j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l .

2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

www.jmrt.com.br

Original Article

Dry sliding wear investigation of Al6082/Gr metal

matrix composites by response surface
methodology

Pardeep Sharma a,∗ , Dinesh Khanduja a , Satpal Sharma b

a Department of Mechanical Engineering, N.I.T. Kurukshetra, Haryana, India
b Mechanical Engineering Department, School of Engineering, Gautam Buddha University, Greater Noida, India

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

Article history: The effect of graphite particles on the dry sliding wear behaviour of Al6082 alloy compos-
Received 2 December 2014 ites produced by conventional stir casting method has been investigated. The percentage
Accepted 5 May 2015 of reinforcement was varied from 0% to 12% in a step of 3. The result showed that with the
Available online 10 June 2015 addition of graphite particles micro- and macro-hardness reduced by 11.11% and 10.44%,
respectively. The tribological behaviour of composites was investigated by pin on disc appa-
Keywords: ratus. Percentage reinforcement, load, sliding speed and sliding distance were taken as the
Metal matrix composites (MMCs) process variable. Response surface methodology has been used to plan and analyze the
Dry sliding wear experiment. Results showed that sliding distance is the most influential factor and load is
Stir casting the factor which affects the wear least.
Graphite (Gr) © 2015 Brazilian Metallurgical, Materials and Mining Association. Published by Elsevier
Aluminium matrix composites Editora Ltda. All rights reserved.
(AMCs)
Aluminium (Al)

manufactured composite are termed as aluminium matrix

1. Introduction composites (AMCs). Owing to technology growth, there is
enlarged demand for an economical, low weight, harder,
Every automotive industry in the recent time keen to man- stronger and energy saving material in the aircraft, space,
ufacture the parts which are light in weight with excellent defense and automotive applications. AMCs found applica-
tribological properties especially in the manufacturing of tion in these areas [1,2]. Since last four to five decades there
hydraulic brake system components where wear resistance is wide exploration and pioneering development in the field
is given as the most important consideration. Aluminium, of composite materials and in the past few years, most of the
which is light in weight, can be used as a main matrix ele- researchers tried to reinforce monolithic metal and alloy with
ment in the fabrication of composite materials and these ceramic phase to enhance their properties [3]. AMCs when

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (P. Sharma), [email protected] (D. Khanduja), [email protected]
(S. Sharma).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2015.05.001
2238-7854/© 2015 Brazilian Metallurgical, Materials and Mining Association. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. All rights reserved.
30 j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l . 2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36

Table 1 – Chemical composition of AA6082-T6.

Element Al Cu Mg Si Fe Ni Mn Zn Pb Tin Ti Cr Vn

Content % 97.14 0.038 0.690 1.16 0.258 0.04 0.580 0.027 <0.001 0.006 0.048 0.042 <0.01

