Available online at http://www.urpjournals.

com

Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal

Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved

ISSN 2277 – 7164

Original Article
The Effect of Silicon Dioxide Filler on the Wear Resistance of Glass Fabric
Reinforced Epoxy Composites
B.R. Raju1*, R.P.Swamy2 B.Suresha3, and K.N.Bharath4
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, PES Institute of Technology and Management, Shivamogga -577 204, India.
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University B.D.T. College of Engineering, Davangere -577004, India.
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The National Institute of Engineering, Mysore-570 008, India.
4
Department of Mechanical Engineering, GM Institute of Technology, Davangere -577006, India.
E-mail: rajusrujan@gmail.com, 2rp_swamybiet@yahoo.co.in,3sureshab2004@yahoo.co.in, 4kn.bharath@gmail.com
* Corresponding author: Tel.: +91 8182257636/640733; fax: +91 8182 233797
Mobile: +91 9448373636; E-mail address: rajusrujan@gmail.com
Received 10 September 2012; revised 17 October 2012; accepted 29 October 2012
Abstract
Three body abrasive wear behaviour of glass fabric reinforced epoxy (G-E) and Silicon Dioxide filled G-E (SiO2-G-E)
composites have been studied using a rubber wheel abrasion tester. Samples of G-E with 0, 5, 7.5 and 10 wt% loads of
SiO2 were tested under different loads and abrading distances. Also, conventional weighing, determination of wear volume,
specific wear rate and examination of the worn surface morphological features by scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
were performed. The results showed varied responses under different abrading distance because of the inclusion of
different loads of SiO2 particles. Silicon Dioxide as the filler in particulate form reduced the steady state wear rate of G-E,
the optimum reduction in wear was found to occur at 10 wt% of SiO2 filler loading. Selected mechanical properties such as
hardness, tensile strength, and elongation at break were analyzed for investigating wear property correlations. Wear of G-E
composite was found to be mainly due to a micro-cracking and fiber fracture mechanisms. It was found that the micro-
cracking mechanism had been caused by progressive surface damage.
© 2012 Universal Research Publications. All rights reserved
Keywords: Glass fabric reinforced epoxy composite, SiO2 filler, Abrasive wear, wear mechanisms.
coefficient of linear expansion, low thermal conductivity
I. INTRODUCTION and limited mechanical properties of epoxies limit their use
Glass fiber reinforced polymer matrix composites in mechanical and tribological applications. Recently many
have been extensively used in various fields such as attempts have been made to develop epoxy based
aerospace industries, automobiles, marine, and defense composites modified by fibers and fillers to improve the
industries [1]. Their main advantages are good corrosion mechanical and tribological performance [3-5]. Bahadur
resistance, lightweight, dielectric characteristics and better and Zheng [6], in their studies on short glass fiber (SGF)
damping characteristics than metals. A possibility that the reinforced polyester by varying SGF up to 60 wt%
incorporation of both particles and fibers in polymer could described the effect of glass fiber on mechanical properties
provide a synergism in terms of improved properties and of the composites. In order to enhance the wear resistance
performance has not been adequately explored so far. and thermal stability, many research studies have been
However, some recent reports suggest that by incorporating carried out. One of these is the fiber reinforcement into the
micro hard filler particles into the polymer matrix of fiber epoxy matrix. Different synthetic fibers and hard ceramic
reinforced composites, synergistic effects may be achieved or metal particles have been tried as fillers in the epoxy
in the form of higher modulus and reduced material cost, matrix [7-9]. Osmani [10] evaluated the mechanical
yet accompanied with decreased strength and impact properties of Silicon Dioxide filled glass-epoxy (G-E)
toughness [2]. composites and reported that tensile and shear strengths
Diglycidyl of bisphenol A (DGEBA) type epoxy decreased with increase in Silicon Dioxide content and
resin being the most widely used matrix for innumerable flexural strength and modulus were increased.
applications, owing to its well balanced chemical, adhesive, Among the wear types, the abrasive wear situation
thermal and processing characteristics. However, the high encountered in industries connected with power,

Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal 2012; 2(4): 51-57
51
automobile, pumps handling industrial fluids, and earth
moving equipment has been received increasing attention.
Glass/carbon fibers are the best known and most widely
used reinforcing fibers in advanced polymeric composites.
