Materials and Design 31 (2010) 4001–4006

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

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

Technical Report

Experimental investigation of hardfaced martensitic steel under slurry

abrasion conditions
S.G. Sapate a,*, A. Selokar a, N. Garg b
a
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, V.N.I.T Nagpur 440011, India
b
Diffusion Engineers Limited, MIDC, Hingana, Nagpur 440022, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Wear by slurry abrasion is a potential problem in engineering components subjected to particulate flow.
Received 18 November 2009 The life of the components under slurry abrasive wear situations is primarily decided by operating con-
Accepted 6 March 2010 ditions and the materials properties. Martensitic steels are widely used for abrasion resistant applica-
Available online 11 March 2010
tions. The present work reports slurry abrasion response of hardfacing martensitic steel under a wide
range of experimental conditions. The response data is generated using systematic and simultaneous var-
iation of test parameters. The experiments were performed using silica sand slurry with different slurry
concentration, particle size, sliding distance and load. The results of the investigation suggest that slurry
concentration had relatively stronger effect than normal load. The wear volume loss exhibited an increas-
ing trend with increasing severity of test parameters. An empirical equation is proposed to describe the
interactive effect of the test parameters, abrasive particle properties and material property. SEM (Scan-
ning Electron Microscope) studies revealed different morphology of the worn surfaces which was attrib-
uted to mild to severe slurry abrasion test conditions.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction carbides inter lamellar spacing and properties of abrasive particles,

Martensitic steels are being used as cost effective materials for
wear and abrasion resistant application chiefly because of their
greater hardness and relatively higher toughness as compared to
high chromium cats irons, which exhibit excellent abrasion resis-
tance [1–2]. The high chromium irons are widely used for hardfac-
ing of industrial components in mining, cement plants, thermal
power plants and iron and steel industries. Due to their higher
hardness, they are however, relatively difficult to machine.
The abrasive wear properties of carbon steels by way of change
in hardness and microstructure by heat treatment have been inves-
tigated in the past by many researchers. The quenched and
tempered carbon steel with martensitic microstructure showed
1.5–2.0 times better slurry abrasion resistance as compared to
pearlitic microstructure [3–5]. The abrasion resistance of steels in-
creased with increasing volume fraction of martnesite [6–9]
whereas Tekeli [10] reported that martensite hardness had greater
influence than its volume fraction in deciding wear rate of heat
treated carbon steels. Lu Zhenlin [1] noted an increase in slurry
abrasion resistance of martensitic steel with carbon content.
The wear properties of steels reinforced with second phase par-
ticles has been investigated in the past. In general it was observed
that the wear resistance of steels is influenced by morphology of
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 712 2222828; fax: +91 712 2223230.
E-mail address: sgsapate@yahoo.com (S.G. Sapate).
test conditions and mechanical properties of steels and material
properties [4,5,7,11–14,15–17].
Wear by slurry abrasion occurs in extruders, slurry pumps, coal
water slurry nozzles and pipes carrying slurry of minerals and ores
in mineral processing industries. The wear resistance of compo-
nents used under slurry abrasion conditions is governed by the
severity of the operational parameters, and properties of the abra-
sive particles in the slurry medium. The interactive effect of these
parameters decides wear life of the components under actual ser-
vice conditions. The weld hardfacing is one of the economic meth-
ods to improve wear life of industrial components.
The wear behaviour of steels with martensitic microstructure,
obtained either by heat treatment or casting has been investigated
in the past under two body or three body dry abrasive wear situa-
tions. A little data is available on slurry abrasion response of weld
deposited (hardfaced) martensitic steel. The interactive effect of
test conditions and abrasive particle properties on wear rate of
hardfaced martenstic steel has not been investigated. There was
no attempt made by previous researchers to obtain quantitative
correlation between wear properties of hardfaced martensitic
steels as a combined function of test parameters and abrasive par-
ticle properties. The objective of present work is to investigate
slurry abrasion response of weld deposited martensitic steel. The
slurry abrasion response data generated by a suitably designed
experimental plan consisting of systematic as well as simultaneous
variation of test parameters and particle properties was used to