compared to unreinforced alloy have better properties such 1.2. Selection of metal matrix
as high strength, high stiffness, high wear resistance and
high thermal stability, furthermore these properties can be Aluminium 6082 is a medium strength alloy with excellent
adapted to a specific requirement [4]. Graphite is a soft rein- corrosion resistance and manganese present in it controls the
forcement which prevents metal to metal contact by forming grain structure, which results into a stronger alloy and its
a thin layer of Gr particle because of its self-lubricating prop- application are in the field of high stress application, bridges,
erties, so Al–Gr composites have better wear resistance than trusses, cranes, transport application, etc. Amount of silicon in
conventional aluminium alloy. Liu et al. [5] observed a linear 6082 is high, which increases its wear resistance and copper is
relationship between wear volume and load for Al–Gr com- low so it is highly wear and corrosion resistant. The properties
posites manufactured by laser processed method and revealed of AA6082 can be further improved if it is alloyed properly with
that Gr particles formed a thin lubricating film, which signif- reinforcement like Gr to enhance its wear resistance so that
icantly improved the wear resistance of composites. Lin et al. the developed composites can be used in tribological applica-
[6] observed for Al–Gr composite when Gr particles increased tions where wear resistance is of main concern.
from 0% to 6% wear has been reduced, this may be due to
graphite formed a thin lubricating film which prevented direct 1.3. Aim of research
contact of sliding surfaces and reduced ploughing effects of
Al chips. Hassan et al. [7] manufactured the Al–Gr compos- A limited research work or almost nil has been reported on
ite and reported decrease in hardness with increase in % wear behaviour of Gr reinforced composites by taking Al6082
reinforcement of Gr due to increased porosity. Akhlaghi and metal matrix containing wide range of reinforcements. In this
Bidaki [8] fabricated Al2024 composites with varying amount research the dry sliding wear behaviour of AA6082/Gr compos-
of Gr (5–20%) by in situ powder metallurgy process and found ite (by varying Gr particles range from 0% to 12% by weight)
that an increase in Gr content reduced the coefficient of fric- produced in an inert atmosphere using conventional stir cast-
tion, hardness and fracture toughness of composites. Ted ing are presented.
and Tsao [9] concluded that the addition of Gr resulted in
reduced wear of Al–Gr composites compared to Al alloy. Jha
et al. [10] reported that wear rate of AA6061–Gr composites 2. Research methodology
increased with increasing the amount of graphite reinforce-
ment by powder metallurgy process. Liu et al. [11] reported 2.1. Development of composite by stir casting process
that both the wear and friction of Al2014–Gr composites man-
ufactured by squeeze casting decreased when the volume The proposed Al6082/Gr composites required for the analy-
fraction of graphite reached upto 50%. Rohatgi et al. [12] sis are fabricated by stir casting. AA6082-T6 is used as the
reported that aluminium matrix composites reinforced with matrix alloy and details of its composition after spectro-Lab
hard particles like SiC showed higher wear and coefficient of test is given in Table 1. Table 2 provides the details of Gr par-
friction than soft particles like Gr. Baradeswaran and Peru- ticulates, which are used as reinforcement. A batch of 1000 g
mal [13] concluded that AA7075/Gr composites manufactured of aluminium alloy was measured and put in the graphite
by liquid casting technique had better wear resistance than crucible and was melted at 900 ◦ C using an electric furnace.
pure aluminium matrix and wear resistance increased with To obtain homogeneous distribution of reinforcement in the
increased amount of Gr whereas hardness and tensile strength melt proper stirring is required. The melt was stirred with
decreased. the help of a mechanical stirrer to form a fine vortex for
10 min [17,18]. The Gr ceramic powder was preheated to a
1.1. Selection of fabrication method temperature of 500 ◦ C so that their surface oxidized, this pre-
heated ceramic powder was added at a constant feed rate into
There are a number of manufacturing methods available to vortex. Argon gas was supplied into the melt during opera-
fabricate AMCs like powder metallurgy, ball milling, friction tion to provide an inert atmosphere. After stirring the molten
stir processing, pressure-less infiltration method, etc., but mixture, it was poured into the mould of dimension 12 mm
conventional stir casting is an attractive and economical pro- diameter and 55 mm length. Argon gas was supplied until the
cess and can produce complex shape products and offers a
wide range of material and processing condition [14–16]. It
offers better matrix particles bonding due to stirring action of
particles into the melts. As a cost effective process stir casting Table 2 – Details of Reinforcement.
can be used in mass production of composite manufacturing Reinforcement Hardness Grain size Density
at industrial scale. Owing to all these advantages, stir cast- (GPa) (␮m) (g/cm3 )
ing is employed in present research for the development of
Gr 0.25 50 2.2
composites.
 j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l . 2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36 31

Table 3 – Factors and their level in CCD experimental plan.

Factors Designation Levels

−2 −1 0 +1 +2

Reinforcement (%) R 0 3 6 9 12
Load (N) L 15 30 45 60 75
Sliding speed (m/s) S 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
Sliding distance (m) D 400 800 1200 1600 2000

entire melt was poured into the preheated permanent mould 52

at 250 ◦ C. The manufactured composite was allowed to solid- 49.5

50
48
ify in atmospheric air and was taken out from the mould after

Microhardness (VHN)
46.5
solidification. The AMCs having different weight percentage 48

(3, 6, 9 and 12 wt.%) of Gr ceramic powder were manufactured 45.2

46 44
by the same procedure.
44

2.2. Micro-hardness measurement 42

40
The micro-hardness of composites was measured using Vick-
ers hardness tester (MITUTOYO-MVK-H1) at a load of 500 g 38
applied for a duration of 15 s at 20 different locations on all 0 3 6 9 12
% Wt of graphite addition
specimens.
Fig. 1 – Variation of micro-hardness with weight
2.3. Macro-hardness measurement percentage of Gr addition.