Reports related to application of polymer matrix
composites on mechanical and tribological components
such as gears, cams, wheels, and impellers are cited in
literature. The importance of the tribological properties
convinced various researchers to study the wear behavior
and to improve the wear resistance of polymers and fiber-
reinforced polymeric composites. Chand et al. [11] reported
the three-body abrasive wear behavior of short glass fiber
reinforced polyester composite. Chand and Gautam [12]
reported the influence of load on the abrasion of fly ash,
glass fiber- reinforced composites. Suresha et al. [13-15]
investigated the abrasive wear behavior of epoxy/vinyl
ester filled with or without particulate filler and
glass/carbon fabrics. An investigation on the wear behavior
of the composite materials with epoxy matrix filled with
hard powders was reported by Visconti et al. [16]. Studies
were also made on the effect of various fillers on the
abrasive wear behavior of polymeric materials [17] and
polymer composites [18-20].
A survey of the literature indicates that the effect
of fiber/filler on the abrasion of polymer/composites is a
complex and unpredictable phenomenon [21]. This is
because physical effects such as fiber fragmentation,
debonding, pullout, etc., affect the behavior of composite
material subject to the abrasive wear process. It is also
difficult to predict their relative contribution because
various other mechanisms and influencing factors are
involved (ploughing, cutting and cracking of the matrix).
Although, a good amount of work has been reported on
mechanical and three-body wear behavior of polymer
matrix composites as discussed earlier in this section, no
literature could be cited on the mechanical and abrasive
wear aspect of G-E filled with SiO2 particles. Therefore an
attempt has been made to study the three-body abrasive
wear behavior of G-E composite filled with different
proportions of very fine SiO2 particles (particle size ≤5 µm)
under two different loads and for different abrading
distances (250-1000 m). The abrasive wear behavior has
been quantified in terms of wear volume and specific wear
rate. The different wear mechanisms under different
abrasive wear conditions have also been reported.
II. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
A. Materials and preparation method
Plain weave fabrics made of 360 g/m2, containing
E-glass fibers of diameter of about 12 µm have been
employed. The epoxy resin (LAPOX L-12) was mixed with
the hardener (K-6, supplied by ATUL India Ltd., Gujarat,
India) in the ratio 100:12 by weight. The filler chosen was
Silicon Dioxide modified using a silane coupling agent and
the average particle size is ≤ 5 µm. The details of the
physical and mechanical properties of the constituents
(Epoxy,Glass fibre & SiO2 filler) selected for the present
work are shown in the Table I.
As regards to the processing, on a Teflon sheet, E-
glass woven fabric was placed over which the resin mix
consisting of epoxy and hardener was smeared. Dry hand
Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal 2012; 2(4): 51-57
52
lay up technique was employed to fabricate the composites.
The stacking procedure consists of placing the fabric one
above the other with the resin mix well spread between the
fabrics. A porous Teflon film was again used to complete
the stack. To ensure uniform thickness of the sample, a 3
mm spacer was used. The mould plates were coated with
release agent in order to aid the ease of separation on
curing. The cast slab of each composite after 12 h of
impregnation and dried for 2 h at 100 oC followed by
compression moulding at a temperature of 390 oC and
pressure of 7.35 MPa. The slabs so prepared measured 250
mm ×250 mm ×3 mm by size. To prepare different wt. %
of SiO2 filled G-E composites, besides the epoxy-hardener
mixture required wt% of SiO2 filler were included to form
the resin mix. The details of the composites (including wt%
of the constituents) prepared are shown in Table II. The
weight percent of the glass fiber in the final composite
slabs is 60 wt%. Mechanical and abrasion test samples
were prepared according to ASTM standard from the cured
slabs using abrasive cut-off machine.