0261-3069/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2010.03.009
4002 S.G. Sapate et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 4001–4006

formulate quantitative relationship between wear loss and severity ence of titanium (Ti) in the EDX analysis is attributed to the flux
parameter. coating on the electrode used for the deposition.
The specimen for metallography was prepared using standard
2. Experimental metallographic technique. The polished specimens were etched
with 2% Nital for observations of microstructure. The microstruc-
2.1. Materials ture consisted of martensite and carbides and is shown in Fig. 1.
The bulk hardness was measured using Vickers Indentation Hard-
The material selected for the present investigation was iron– ness tester at a load of 30 kg. An average of five readings is reported
carbon–chromium alloy steel deposited on mild steel plate (0.19 in the results. The bulk hardness of the sample was 496 HV30.
carbon) with dimensions of 200 mm (length)  200 mm
(width)  10 mm (thickness), by manual metal arc welding meth- 2.2. Slurry abrasion testing
od. The consumable used for deposition was in the form of elec-
trode with diameter of 3.15 mm. The welding parameters were; The slurry abrasion wear tests were performed using slurry
voltage – 22 V and current – 120 A (direct current). The thickness abrasion test apparatus (Ducom make, India) using silica sand
of the weld deposit was typically 4 mm. The specimens for chem- abrasive (hardness = 1000–1100 HV) particles with different parti-
ical analysis, hardness, metallography and slurry abrasion testing cle size as shown in Fig. 3(a–d). The silica sand particles were hav-
were derived from the top surface of the weld deposited plate. ing sub rounded to angular shape. Finer particles were relatively
The chemical composition of the weld deposited steel surface more angular as compared to coarser particles. The slurry abrasion
was analyzed by spectrometer (Spectrolab make). The chemical wear tests were performed using slurry abrasion test apparatus
composition of the deposited surface was carbon – 0.46%, silicon (Ducom make, India). The apparatus consisted of a slurry abrasive
– 0.710%, manganese – 0.37%, phosphorous – 0.025%, sulfur – chamber enclosing the rubber lined steel wheel, test specimen and
0.008%, chromium – 8.45% and vanadium – 0.48%. Energy Disper- slurry. The wheel is made of steel disc with an outer layer of neo-
sive X-ray (EDX) analysis of the surface was also carried out. prene rubber (durometer hardness of 60 ± 2) molded to its periph-
Fig. 2 shows EDX spectrum indicating elemental analysis. The pres- ery. Diameter of wheel is 178 mm and thickness is 12.7 mm. The
maximum speed of the rubber lined wheel is 250 ± 5 rpm (revolu-
tions per minute). The double walled jacket enables to maintain
the slurry temperature by circulating coolant. The load was moni-
tored by a load cell (450 N capacity) which was pre-calibrated to
measure the force applied by the specimen over the rubber wheel.
A photograph of the slurry abrasion test apparatus is shown in
Fig. 4.
The method of slurry abrasion testing is reported elsewhere [5].
The specimens for slurry abrasion testing were rectangular blocks
measuring 57.2 mm (length)  25.4 mm (width)  9 mm (thick-
ness). The specimens for abrasion testing were polished with suc-
cessive silicon carbide paper followed by polishing with alumina
slurry to obtain average surface roughness, Ra = 0.60 lm and
cleaned with ethyl alcohol and then weighed using a digital elec-
tronic balance to the accuracy of 0.1 mg. After the test, specimens
were cleaned with dry compressed air followed by cleaning with
ethyl alcohol and then weighed. The loss in mass (g) was calculated
as the difference of initial and final weight of the specimen. In
addition, wear volume loss was also determined. In the present
work slurry abrasion tests were carried out to study the effect of
Fig. 1. Microstructure of weld deposited specimen showing martensite and load, slurry concentration and sliding distance on wear loss. In
carbides. addition slurry abrasion tests were also performed by simulta-
neous variation of load, slurry concentration and total revolutions.
The range of test parameters used was load (35, 70, 95 and 125 N),
slurry concentration (40%, 80%,120%,150%) and total revolutions
27000 001 (500, 1000, 1500 and 2000) and abrasive particle size (53–64,
OKa TiLl TiLa VLl VLa CrLl FeLl