The macro-hardness of the composites was evaluated by using

a Brinell hardness tester (model 7KB3000) at a load of 500 kg process, therefore, both these factors were considered along
applied for a duration of 15 s at 10 different locations. with the sliding speed and sliding distance in this study. Thus,
four factors, % reinforcement, load, sliding speed and slid-
2.4. Wear test ing distance, were used in the present study. These factors
were designated as R (% reinforcement), L (load), S (sliding
Wear test specimens of dimension diameter 8 mm and length speed) and D (sliding distance), respectively. The coded value
35 mm were prepared. The end surfaces of the wear test spec- of upper, middle and lower level of these factors is designated
imens were properly cleaned and then polished with abrasive by +2, +1, 0, −1, and −2, respectively. Table 3 shows the factor
paper of grade 400, 600 and 1000, respectively. The wear test and their level used in the analysis. The experimental design
has been performed on pin on disc apparatus. The disc of the matrix for different runs and various factors with their actual
pin on disc is made of EN31 steel having surface roughness and coded value (in parentheses) is shown in Table 4.
0.1. The pins and disc were cleaned properly with the help of The relation between the actual and coded value of a factor
acetone before and after wear test. The wear was measured is shown below:
by weight loss, taking weight of the wear pins before and after Actual test conditions − Mean test conditions
wear test to an accuracy of 0.0001 g. Coded value =
Range of test conditions/2

The rotatable central composite design (CCD) was used in

2.5. Response surface methodology
the present investigation. The design expert 6.0.8 software was
used for analysis of data obtained. The wear tests were per-
The vast amounts of data have been generated by the tradi-
formed according to design matrix (Table 4) and weight loss
tional approach of experiment design in which one factor is
was the measured as response used to evaluate dry sliding
varied at a time (load, sliding speed, etc.). In this approach, it
wear behaviour Al/Gr composites.
is difficult to evaluate the combined effects of applied factors.
This is the main reason why load has always been considered
first in wear research, whilst other factors, e.g. reinforcement, 3. Result and discussion
sliding distance and their combined effects (load and rein-
forcement, load and speed, etc.), which may also be important, 3.1. Hardness result
have not been given the attention they deserve. The advantage
of the statistical method is obvious [19]. Thus, RSM (response The hardness value decreased (both micro and macro) as the
surface methodology) with full factorial design of experiments percentage Gr addition increased in the alloy (Figs. 1 and 2)
with five levels of each factor has been used in the present this may be due to low density of graphite as they are soft
study. According to Rabinowicz’s classic theory [20] that claims reinforcement and float in the melt and resulted into weak
applied load and hardness (depends upon composition) of bonding between the matrix and Gr particles, which resulted
materials are the most important factors affecting the wear into non uniform distribution of graphite particles, which
32 j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l . 2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36

Table 4 – Design matrix and various factors with their actual and coded value (in parentheses).
Run no. Process parameters Wear (g)

Reinforcement (R) Load (L) Sliding speed (S) Sliding distance (D)