TABLE 1: PHYSICO-MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE
CONSTITUENTS SELECTED FORTHE PRESENT WORK
Glass SiO2
Property Epoxy
fibers filler
Density(g/cm3) 1.15 2.54 2.19
Tensile strength (MPa) 110 3400 55
Tensile Modulus (GPa) 4.1 72.3 70
TABLE 2: COMPOSITE PREPARED FOR THE PRESENT WORK
Epoxy SiO2
Sample name (Designation)
(wt.%) (wt.%)
Glass fabric reinforced epoxy (G-E) 40 ------
Silicon dioxide filled G-E
35 5
(5%SiO2-G-E)
Silicon dioxide filled G-E
32.5 7.5
(7.5%SiO2-G-E)
Silicon dioxide filled G-E
30 10
(10%SiO2-G-E)
B. Characterisation
Density of the composites was determined by
using a high precision electronic balance (Mettler Toledo,
Model AX 205) using Archimedes principle. Hardness
(Shore-D) of the samples was measured as per ASTM
D2240, by using a Hiroshima make hardness tester
(Durometer). Five readings at different locations were
noted and average value is reported. Tensile properties
were measured using a Universal testing machine in
accordance with the ASTM D-3039 procedure at a cross
head speed of 5 mm/min and a gauge length of 50 mm. The
tensile strength and modulus were determined from the
stress-strain curves. Four samples were tested in each case
and the average value was reported. The tensile tests were
carried out on a fully automated Lloyd LR-20 kN Universal
testing machine connected to a computer with DAPMAT
software.
The three-body abrasive wear tests were
conducted using a dry sand/rubber wheel abrasion tester as
per ASTM G-65. The details of the samples preparation
and wear testing procedure have been described elsewhere
[13].
The experiments were carried out at two different
loads (24 and 36 N) under different abrading distances (250
m to 1000 m). Densities of the composites were determined
using a high precision weighing balance by using
Archimedes’s principle. The wear was measured by the
loss in weight, which was then converted into wear volume
using the measured density data. After the wear test, the
sample was again cleaned. The specific wear rate (Ks) was
calculated from the equation:
KS V
L D
m 3 / Nm
Where ∆V is the volume loss, L is the load and D is the
abrading distance.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Effect of filler loading on density
The measured densities of the samples are listed in
Table III. Comparing the results it was observed that
inclusion of ceramic fillers into G-E showed higher density.
The density of SiO2 filled G-E is 2.19 which is highest
when compared to other composites. This is because of the
filler SiO2 has higher density. The densities of all
microparticles filled G-E is higher than the density of
unfilled G-E composites.
B. Effect of filler loading on hardness
By using Duro-hardness tester, the hardness of the
composites is measured; the values recorded are given in
Table III. The hardness of G-E composite increased with
increase of SiO2 filler loading. From Table III, it can be
seen that the SiO2 filler greatly increased the hardness of G-
E, which can be attributed to the higher hardness and more
uniform dispersion of SiO2 filler. The higher hardness is
exhibited by the 10 wt% SiO2 filled G-E compared to other
mirocomposites. The table shows that for a 10 wt%
increase in SiO2 content there is 11% increase in hardness.
The increase in SiO2 content results in an increase in
brittleness of the composite. Hence this results in an
increase in hardness value of the composite. Particulate
filled G-E composites with sufficient surface hardness are
resistant to in-service scratches that can compromise
fatigue strength and lead to premature failure. Therefore,
under an indentation loading, microparticles would undergo
elastic rather than plastic deformation, as compared to
unfilled G-E composites. The improvement in hardness
with incorporation of filler can be explained as follows:
under the action of a compressive force, the thermoset
matrix phase and the solid fiber and filler phase will be
pressed together, touch each other and offer resistance.
Thus the interface can transfer load more effectively
although the interfacial bond may be poor. This results in
enhancement of hardness of SiO2 filled G-E composites.
TABLE 3: PHYSICO-MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF G-E AND SIO2 FILLED G-E COMPOSITES
Sample code G-E 5%SiO2-G-E
Density (g/cm3) 1.984 2.06
Hardness (Shore-D) 63 65
Tensile strength, σ (MPa) 254 300
Tensile modulus, E(GPa) 8.34 9.43
Elongation, e (mm) 7.1 6.7
Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal 2012; 2(4): 51-57
53
C. Tensile Properties
The typical load-deformation curves of unfilled
and particulate filled G-E composites are shown in Fig. 1
and the measured mechanical test results are listed in Table
III. It is clear from this table that the tensile strength is
increasing with the increase in SiO2 content. As the
investigation is mainly focused on filler content rather than
G-E composite, taking the 7.5 wt% SiO2 loading into G-E
there is about 25% increase in tensile strength. Because of
all added constituents are brittle in nature in comparison to
epoxy therefore this is reflected by the mechanical
properties of the composite as a hybrid one. Thus there is
an increase in tensile strength of SiO2 filled G-E composite
with the increase in SiO2 content. This could be attributed
the uniform dispersion of silane treated SiO2 filler in G-E.
