.25

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1

C-E
C-E-1

0.05

C-E-2
0

75

150

225

Abrading distance (m)

Fig. 4. Wear volume vs. abrading distance of samples at (a) 10 N, 150 grit and (b) 20 N, 150 grit.

300

1837

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

Wear volume x 103 (mm3)

0.04
0.035
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
C-E

0.01

C-E-1

0.005
0
75

C-E-2

150

225

0.07

Wear volume x 103 (mm3)

0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
C-E

0.02

C-E-1

0.01

C-E-2

0
75

300

150

225

300

Abrading distance (m)

Abrading distance (m)

Fig. 5. Wear volume vs. abrading distance of samples at (a) 10 N, 320 grit and (b) 20 N, 320 grit.

abrasive paper for both the materials. In Fig. 6a, it is obvious that
the wear volume of composites worn on 150 grit SiC paper is high
when compared to 320 grit SiC paper. Wear volume of unlled CE
is much more than those of lled CE (CE-1 and CE-2) composites and also the wear volume decreased with increasing weight
percentage of ller. It was observed that the wear volume of
two-body abrasive wear (single-pass condition) is 2.53 times
greater than two-body abrasive wear (multi-pass condition). Comparing the wear volume under multi-pass condition with singlepass condition, the wear volume is much less in multi-pass condition. This is because of the effects of transfer of epoxy matrix to the
abrading surface and trapped debris in multi-pass condition.
Archards equation [50] is generally used to describe the sliding
wear of metal caused by adhesion, but it is useful in abrasive wear
mode as well. The equation states that:

V K

LD
H

where V is the wear volume; L the applied load; D the sliding distance; H the hardness of material; and K is a constant referred to
as wear coefcient. Eq. (2) clearly indicates wear volume is directly
proportional to both sliding distance and load and it is inversely
proportional to hardness. The above equation does not hold good
for polymer and their composites, though a linear trend has been
reported [39,40, 49]. This is because a combination of several prop-

Wear volume x 102 (mm3)

30
25
20

C-E-1
C-E-2

10
5

5.6

The variation in the specic wear rate of composites worn on

150 and 320 grit SiC papers and at 10 N and 20 N against abrading
distance is shown in Figs. 7a, b and 8a, b respectively. There is a
distinct difference between the specic wear rate behaviour.
The specic wear rate decreases with increasing abrading distance and grit size for two-body abrasive wear under multi-pass
condition. Further, the specic wear rate increases with increase
in load. As seen in Fig. 7a and b, when the emery paper is of coarse
grade (150 grit), the specic wear rate starts to decrease drastically
with increase in abrading distance. In the initial stage the wear
track is not completely attained and with increase in abrading distance, the uniform contact was established. Thus, the lubricating
action of graphite and abrading nature of carbon bers reduced
the wear rate. Higher specic wear rate was noticed for unlled
CE composite compared to graphite lled ones. This is because
the carbon ber has high specic strength with the inclusion of

12

C-E

15

0
2.8

3.2. Specic wear rate

Wear volume x 102 (mm3)

erties and experimental parameters inuences the abrasive wear

performance of polymer composites. In the present study, wear volume increases linearly with increase in abrading distance/load in
two-body wear under multi-pass condition (Figs. 4 and 5). However, in case of two-body abrasive wear under single-pass conditions non-linear increase in wear volume was observed (Fig. 6).

8.4

Abrading distance (m)

11.2

10
8

C-E
C-E-1
C-E-2

6
4
2
0
2.8

5.6

8.4

Abrading distance (m)

Fig. 6. Wear volume vs. abrading distance of samples at (a) 20 N, 150 grit and (b) 20 N, 320 grit.