24000 125–150, 212–250, 250–300 lm). The test conditions involving

simultaneous variation of test parameters were designated as A
21000
(35 N load, 40% slurry concentration, 500 revolutions, 53–64 lm
18000 abrasive particle size) B (70 N load, 80% slurry concentration,
FeKa

1000 revolutions, 125–150 lm abrasive particle size) C (95 N load,

Counts

15000
120% slurry concentration, 1500 revolutions, 212–250 lm abrasive
FeKesc

12000
particle size and D (125 N load, 150% slurry concentration, 2000
VKb CrKa

MnKb
CrKb MnKa

9000 revolutions, 250–300 lm abrasive particle size). A summary of

TiKb VKa
PKa

FeKb

slurry abrasion tests performed in the present investigation and

CKa

6000
SiKa

TiKa

test designations is given in Table 1.

CrLa

3000
0
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 3. Results
keV
The effect of slurry concentration and normal load on slurry
Fig. 2. EDX spectrum showing the elemental analysis of the weld deposited surface. abrasion volume loss of hardfaced martensitic steel is shown in
 S.G. Sapate et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 4001–4006 4003

Fig. 4. Photograph of the slurry abrasion test apparatus.

Table 1
Summary of slurry abrasion tests performed in the present work.

Load (N) No. of Particle size of Slurry

revolutions silica sand concentration
(lm) (%)
35, 70, 95, 125 1000 250–300 150
125 500, 1000, 1500, 2000 250–300 150
125 1000 250–300 40, 80, 120, 150
35 (A) 500 53–64 40
70 (B) 1000 125–150 80
95 (C) 1500 212–250 120
125 (D) 2000 250–300 150

sulted in increase in volume wear loss from 19.4864 to

29.100 mm3 as shown in Fig. 5a. When the normal load was in-
creased from 35 N to 125 N, volume loss increased nearly two
times from 20.5229 mm3 to 40.30 mm3 as shown in Fig. 5b. The
volume loss increased from 19.175 mm3 to 72.2059 mm3 when
the sliding distance was increased from 18.838 m to 77.486 m un-
der given slurry abrasion conditions. The simultaneous variation of
test parameters from test conditions A–D resulted in significant in-
crease in volume loss which was observed to be 0.259 mm3, 0.816,
14.316 and 77.5 mm3, respectively.

4. Discussion

The present investigation reports wear behaviour of hardfaced

Fig. 3. (a–d) SEM photographs of silica sand particles used for slurry abrasion
testing: (a) 53–64 lm, (b) 125–150 lm, (c) 212–250 lm and (d) 250–300 lm.
Fig. 5a and b respectively. The data points in each case were fitted
by best fit line and the slope of the line gives volume wear rate
with respect to slurry concentration (Sc) and normal load (L). In
each case a linear relationship was noted with regression coeffi-
cients of 0.9846 and 0.9459. The volume wear loss increased from
2.4487 mm3 to 13.3192 mm3 when slurry concentration was in-
creased from 40% to 80%. A further increase from 80% to 150% re-
martensitic steel under different experimental conditions. The vol-
ume wear loss exhibited increasing trend with slurry concentra-
tion, normal load and the sliding distance. The magnitude of
increase in volume loss was, however different in each case. It
can be concluded from Fig. 5a and b. that nearly four fold increase
in slurry concentration resulted in more than eleven times increase
in wear volume loss. The significant increase in volume loss of
more than five times for two times increase in slurry concentra-
tion, initially, can also be noted. The increase in volume loss, fur-
ther with slurry concentration was more or less linear. The
4004 S.G. Sapate et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 4001–4006