Addition of a coupling agent can provide covalent bonding
between epoxy/ SiO2 hybrid materials, thereby enhancing
the mechanical properties of the composites. The surface
modified SiO2 can interact with the fiber surface and
hydrogen bonding increases and leads to the better
interaction with glass fiber and epoxy. Addition of ceramic
filler increases the effective mechanical interlocking, which
in turn increases the frictional force between the fiber and
matrix. It can also be seen from Table III that the tensile
modulus of SiO2 filled G-E composites increases with
increase in wt% of SiO2 content. It is clear from this table
that the elongation at break is decreasing with the increase
in SiO2 content. This table shows that for a 10 wt%
increase in SiO2 content there is 11% decrease in
percentage elongation at break. The increase in SiO2
content results in an increase in brittleness of the
composite. Hence this results in a decrease of the
percentage of elongation at break. As the wt. fraction of
SiO2 filler increase, the tensile modulus of the G-E
composites increases, but at the same time the system
becomes more brittle. The increase in the tensile strength
with wt. fraction of filler is attributed to the high modulus
of ceramic filler which is dispersed uniformly in the fabric
layers of G-E composites. Young’s modulus is mainly
dependent on the matrix deformation of the composite and
increases as the slope of load-deformation curve at the
initial stage and is practically not much influenced by the
interfacial strength between fiber and the matrix. Generally,
the addition of ceramic fillers and glass fiber reduces the
elongation at break because of the lower elongation at
break values of ceramic fillers and glass fiber compared to
that of epoxy matrix. The addition of SiO2 particles causes
a dispersion of these particles in the matrix which impede
to the propagation of failure along the loading direction.
Thus the failure would propagate easily in those directions
where the dispersoid concentration is less leading to
increased tensile strength, tensile modulus, and lower
elongation.
7.5%SiO2-G-E 10%SiO2-G-E
2.15 2.19
67 70
316.6 326.7
9.53 9.57
6.5 6.4

Figure 1: Typical load v/s displacement curves G-E and
SiO2 filled G-E samples
D. Abrasive wear volume and specific wear rate
The three-body abrasive wear results of the
unfilled G-E composite indicate that a poor wear
performance as compared to SiO2 filled G-E composites. In
unfilled G-E, the wear results are poor compared to those
obtained in particulate filled G-E. A G-E composite sample
is fixed to a sample holder (as indicated in Fig. 2).
Figure 2: Dry Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Test
Apparatus
This way the mounted G–E sample is made to
come in contact with a rotating rubber wheel. In this case,
the abrasion started through contact with the softer phase
(epoxy). It has been reported that the presence of glass
fibers in the interface reduces the wear rate [5]. In the
present work, during abrasion, in the initial stage of
abrasion, the particle penetrated the soft outer layer of the
composite (matrix) due to the lower hardness. Once the
matrix layer was removed, the harder phase of the
composite (fibers) was exposed to the rubbing area, which
acted as a protector, leading to a reduction in the removal of
material. However, breakage, debonding and pull-out of
fibers have been observed at longer abrading distances.
Figure 3(a and b) show the wear volume loss with
abrading distance for different loads. It is evident from these
figures that irrespective of the type of samples used, there is
a linear trend of wear volume loss. The SiO2 filled G- E
Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal 2012; 2(4): 51-57
54
composite exhibited considerably lower wear volume loss
than that of G-E composite. This is attributed to the glass
fiber reinforcement in epoxy decrease the abrasive wear
resistance due to debonding and tearing at the glass/matrix
interface. Similar behaviour was observed at a higher load
of 36 N.
Figure 4(a and b) shown as histograms, the
comparative abrasive wear performance of G-E and SiO2 -
G-E composites at 24 N and 36 N loads respectively. The
specific wear rate data reveals that initially the specific wear
rate tends to decrease with increasing abrading distance and
further it strongly depends on the applied load for both
samples. Also observed is the earlier noted fact that G-E
composite exhibits the highest specific wear rate. It is
interesting to note that for SiO2 -G-E system, the specific
wear rate is on the lower side.