11.2

1838

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

C-E-1

C-E-2

C-E

1.4

1.4

1.2

1.2

Ks x 10-10 (m3/N m)

Ks x 10-10 (m3/N m)

C-E

1
0.8
0.6
0.4

C-E-2

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

0.2
0

C-E-1

75

150

225

300

75

Abrading distance (m)

150

225

300

Abrading distance (m)

Fig. 7. Specic wear rate vs. abrading distance of samples at (a) 10 N, 150 grit SiC and (b) 20 N, 150 grit SiC.

graphite ller compared to that of unlled CE composite and possesses better self lubricating property (Fig. 8a and b).
The variation in the specic wear rate of composites worn on
150 and 320 grit SiC papers and at a load of 20 N is shown in Figs.
9a and b respectively. The specic wear rate as a function of abrading distance, however, showed interesting results. During the rst
interval, CE sample exhibited a high wear rate which suddenly decreased in consecutive intervals followed by slow and steady increase for subsequent intervals. However, in graphite lled CE
samples the specic wear rate decreases till 5.6 m and reaches steady state with further increasing abrading distance against 150 grit
SiC paper and increased against 320 grit paper. This uctuating
wear behaviour was attributed to the fact that initially complete
wear track could not be attained. The main reason for reinforcing bers into polymers is to improve their mechanical properties, but
the effects on wear rate are invariably not benecial. Generally ber/ller reinforcement increases the tensile strength (r) of neat
polymer, they usually decrease the ultimate elongation (e) and
hence the product (re) may become smaller than that of neat polymer. In the present work, the reduction in specic wear rate with
increase in graphite content in CE composite enhances the adhesion between reinforcement and matrix leading to lower wear volume loss and reduced specic wear rate. The specic wear rates
were found to be in the order of 108 and 1010 m3/N m for single
pass and multi-pass conditions respectively.

C-E

C-E-1

C-E-2

The purpose of the statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) is to

investigate, which design parameter signicantly affects the abrasive wear characteristic. This analysis is carried out for a level of
signicance of 5% (i.e. the level of condence 95%). Table 4 shows
the results of ANOVA analysis for the composites under multi-pass
conditions. From the analysis presented in Table 4, it is observed
that the abrading distance (P = 0.33) has statistical and physical
signicance on the abrasive wear volume. It is clear that the F-values of factors applied load, grit and material were all greater than
that of abrading distance. Factor abrading distance, with an F-value
lower, was not an effective parameter for either material. Further,
it can be observed from the ANOVA table that the grit size of SiC
and applied normal load and type of material has an inuence on
abrasive wear behaviour of the composites investigated. However,
the order of inuence of these experimental test parameters on the
wear behaviour is; grit size of SiC > applied normal load > type of
material.
3.4. Worn surface morphology
Fig. 10a and b shows the worn surfaces of unlled CE samples
at a load of 20 N and 300 m abrading distance. The contribution of
the matrix and the bers to the wear behaviour vary with the grit
C-E

0.3

0.35

0.25

0.3

Ks x 10-10 (m3/N m)

Ks x 10-10 (m3/N m)

3.3. Analysis of variance

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0

C-E-1

C-E-2

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05

75

150

225

Abrading distance (m)

300

75

150

225

Abrading distance (m)

Fig. 8. Specic wear rate vs. abrading distance of samples at (a) 10 N, 320 grit and (b) 20 N, 320 grit.

300

1839

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

12

Ks x 10-8 (m3/Nm)

Ks x 10-8 (m3/Nm)

10
8
6
4

C-E
C-E-1

C-E-2
0

2.8

5.6

8.4

11.2

Abrading distance (m)

4
3
2

C-E
1

C-E-1
C-E-2

0
2.8

5.6

8.4

11.2

Abrading distance (m)

Fig. 9. Specic wear rate against abrading distance of samples at (a) 20 N, 150 grit and (b) 20 N, 320 grit.

Table 4
Analysis of variance (multi-pass conditions) [46].
Dependent variable: wear volume, multiple R: 0.9931, squared multiple R:
0.9863
Source

Load
Abrading
distance
Grit
Material
Error

Sum of
squares
(SS)

Degrees of
freedom
(DF)

Mean
square
(MS)

77.018
3.956

1
3

77.018
1.318

1023.424
41.216
50.885

1
2
8

1023.424
20.608
6.36

F ratio

12.108
0.207
160.9
3.24

Contribution
(P %)
6.437
0.33
85.534
3.45
4.253

size of the abrasive paper. Fig. 10a shows scanning electron microscope (SEM) pictures of carbon ber reinforced epoxy samples
abraded against 150 grit SiC paper. Fig. 10a shows some ploughing
marks on the surface, matrix damage and exposure of carbon bers. These exposed bers tend to fracture and their removal from
the surface of the composite. The matrix is heavily damaged by
ploughing and cutting action by the higher sized SiC particles.
Overall surface topography indicated more ber pulverization,
more ber breakage and less bermatrix debonding. The micrograph also indicates the crack propagation of the matrix, deterioration of the bermatrix adhesion due to repetitive mechanical
stress and some bers pull-out from the matrix is also visible.