35 In the present work the two different approached were used.

The first approach was to evaluate the effect of individual test
30 parameters like load, slurry concentration and sliding distance on
slurry abrasion volume loss. The second approach was aimed at
25 studying the effect of simultaneous variation of applied load, slurry
Volume loss (mm 3)

concentration, sliding distance and abrasive particle size on slurry

20 abrasion behaviour of hardfaced martensitic steel. In the present
work the size of the abrasive particles is also incorporated in the
15 ‘Test Severity Parameter’ (TSP).
To assess the simultaneous variation of test parameters, and
properties of abrasive particle and material hardness, the volume
10
loss Q was plotted vs. Test Severity Parameter expressed as
TSP = [(S  L/Ac)  (Sc/D)  (Ha/Ht)], where S is sliding distance
5
(m), L is normal load (N), Ac is area of worn out crater (m2), Sc is
fraction of abrasive particles in slurry, D is average particle size
0
0 50 100 150 200 of abrasive (m), Ha/Ht is the ratio of hardness of abrasive particle
(Ha) to hardness of the target material (Ht) as shown in Fig. 6.
Slurry concentration(%)
The data points on log–log plot were fitted by the best fit line
Fig. 5a. Effect of slurry concentration on wear volume loss of hardfaced martensitic and slope of the line indicated the exponent of the combined
steel. parameters. The dependence of the wear volume loss (Q) on Test
Severity Parameter, TSP, was expressed as,

32.5 Q ¼ k½ðS  L=Ac ÞðSc =DÞðHa =Ht Þm ð1Þ

30 where k is constant and m is the exponent. The value of the expo-

nent m was observed to be 2.4236 and the regression coefficient
27.5 was 0.8858. The Test Severity Parameter [(S  L/Ac)  (Sc/D)  (Ha/
Volume loss (mm3)

Ht)], not only takes into account the operating variables like sliding
25 distance, normal load and slurry concentration but also the proper-
ties of the abrasive particle in slurry and the material property. Thus
22.5 slurry abrasion volume loss can be more meaningfully represented
by this parameter under a range of given slurry abrasion conditions.
20 SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope) investigations on abraded
surface revealed significant differences in morphology of the sur-
17.5 faces. Under benign experimental conditions, the abraded surface
was relatively smooth and shallow grooves were observed on the
15 worn out surface and material was predominantly removed by
0 50 100 150
ploughing mechanism. The lip of work hardened material still at-
Normal Load (N) tached to the groove edges can be observed in Fig. 7a. In Fig. 7b,
Fig. 5b. The effect of normal load on slurry abrasive wear volume loss of hardfaced
relatively deeper grooves can be seen indicating greater depth of
martensitic steel. penetration by relatively coarser abrasive particles at higher loads
as compared to test condition A. The material removal in the form
relationship between volume loss and sliding distance was linear. of flakes can also be observed at the centre and top side of the
The slope of the best fit line indicated volume loss for per unit% photographs and material is primarily removed by cutting indicat-
of slurry concentration, per unit normal load and sliding distance. ing micro cutting mechanism of material removal as seen in
The respective values were 0.2316, 0.1019 and 0.9382 for slurry
concentration, normal load and sliding distance indicating that vol- 1.00E-06
ume loss exhibited relatively greater dependence on slurry concen-
tration than normal load. Similar observations were reported in an
earlier investigation [18]. Simultaneous variation of test parame-
Wear volume loss ( m3)

ters from test conditions A–D resulted in nearly three times in- 1.00E-07
crease in volume loss.
Under actual service conditions, the engineering components
are subjected to slurry abrasion situations with different severity,
1.00E-08
which is influenced by operational parameters (load, velocity),
properties of abrasives particles (hardness, size, shape, fraction of
abrasives in slurry). The severity of slurry abrasion condition is
generally represented by wear constant K in Archard’s wear equa- 1.00E-09
tion; V = K(SL/H) where V is volume wear loss, S is the sliding dis-
tance (S), L is normal load, H is bulk hardness of the surface [5].
Cozza and coworkers [19] used product of contact pressure and 1.00E-10
velocity as measure of ‘test severity’ in micro-abrasion test 1.00E+10 1.00E+11 1.00E+12
whereas Adachi and Hutchings [20,21] used ‘severity of contact’ (SxL/Ac) (Sc/D) (Ha/Ht)
to indicate severity of test conditions, which incorporated applied
load, wear scar area, slurry faction and hardness of surface and Fig. 6. Slurry abrasion wear volume loss plotted vs. Test Severity Parameter TSP,
abrasive. [(S  L/Ac)  (Sc/D)  (Ha/Ht)].
 S.G. Sapate et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 4001–4006 4005