The specific wear rate of unfilled and SiO2 filled
glass fabric reinforced epoxy (SiO2 -G-E) composites
versus the applied load (24 and 36 N) at 200 rpm rotational
speed are shown in Fig.3(a and b). In general, increase in
the applied load decreases the specific wear rate [Fig. 4(a
and b)]. An increase in load causes a decrease in the wear of
particulate filled G-E composites. Similar results of
decreasing wear with increasing load of fiber reinforced
polymers are reported. This behaviour is due to the
formation of ridges on the surface of the polymer during
sliding on an abrasive medium [22]. The material from the
grooves is not removed but rather displaced towards the
sides to form the ridges. Hence quantification of wear losses
either by dimension loss or mass loss does not give the right
picture of the actual loss. Hence there seems to be a
reduction in the wear loss with increasing load. Moreover, It
was observed that wear performance of G-E enhanced due
inclusion of SiO2 filler. However the higher loading of
fillers in G-E composite (10% SiO2) exhibit lower specific
wear rate at all the loads and abrading distances. The
maximum specific wear rates of unfilled G-E and SiO2
filled G-E are 2.2 x 10-11 and 1.69 x 10-11 m3/Nm
respectively. The reason for improvement in wear
characteristics may be attributed to the type, surface
treatment and filler loading. In this work, the decrease in
the specific wear rate with an increase in the applied load is
consistent with other published works [19–21]. However,
other reported works [7, 10] showed no influence of the
applied load on the wear rate of the composite. The
reduction in the wear rate with increase in applied load
could be due to the fact that the apparent contact area was
greatly increased at higher applied loads compared to that at
lower applied loads. Increase in the apparent contact area
allows a large number of sand particles to encounter the
interface and share the stress. This, in turn, leads to a steady
state or reduction in the wear rate.
Lancaster [23] stated that the product of σ and e is
a very important factor which controls the abrasive wear
behavior of composites. Generally fiber/filler reinforcement
increases the tensile strength (σ) of neat polymer, they
usually decrease the ultimate elongation (e) and hence the
product (σe) may become smaller than that of neat polymer.
Hence, reinforcement usually leads to deterioration in the

Figure 3: Wear volume loss of unfilled & SiO2 filled G-E
composites at (a) 24 N & (b) 36 N
abrasive wear resistance. In the present work, for the
composites tested, the wear volume loss increased with
increase in σe factor (Table 3) and the results are
contradicting the reported literature.
E. Worn Surface analysis
To ascertain the wear mechanisms of unfilled and
SiO2 filled G-E composites, the worn surface of the samples
during abrasion were observed using SEM, and the
micrographs are given in Figures 5 and 6 respectively.
Figure 5(a) shows that some deeper furrows with
various width presented at the worn surface of unfilled G-E
composite. At higher magnification, a more damage to the
epoxy matrix can be observed [Fig. 5(a)]. However,
apparently different phenomenon for the composite is that, a
lot of GF embedded in the dark transfer film, which is
surrounded by the melted blend matrix, and the length is
less than 50 µm. This length is much shorter than that of
unrubbed sample [Fig. 5(a)], indicating that the glass fiber
was fractured during sliding under the frictional shear and
normal load. This result indicates poor adhesion of
the matrix to the fibers as several clean fibers appear on the
Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal 2012; 2(4): 51-57
55
Figure 4: Specific wear rate of unfilled and SiO2 filled G-E
composites at (a) 24 N & (b) 36N
abraded surface. The higher wear rate in G–E composite
may be attributed to lower matrix ductility and poorer fiber–
matrix adhesion. The abraded surface shows evidence of
debonding at each fiber–matrix is not sufficient to result in
the removal of fiber. The fracture of fiber is due to abrasion
and transverse bending by sharp abrasive particles, resulting
in fragments of fibers torn from the matrix (Fig. 5(a)). Once
again, the micrograph shows poor adhesion between fiber
and matrix.