1 3 (−1) 30 (−1) 0.8 (−1) 800 (−1) 0.0076

2 9 (+1) 30 (−1) 0.8 (−1) 800 (−1) 0.006
3 3 (−1) 60 (+1) 0.8 (−1) 800 (−1) 0.008
4 9 (+1) 60 (+1) 0.8 (−1) 800 (−1) 0.0058
5 3 (−1) 30 (−1) 1.6 (+1) 800 (−1) 0.0036
6 9 (+1) 30 (−1) 1.6 (+1) 800 (−1) 0.0025
7 3 (−1) 60 (+1) 1.6 (+1) 800 (−1) 0.0052
8 9 (+1) 60 (+1) 1.6 (+1) 800 (−1) 0.0006
9 3 (−1) 30 (−1) 0.8 (−1) 1600 (+1) 0.0161
10 9 (+1) 30 (−1) 0.8 (−1) 1600 (+1) 0.0146
11 3 (−1) 60 (+1) 0.8 (−1) 1600 (+1) 0.0182
12 9 (+1) 60 (+1) 0.8 (−1) 1600 (+1) 0.0172
13 3 (−1) 30 (−1) 1.6 (+1) 1600 (+1) 0.0095
14 9 (+1) 30 (−1) 1.6 (+1) 1600 (+1) 0.0081
15 3 (−1) 60 (+1) 1.6 (+1) 1600 (+1) 0.0152
16 9 (+1) 60 (+1) 1.6 (+1) 1600 (+1) 0.0132
17 0 (−2) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0115
18 12 (+2) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0077
19 6 (0) 15 (−2) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0051
20 6 (0) 75 (+2) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0098
21 6 (0) 45 (0) 0.4 (−2) 1200 (0) 0.0123
22 6 (0) 45 (0) 2 (+2) 1200 (0) 0.0075
23 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 400 (−2) 0.0018
24 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 2000 (+2) 0.0199
25 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0091
26 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0071
27 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0068
28 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0071
29 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.0089
30 6 (0) 45 (0) 1.2 (0) 1200 (0) 0.006

in-turns results into decrease in hardness with increase in where Y is the response (yield), f is the response function, ε is
weight percentage of Gr particles. These results are in line with the experimentation error, and X1 , X2 , X3 , . . ., Xn are indepen-
previous investigations [7,8,13]. dent input process parameters.
Expected response Y is plotted with the help of input pro-
3.2. Development of wear model by RSM cess parameter to obtain a response surface. The response
function ‘f’, which is not known to us, is very complicated
In RSM the input process parameters are represented in the to determine. RSM is used for this purpose, the main aim of
form of response in the quantitative form as: which is to approximate f by determining a range of inde-
pendent input process parameters by applying a lower order
polynomial equation. If the model is appropriate and suitable
Y = f (X1 , X2 , X3 , . . ., Xn ) ± ε (1)
then the response of the model can be represented by a linear
function in terms of independent process parameters, then
the response represented in Eq. (1) can be written as
33
31.6
31
32
30.2 Y = C0 + C1 X1 + C2 X2 + . . .Cn Xn ± ε (2)
Macrohardness (BHN)

31

30 29 However, there may be a possibility of appearance of cur-

28.3
vature in the response system made then a higher order
29
polynomial, i.e., quadratic equation will be used to represent
28
the response equation and following equation may be used.
27

26

n

n
Y = C0 + Ci Xn + di Xi2 ± ε (3)
25
i=1 i=1
0 3 6 9 12
% Wt of graphite addition
The central composite design (CCD) was used in this
Fig. 2 – Variation of macro-hardness with weight experimental study. Significance testing of the coefficients,
percentage of Gr addition. adequacy of the model and analysis of variance was carried
 j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l . 2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36 33

Table 5 – ANOVA table for wear rate (after backward elimination).

Source Sum of squares Degree of freedom Mean square f-value Prob. > f

Model 6.738 × 10−4 8 8.423 × 10−5 73.38 <0.0001

Reinforcement (R) 2.204 × 10−5 1 2.204 × 10−5 19.20 0.0003
Load (L) 2.563 × 10−5 1 2.563 × 10−5 22.33 0.0001
Sliding speed (S) 8.513 × 10−5 1 8.513 × 10−5 74.16 <0.0001
Sliding distance (D) 4.950 × 10−4 1 4.950 × 10−4 431.28 <0.0001
A2 7.823 × 10−6 1 7.823 × 10−6 6.82 0.0163
C2 1.020 × 10−5 1 1.020 × 10−5 8.89 0.0071
D2 1.981 × 10−5 1 1.981 × 10−5 17.26 0.0004
BD 1.521 × 10−5 1 1.521 × 10−5 13.25 0.0015
Residual 2.410 × 10−5 21 1.148 × 10−6
Lack of fit 1.652 × 10−5 16 1.033 × 10−6 0.68 0.7454
Pure error 7.580 × 10−6 5 1.516 × 10−6
Cor total 6.979 × 10−4 29