Fig. 10. SEM pictures of CE samples abraded against (a) 150 grit and (b) 320 grit SiC paper.

Fig. 11. SEM pictures of graphite lled CE samples abraded against (a) 150 grit and (b) 320 grit.

1840

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

Fig. 12. SEM pictures of CE samples abraded against 150 grit SiC paper (a) 5.6 m and (b) 11.2 m.

Fig. 13. SEM pictures of graphite lled CE samples abraded against 150 grit SiC paper (a) 5.6 m and (b) 11.2 m.

Fig. 10b shows SEM pictures of unlled CE samples abraded

against 320 grit abrasive papers. Further, few ploughing marks
on the surface, matrix damage and very little exposure of carbon
bers are seen from the SEM picture. The matrix is damaged more
and more microcracks in the matrix are also visible from the
micrograph. Further, smooth surface of matrix and at some regions
cracks and also voids are evident from the photomicrograph. This
is attributed to the ner abrasive particles get crushed as the
abrading distance increases and the SiC particles become ineffective. The SEM picture also indicates the deterioration of the bermatrix adhesion due to repetitive mechanical stress and
debonding of bers from the matrix.
Fig. 11a and b shows the abrasive wear surfaces of graphite
lled CE samples at a load of 20 N and 300 m abrading distance.
The deep furrows in the abrading direction owing to the ploughing
action by sharp abrasive particles are seen on the surface (Fig. 11a).
The extent of damage to the matrix and ber is less in graphite
lled CE as compared to unlled CE composite under same test
conditions. In this case there are signicant interactions between
bers and powdered graphite resulting in better bonding with
epoxy matrix. This result is in agreement with the SEM pictures
11a and b shows that uniform dispersion of graphite ller and bers apparently are well bonded to the matrix material. Keeping
the load constant, the sample abraded against 320 grade SiC paper
led to appearance of smaller-sized ber with matrix debris adhered to the broken end of the bers as seen in Fig. 11b. Also, severe damage to the matrix, little ber breakage and some ber
pull-out from the surface is noticed.
Figs. 12 and 13 show SEM pictures of CE and graphite lled C
E surfaces abraded at different abrading distance under single-pass
conditions. The different abrasive wear mechanisms can be clearly
seen from the SEM pictures. The damage of the polymer and ber
conrms cutting type of wear mechanism. The damage to the ma-

trix and bers is severe for CE samples abraded against 150 grit
SiC paper compared to graphite lled CE samples. The micrographs in Fig. 13a and b show the matrix damage and subsequent
matrix removal due to the formation and propagation of micro as
well as macro-cracks at the surface. SEM pictures conrm different
wear mechanisms. In single-pass condition cutting, and multi-pass
condition microcracking mechanisms were observed to be
dominating.
4. Conclusions
Based on the experimental observations, the following conclusions can be drawn:
 Two-body wear experimental results showed that the grit size of
the abrasive paper greatly affected the wear rate of the
composites.
 The wear volume loss increased in carbonepoxy composites
with increase in abrading distance as compare to graphite lled
carbonepoxy composites.
 Analysis of variance method gave the signicance degree of test
parameter. According to the P-values, the abrading distance was
not effective on the wear volume of the composites. The results
indicate that better correlation between wear volume and experimental test parameters (grit size of SiC and applied normal load).
 Comparative wear performance of carbonepoxy and graphite
lled carbonepoxy composites at different loads shows that
specic wear rate of two-body wear under single-pass is greater
than that of multi-pass conditions.
 Graphite lled carbonepoxy showed better abrasion resistance
under different loads/abrading distances. This is because the llerller interaction and uniform dispersion of ller in carbon
epoxy composite.