Fig. 7c and d which show the SEM photographs of worn surfaces

under relatively severe test conditions (test conditions C and D).
With increasing severity of experimental conditions, the depth
and width of the wear groove increased significantly resulting in
increased material removal, since with increasing severity of test
parameter, increased load and particle size leads to greater depth
of penetration into the surface. With increasing particle size de-
crease in abrasive wear resistance has been reported earlier
[17,22]. The relatively harder silica sand particles can indent the
surface, as ratio of hardness of silica sand particle and hardfaced
martensitic steel was more than 1.2 required to cause plastic
indentation of the surface [23]. Thus significant increase in vol-
ume loss with increasing severity parameter can be attributed
to increasing number of abrasive particle in slurry causing groov-
ing abrasion, increased normal pressure and particle size effect
[22].
The ratio of hardness of abrasive particles to that of the surface
has been included in the Eq. (1) for the sake of brevity realizing
that the slurry abrasion tests were conducted with silica sands
abrasive particles on hardfaced martensitic steel. The response
data generated by simultaneous variation of test parameters shall
be useful in selecting wear resistant steel under particular set of
slurry abrasion situations. It is realized that the experimental mod-
el presented in this work can be made more comprehensive by
incorporating a range of relative hardness of the target material.
Further experimentation is in progress in this direction to extend
the validity the experimental model over a wide range of experi-
mental conditions, material and particle properties.

Fig. 7. (c and d) SEM micrograph of worn surface of hardfaced martensitic steel

after slurry abrasion test under test conditions C and D respectively.

5. Conclusion

(1) The slurry abrasion response of hardfaced martensitic steel

was investigated by systematic and simultaneous variation
of test parameters.
(2) The volume wear loss of hardfaced martensitic steel
increased with slurry concentration, normal load and the
sliding distance. The magnitude of increase in volume loss
was, however different in each case.
(3) The volume loss exhibited relatively greater dependence on
slurry concentration than normal load. Increasing severity
parameter resulted in significant increase in wear volume
loss under the given test conditions.
(4) The dependence of wear volume loss on Test Severity
Parameter was expressed by the equation,
m
Q ¼ k½ðS  L=Ac Þ  ðSc =DÞ  ðHa =Ht Þ .
(5) The difference in morphology of the abraded surface was
attributed to the differential severity of the test conditions.
(6) The important mechanisms of material removal were
ploughing, micro cutting and indentation. With increasing
severity of test conditions, material removal occurred pre-
dominantly by micro cutting mechanism.