Figure 6 (a & b) shows the photomicrograph of
abraded surface of SiO2 filled G-E composites tested at a
load of 36 N. At lower abrading distance (Fig. 6b), severe
matrix and fiber destructions were the characteristic features
in the micrographs. Also the evidence of fiber cutting, small
voids left by debonded fibers and fatigue damage of matrix
can be seen on the surface. It is thought that the observed
damaged fibers are the result of surface fatigue due to
repeated abrasion by silica sand particles. The crack
propagation through the fiber and interfacial debonding
were also observed at because of the brittle nature of glass
fibers, which fractures due to repeated abrasion by silica
sand particles. The interfacial debonding is less because of
fine SiO2 dispersed uniformly in G-E composite and hence,
the fibers are less exposed to the abrasive medium resulted
in the lower wear volume loss as compared to unfilled G-E
composites.
Figure 5: SEM photomicrographs of unfilled G-E
composite at 36 N load:
(a) 1000 m abrading distance & (b) 250 m abrading
distance.
It is evident from the SEM photographs
(comparing Fig. 5(b) with Fig. 6(b) that the 10 % SiO 2 filled
G-E is showing lesser degree of worn surface features
compared to unfilled G-E sample at 36 N load applications.
In the case of samples subjected to 36 N load, one can see
less number of broken fibers with less debris formation in
the SiO2 filled G-E sample (Fig. 6b), whereas in the unfilled
G-E sample (Fig. 5b), de-bonding of the fiber with cleavage
type of fracture is seen. Now, coming to the samples
subjected to higher abrading distance (1000 m), masking of
fibers are noticed in the SiO2 filled sample (Fig. 6a). On the
other hand, the SEM features of unfilled G-E sample (Fig.
5a) show large number of broken fibers with lot of
distortion in the matrix and also higher degree of debris
formation.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
In this study, an experimental investigation has been
conducted to evaluate the mechanical properties and three-
body abrasive wear behaviour of glass-fiber reinforced
epoxy matrix filled with different proportions of very fine
SiO2 particles. The following main conclusions can be
drawn from this study.
Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal 2012; 2(4): 51-57
56
Figure 6`: SEM photomicrographs of SiO2 filled G-E
composite at 36 N load:
(a) 1000 m abrading distance & (b) 250 m abrading
distance.
1. The present work shows that incorporation of SiO2
filler into G-E composites modifies the tensile and
tribological properties of the composites.
2. Compared with unfilled G-E composite, the tensile
modulus of SiO2 filled G-E improves a little but the
tensile strength improves obviously. However, glass
fiber- SiO2 exhibits synergistic effects on wear
resistance and reinforcing the epoxy simultaneously,
because of its special spherical-cylindrical rod structure
and the interaction between SiO2 and glass fiber. The
higher percentage (10 wt%) of SiO2 content in G-E
composite results to higher tensile strength, hardness
and a less percentage of elongation at break.
3. The maximum wear volume and specific wear rate is
observed for unfilled G-E composites. The specific
wear rate increased with applied load at lower abrading
distance and decreased with increasing abrading
distance.
4. The worn surface morphology for unfilled and SiO2
filled G-E composites show that the plowing action is
predominating, brittle behaviour and the cracking
mechanism under three-body abrasive wear conditions.
During wear process the important SEM features
 observed fiber fracture, tearing of matrix, cracking
wear mechanism etc.
5. For SiO2 filled G-E, increase in the filler loading causes
a decrease in wear, due to ridge formation.
References
1. Kuljanin J, Vuckovic M, Comor M.I, Bibic N,
Djokovic V, Nedeljkovic J.M. 2002,” Influence of
CdS-filler on the thermal properties of polystyrene”,
European Polymer Journal, 38(8), pp 1659–1662.
2. Weidenfeller B, Hofer M, Schilling F, 2004, “Thermal
conductivity, thermal diffusivity and specific heat
capacity of particle filled polypropylene, Composites
Part A” Applied Science and Manufacturing, 35 (4), pp
423–429.
3. Ferreira J.M, Pires J.T.B, Costa J.D, Zhang Z.Y,
Errajha O.A, Richardson M, 2005, “Fatigue Damage
Analysis of Aluminized Glass Fiber Composites”,
Materials Science and Engineering A, 407,pp 1–6.
4. Amuzu J.K.A, Briscoe B.J, Tabor D, 1978, “Polymers
as Bearing and Lubricants; Aspects and Fundamental
Research” Advances in Tribology, pp 59-62.
5. Kaushal S, Kishore, 1992, “Analysis of Deformation
Behaviour and Fracture Features in Glass-epoxy
Composites Toughened by Rubber and Carbon
Additions”, Journal of Materials Science Letters, 11,pp
86–88.