B. Suresha et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 18331841

 In single-pass condition, cutting and multi-pass condition,

microcracking and ploughing are the dominant wear
mechanisms.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank N. Govinda Raju, Chief Executive Ofcer,
Magnum Engineers, Bangalore for providing the testing facilities.
The authors are thankful to the Management and Principal and
CEO Dr. M.S. Shiva Kumar, The National Institute of Engineering,
Mysore for their encouragement.
References
[1] Zum Gahr KH. Wear by hard particles. Tribol Int 1998;31:58796.
[2] Hutchings IM. Mechanism of wear in powder technology: a review. Powder
Technol 1993;76:313.
[3] Neale MJ, Gee M. Guide to wear problems and testing for industry. New York,
USA: William Andrew Publishing; 2001.
[4] Standard terminology relating to wear and erosion. Annual book of standards,
vol. 03.02. ASTM; 1987. p. 24350.
[5] Hutchings
IM.
Tribology:
friction
and
wear
of
engineering
materials. London: CRC Press; 1992.
[6] Mallick PK. Fiber reinforced composites: materials, manufacturing and design.
2nd ed. New York: 18 Marcel Dekker Inc.; 1993.
[7] Friedrich K, Lu Z, Hager AM. Recent advances in polymer composites tribology.
Wear 1996;190:13944.
[8] Viswnath B, Verma AP, Kameswara CVS. Effect of reinforcement on friction and
wear of fabric reinforced polymer composites. Wear 1993;167:939.
[9] Tripathy Bhawani S, Furey Michael J. Tribological behavior of unidirectional
graphiteepoxy and carbonPEEK composites. Wear 1993;162164:38596.
[10] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Samapthkumaran P, Seetharamu S, Vynatheya S.
Friction and wear characteristics of carbonepoxy and glassepoxy woven
roving ber composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 2006;25:77182.
[11] Briscoe BJ, Pogosian AK, Tabor D. The friction and wear of high density
polythene: the action of lead oxide and copper oxide llers. Wear
1974;27:1934.
[12] Bijwe J, Logani CM, Tewari US. Inuence of llers and ber reinforcement on
abrasive wear resistance of some polymeric composites. Wear
1990;138:7792.
[13] Lu Z, Friedrich K, Pannhorst W, Heinz J. Wear and friction of unidirectional
carbon berglass matrix composite against various counterparts. Wear
1993;162164:110310.
[14] Wang Junxiang, Gu Mingyuan, Bai Songhao, Ge Shirong. Investigation of the
inuence of MoS2 ller on the tribological properties of carbon ber reinforced
nylon 1010 composites. Wear 2003;255:7749.
[15] Lu Z, Friedrich K, Pannhorst W, Heinz J. Wear and friction of a unidirectional
carbon berglass matrix composite against various counterparts. Wear
1993;162164:7749.
[16] Sinha SK, Biswas K. Effect of sliding speed on friction and wear of unidirectional aramid berphenolic resin composite. J Mater Sci
1992;27:3085891.
[17] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Sadananda Rao PR, Samapathkumaran P,
Seetharamu S. Investigation of the friction and wear behavior of glassepoxy
composite with and without graphite ller. J Reinf Plast Compos
2007;26:8193.
[18] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Kishore, Sampathkumaran P, Seetharamu S.
Mechanical and three-body abrasive wear behavior of SiC lled glassepoxy
composites. Polym Compos 2008;33:10205.
[19] Tanaka K. Effect of various llers on the friction and wear of PTFE-based
composites. In: Friedrich K, editor. Friction wear of polymer composites, vol.
205. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1986. p. 13774.
[20] Bahadur S, Fu Q, Gong D. The effect of reinforcement and the synergism
between CuS and carbon ber on the wear of nylon. Wear 1994;178:12330.
[21] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Siddaramaiah, Sampathkumaran P, Seetharamu
S. Three-body abrasive wear behavior of carbon and glass ber reinforced
epoxy composites. Mater Sci Eng A 2007;443:28592.