out by using Design Expert Software to find out the significant

factors, square terms and interactions affecting the response The value of R2 and adjusted R2 is over 95%. This means
(dry sliding wear). that regression model provides a tremendous clarification of
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) is shown in Table 5. The the relationship between input variables (process parameters)
analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows the significance of vari- and output response (dry sliding wear). The associated p-value
ous factors and their interactions at 95% confidence interval. for the model is lower than 0.05 (i.e. ˛ = 0.05 or 95% confi-
ANOVA shows the “Model” as “Significant” while the “Lack dence) indicates that model is considered to be statistically
of fit” is “Not significant”, which are desirable from a model significant.
point of view. The probability values <0.05 in the “Prob. > F”
column indicates the significant factors and interactions. The 3.3. Validity of the wear model and confirmation
main factors and their interactions are included in the final experiments
dry sliding wear model while the insignificant interactions are
excluded from the wear model. % Reinforcement (R), load (L), The validity of the dry sliding wear model was evaluated by
sliding speed (S) and sliding distance (D) are the significant conducting dry sliding wear test on composites at different
factors while load–sliding distance (LD) is the significant inter- values of the experimental factors such as % reinforcement
actions. Quadratic terms of percentage reinforcement, sliding (R), load (L), sliding speed (S) and sliding distance (D). As the
speed and sliding distance also have significant influence on equation of response for the model is derived from quadratic
the dry sliding wear of composites manufactured. regression fit, so to confirm their validity confirmation test
After eliminating the non-significant terms, the dry slid- must be performed. The independent variable selected for
ing wear model generated in terms of coded and actual factor the confirmation experiments must lie within the ranges for
values (Eqs. (4) and (5) respectively) is given below: which equations were derived. The three confirmation exper-
In coded parameters: iments were performed for wear rate at the condition of
independent process parameter provided by quadratic model.
Wear (g) = 7.488 × 10−3 − 9.583 × 10−4 × A + 1.033 × 10−4 The data from the confirmation experiments and their com-
parison with the predicted designed for wear rate are listed
× B − 1.883 × 10−3 × C + 4.542 × 10−3 × D + 5.286
in Table 6. From the table it can be observed that calculated
× 10−4 × A2 + 6.036 × 10−4 × C2 + 8.411 × 10−4 D2 error is small. The error between experimental and predicted
values is small which confirms the experimental conclusion.
+ 9.750 × 10−4 × B × D (4)

3.4. Effect of individual variables on wear rate

In actual parameters:
The effect of individual factors on dry sliding wear is shown in
Wear (g) = 0.022221 − 1.02421 × 10 −3
× Reinforcement (R) Fig. 3(a)–(d). The effect of percentage reinforcement (R), load
(L), sliding speed (S), sliding distance (D) and that of interac-
− 1.26111 × 10−4 × Load (L) − 0.013762 tions between load (L) and sliding distance (D) on dry sliding
wear is given in Eq. (4), which exhibits the dry sliding wear
× Sliding Speed (S) − 8.57440 × 10−6
in terms of coded value and Eq. (5) in terms of actual val-
× Sliding Distance (D) + 5.87302 × 10−5 ues of factors and their interactions. However, the effect of
individual factors is discussed by considering Eq. (4) because
× Reinforcement (R) + 3.77232 × 10−3
2
all the factors are at same level. The constant 7.488 × 10−3 in
× Sliding Speed (S) + 5.25670 × 10−9
2
Eq. (4) indicates the overall mean of the dry sliding wear of
2 composite under all the test conditions. This equation further
× Sliding Distance (D) + 1.62500 × 10 − 7
indicates that the coefficient 9.583 × 10−4 associated with per-
× Load (L) × Sliding Distance (D) (5) centage reinforcement is negative, which signifies a decrease
34 j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l . 2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36

Table 6 – Confirmation test and their comparison with the result.