6. Bahadur S, Zheng Y, 1990, “Mechanical and
Tribological Behaviour of Polyester Reinforced with
Short Glass Fibers”, Wear, 137, pp 251-266.
7. Zheng Y, Pickels C.A, Cameron J, 1992, “The
Production and Mechanical Properties of Silicon
Carbide and Silicon Dioxide Whisker-Reinforced
Epoxy Composites”, Journal of Reinforced Plastics
and Composites, 11, pp 1176–1186.
8. Cao Y, Cameron J, 2006, “Flexural and Shear
Properties of Silica Particle Modified Glass Fiber
Reinforced Epoxy Composite”, Journal of Reinforced
Plastics and Composites, 25, pp 347–359.
9. Srivastava V.K., Pathak J.P, Tahzibi, K. 1992, “Wear
and Friction Characteristics of Mica-filled Fiber
Reinforced Epoxy Resin Composites”, Wear, 152, pp
343–350.
10. Osmani, 2009, “Mechanical Properties of Glass-Fiber
Reinforced Epoxy Composites Filled with SiO2
Particles”, Journal of Reinforced Plastics and
Composites, 28, pp 2861-2867.
11. Chand N, Naik A.M, Neogi S, 2000, “Three-Body
Abrasive Wear of Short Glass Fiber Polyester
Composite”, Wear, 242(1-2), pp 38-46.
Source of support: Nil; Conflict of interest: None declared
Advances in Polymer Science and Technology: An International Journal 2012; 2(4): 51-57
57
12. Chand N, Gautam K.K.S, 1994, “Influence of Load on
Abrasion of Fly Ash-glass Fiber reinforced
Composites”, Journal of Materials Science Letters,
13(4) , pp 227-300.
13. Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Siddaramaiah,
Sampathkumaran P, Seetharamu S, 2007, “Three-Body
Abrasive Wear Behavior of Carbon and Glass Fiber
Reinforced Epoxy Composites”, Mater. Sci. Eng. A,
443(1-2) , pp 285-292.
14. Suresha B, Chandramohan G, 2008, “Three-Body
Abrasive Wear Behavior of Particulate- Filled Glass-
Vinyl Ester Composites”, J. Mater. Process. Tech.,
200(1), pp 306-311.
15. Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Kishore
Sampathkumaran, P, Seetharamu S, 2008, “Mechanical
and Three-Body Abrasive Wear Behavior of SiC Filled
Glass-Epoxy Composites”, Polym. Compos., 29(9) , pp
1020-1025.
16. Visconti I.C, Langella A, Durante M, 2001, “The Wear
Behaviour of Composite Materials with Epoxy Matrix
Filled with Hard Powder”, Applied Composite
Materials, 8(3), pp 179-189.
17. Vaziri M, Spurr R.T,Stott F.H, 1988, “An Investigation
of the Wear of Polymeric Materials”, Wear, 122(3) , pp
329-342.
18. Vishwanath B, Verma A.P, Rao C.V.S.K, 1989, “Wear
Study of Glass Woven Roving Composite”, Wear,
131(2) , pp 197-205.
19. Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Siddaramaiah, Jayaraju
T, 2008, “Three-body Abrasive Wear Behavior of E-
glass Fabric Reinforced/Graphite-filled Epoxy
Composites”, Polymer Composites, 29(6), pp 631-637.
20. Suresha, B, Chandramohan G, Mohanram P.V, 2009,
“Role of fillers on three-body abrasive wear behavior
of glass fabric reinforced epoxy composites”, Polymer
Composites, 30(8) , pp 1106-1113.
21. Bartenov G.M, Lavrentov V.V, Lee L.H, Ludema
K.C,1981, “Friction and Wear of Polymers, Tribology
Series 6”, Elsevier, Amsterdam
22. Jayshree Bijwe, John Rajesh J, Jeyakumar A, Gosh A,
Tewari U.S, (2000). Influence of solid lubricants and
fibre reinforcement on wear behavior of
Polyethersulphone, Tribology International, 33, pp
697-706.
23. Lancaster J.K, 1972, “Friction and wear in Polymer
Science, In Jenkins, A.D. ed., A Material Science
Handbook”, North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 959-1046.