1841

[22] Suresha B, Shivakumar Kunigal N. Investigations on mechanical and two-body

abrasive wear behaviour of carbon/glass fabric reinforced vinyl ester
composites. Mater Des 2009;30:205660.
[23] Harsha AP, Tewari US. Tribo performance of polyaryletherketone composites.
Polym Test 2002;21:697709.
[24] Chand N, Pandey A. High stress abrasive wear study on y-ash lled
polypropylene/polystryrene blends. Metals Mater Process 2000;12:916.
[25] Cirino M, Friedrich K, Pipes RB. Evaluation of polymer composites for sliding
and abrasive wear applications. Composites 1988;19:38392.
[26] Cirino M, Friedrich K, Pipes RB. The abrasive wear behaviour of continuous
ber polymer composites. J Mater Sci 1987;22:23547.
[27] Lhymn C, Tempelmeyer KE, Davis PK. Abrasive wear of short ber composites.
Composites 1985;16:12739.
[28] Wang HG, Qi Jian L, Li Pan B, Zhang JY, Yang SR. Mechanical and tribological
behaviour of polyamide66/UHMWPE blends. Polym Eng Sci 2007;45:73844.
[29] Friedrich K. In: Friedrich K, Pipes RB, editors. Advances in Composite
technology, vol. 8. Netherlands: Elsevier; 1993. p. 20976.
[30] Harsha AP, Tewari US. Two-body and three-body abrasive wear behaviour of
polyaryletherketone composites. Polym Test 2003;22:40318.
[31] Adrian S, Yap UJ, Teoh SH, Tan KB. Inuence of water exposure on three-body
wear of composite restoratives. J Bio Mater Res Part B 2000;53:54753.
[32] Sarret DC, Soderholm KJM, Batich CD. Water and abrasive effects on threebody wear of composites. J Dent Res 1991;70:107481.
[33] Soderholm KJM. Hydrolytic degradation of dental composites and effects of
silane treatment and ller fraction on compressive strength and thermal
expansion of composites. Umea Sweden: Umea University Odontological
Dissertations No. 19, ISSN 0345-7532. p. 1165.
[34] Soderholm KJM, Zigan M, Ragon M, Fischlschweiger W, Bergman M. Hydrolytic
degradation of dental composites. J Dent Res 1984;63:124854.
[35] Stachowaik GW. Engineering tribology. Boston: Butterworth HeinMann; 2000.
[36] Bijwe J, Indumathi J, Jhon Rajesh J, Fahim M. Friction and wear behavior of
polyetherimide composites in various wear modes. Wear 2001;249:71526.
[37] Bijwe J, Jhon Rajesh J, Jeyakumar A, Gosh A, Tewari US. Inuence of solid
lubricants and ber reinforcement on wear behavior of polyethersulphone.
Tribol Int 2000;33:697706.
[38] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Siddaramaiah, Jayaraju T. Inuence of
cenosphere ller additions on the three-body abrasive wear behavior of
glass ber reinforced epoxy composites. Polym Compos 2008;29:30712.
[39] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Mohanram PV. Role of llers on three-body
abrasive wear behavior of glass fabric reinforced epoxy composites. Polym
Compos 2009;30:110613.
[40] Tewari US, Bijwe J, Mathura JN, Sharma Indu. Studies on abrasive wear of
carbon ber (short) reinforced polyamide composites. Tribol Int
1992;29:5360.
[41] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Siddaramaiah, Jayaraju T. Three-body abrasive
wear behavior of E-glass fabric/graphite-lled epoxy composites. Polym
Compos 2008;29:6317.
[42] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Renukappa NM, Siddaramaiah. Mechanical and
tribological properties of glassepoxy composites with and without graphite
particulate ller. J Appl Polym Sci 2007;103:247280.
[43] Suresha B, Siddaramaiah, Kishore, Samapthkumaran P, Seetharamu S.
Investigations on the inuence of graphite ller on dry sliding wear and
abrasive wear behaviour of carbon fabric reinforced epoxy composites. Wear
2009;267:140514.
[44] Mody PB, Chou TW, Friedrich K. Effects of testing conditions and
microstructure on the sliding wear graphite ber/PEEK composites. J Mater
Sci 1988;23:431930.
[45] Montegomery
DC.
Design
and
analysis
of
experiments.
3rd
ed. Singapore: Wiley; 1991.
[46] Myers RH, Walpole RE. Probability and statistics for engineers and
scientists. New York: MacMillan; 1989.
[47] Chand N, Dwivedi UK. Effect of coupling agent on abrasive wear behavior of
jute-PP composites. Wear 2006;261:105763.
[48] Zum Gahr KH. Microstructure and wear of Materials. Tribology Series,
10. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1987.
[49] Tripathy BS, Furey MJ. Tribological behavior of unidirectional graphiteepoxy
and carbonPEEK composites. Wear 1993;162164:38596.
[50] Archard JF. Contact and rubbing of at surfaces. J Appl Phys 1953;24:9818.