Acknowledgement

Fig. 7. (a and b) SEM micrograph of worn surface of hardfaced martensitic steel The authors are grateful to Director, VNIT for providing neces-
after slurry abrasion test under test conditions A and B respectively. sary facilities in carrying out this investigation. The authors are
4006 S.G. Sapate et al. / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 4001–4006
grateful to Diffusion Engineers Limited for providing samples for
the present investigation. The thanks are due to Mr. K.M. Manapure
and Mr. Kapil for their assistance during experimentation and SEM
work.
References
[1] Zhenlin Lu, Qichang R, Zhihao Jin. An investigation of the corrosion abrasion
behaviour 6% chromium cats steel. J Mater Process Technol 1999;95:180–4.
[2] Sapate SG, RamaRao AV. Erosive wear behaviour of weld hardfacing high
chromium cast irons: effect of erodent particles. Tribol Int 2006;39(3):206–12.
[3] Shu Sun J. The abrasion characteristics of some carbide containing alloys. In:
Ludema KC, editor. Proc of the int conf on wear of materials, ASME; 1983. p.
79–86.
[4] He Lin, Zhang CJ. An investigation of the role of secondary carbides in
martensitic steel during three body abrasion wear. Wear 1994;16:103–9.
[5] Sapate SG, Chopde AD, Nimbalkar PM, Chandrakar DK. Effect of microstructure
on slurry abrasion response of En-31 steel. Mater Des 2008;29(3):613–21.
[6] ZumGahr KH. Abrasive wear of two phase metallic materials with a coarse
microstructure. In: Ludema KC, editor. Proc of int conf on wear of materials,
Vancouver, ASME; April 1985. p. 45–57.
[7] Modi OP, Pandit P, Mondal DP, Prasad BK, Yegneswaran AH, Chrysanthou A.
High-stress abrasive wear response of 0.2% carbon dual phase steel: effects of
microstructural features and experimental conditions. Mater Sci Eng 2007;A
458:303–11.
[8] Saghafian H, Kheirandish S. Correlating microstructural features with wear
resistance of dual phase steel. Mater Lett 2007;61:3059–63.
[9] Jha AK, Prasad BK, Modi OP, Das S, Yegneswaran AH. Correlating
microstructural features and mechanical properties with abrasion resistance
of a high strength low alloy steel. Wear 2003;254:120–8.
[10] Tekeli S, Gural A. Dry sliding behaviour of heat treated iron based powder
metallurgy steels with 0.3 Graphite + 2% Ni additions. Mater Des 2006.
[11] Reponen PK, Liimatainen J, Ala-Kleme S, Hellman J, Hannula SP. The correlation
of material characteristics and wear in a laboratory scale cone crusher. Wear
2009;267:568–75.
[12] Badisch E, Mitterer. Abrasive wear of high speed steels influence of abrasive
particles and primary carbides on wear resistance. Tribol Int 2003;36:765–70.
[13] Katsuki F, Watari K, Tahira H, Umino M. Abrasive wear behavior of a pearlitic
(0.4% C) steel microalloyed with vanadium. Wear 2008;264:331–6.
[14] Modi OP, Mondal DP, Prasad BK, Singh M, Khaira HK. Abrasive wear behaviour
of a high carbon steel: effects of microstructure and experimental parameters
and correlation with mechanical properties. Mater Sci Eng 2003;A343:235–42.
[15] Bourithisa L, Papadimitrioua GD, Sideris J. Comparison of wear properties of
tool steels AISI D2 and O1 with the same hardness. Tribol Int 2006;39:479–89.
[16] Larsen Basse J, Premaratne B. Effect of relative hardness on transitions in
abrasive wear mechanisms. In: Ludema KC, editor. Proc of int conf on wear of
materials, ASME; 1983. p. 161–6.
[17] Sevim I, Eryurek IB. Effect of abrasive particle size on wear resistance in steels.
Mater Des 2006;27:173–81.
[18] Balasubramanian V, Varahamoorthy R, Ramachandran CS, Babu S. Abrasive
slurry wear behavior of stainless steel surface produced by plasma transferred
arc hardfacing process. Surf Coat Technol 2008;202:3903–12.
[19] Cozza RC, DeMello JDB, Tanaka DK, Souza RM. Relationship between test
severity and wear mode transition in micro-abrasive wear test. Wear
2007;263:111–6.
[20] Adachi K, Hutchings IM. Wear mode mapping for the micro-scale abrasion test.
Wear 2003;255:23–9.
[21] Adachi K, Hutchings IM. Sensitivity of wear rates in the micro-scale abrasion
test to test conditions and material hardness. Wear 2005;258:318–21.
[22] Misra A, Finnie I. On the size effect in abrasive and erosive wear. Wear
1981;65:359–73.
[23] Hutchings IM. Tribology, friction and wear of engineering materials. Edward
Arnold; 1992.