Exp. no. Process parameters Wear (g)

% Reinforcement (R) Load (L) Sliding speed (C) Sliding distance (D) Exp. Predicted Error (%)

1 4 60 0.9 1500 0.0165 0.0158 4.24

2 8 40 1.6 900 0.0031 0.0028 9.68
3 3 35 1.5 1500 0.0110 0.0106 3.63

of wear with an increase of percentage reinforcement Fig. 3(a). in Fig. 3(b)–(d). The coefficient associated with load, sliding
This is attributed due to the presence of Gr particles, which as speed and sliding distance is 1.033 × 10−4 , 1.883 × 10−3 and
a soft lubricant formed a layer between the sliding surfaces 4.542 × 10−3 , respectively. This signifies that sliding distance
and prevented the contact of sliding surfaces [6]. The effect has a more detrimental effect than the applied load and slid-
of load, sliding speed and sliding distance on wear is shown ing speed on the wear of the composite. The effect of load on

0.0199
a 0.0199 b

0.015075 0.015075
Wear (g)
Wear (g)

0.01025 0.01025

0.005425 0.005425

0.0006 0.0006

3.00 4.50 6.00 7.50 9.00 30.00 37.50 45.00 52.50 60.00
Reinforcement, R (%) Load, L (N)

0.0199 c 0.0199 d

0.015075 0.015075
Wear (g)

Wear (g)

0.01025 0.01025

0.005425 0.005425

0.0006 0.0006

0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 1400.00 1600.00

Sliding speed, S (m/s) Sliding distance, D (m)

Fig. 3 – Effect of individual factors on dry sliding wear (a) percentage reinforcement, (b) load, (c) sliding speed, and (d) sliding
distance.
 j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l . 2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36 35

i.e. wear rate of composites and the following conclusion were

drawn from the present investigation.
0.0148792
0.0120917 1. The micro-hardness of composites was decreased from
0.00930417
49.5 VHN to 44 VHN and macro-hardness from 31.6 BHN to
0.00651667
28.3 BHN, respectively, with respect to addition of weight
Wear (g)

0.00372917
percentage of Gr.
2. The wear rate of composites decreased with increasing
sliding speed and percentage reinforcement and increased
1600.00
60.00 with increasing load, sliding distance.
1400.00
52.50 3. The wear resistance of developed composites was lower
1200.00
45.00 than that of cast AA6082 at all combination of reinforce-
D: Sliding distance, D (m) 1000.00 37.50
800.00 30.00
B: Load, L (N) ment, load, sliding speed and sliding distance.
4. ANOVA indicated that sliding distance is the most
Fig. 4 – Effect of load and sliding distance interaction on influential factor followed by sliding speed, percentage
wear. reinforcement and load on the wear rate of composites.
5. The interaction between load (L) and sliding distance (D)
also has significant effect on the wear rate of composites.
6. The confirmation experiments showed that the error
wear is shown in Fig. 3(b) the wear increased with increase in
between experimental and predicted value of wear rate lies
load, which is due to the fact that with increase in load con-
within range 3–10%.
tact pressure increased on the sliding surfaces which resulted
into increased wear at high load. The effect of sliding speed
on the wear is shown in Fig. 3(c) where low as compared to
sliding distance. The wear decreased with increased in sliding Conflicts of interest
speed, which may be due to the fact that higher sliding speeds
results in increase in temperature. This increase in tempera- The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
ture further leads to oxidation of the contact surfaces. The
hard nature of oxides results in low wear of the composite.
Also at higher sliding speed the time of interaction between
references
sliding surface decreased which results in to low amount of
material removed. The effect of sliding distance on the wear
is shown in Fig. 3(d) where the wear increased with increase
[1] Wang DZ, Peng HX, Liu J, Yao CK. Wear behaviour and
in sliding distance. This may be due to the fact contact area of
microstructural changes of SiC–Al composite under
sliding surface increased with increased in contact time which unlubricated sliding friction. Wear 1995;184:187–92.
in turns increased wear of the composite. [2] Garcia CC, Narciso J, Louis E. Abrasive wear resistance of
aluminium alloy/ceramic particulate composites. Wear
3.5. Interaction effect of the different variables 1996;192:170–7.
[3] Cylne TW, Mortensen A. Comprehensive composite
materials, metal matrix composites. Elsevier; 2000. p. 26–38.
Fig. 4 shows the effect of load and sliding distance (LD) on wear [4] Mbaya EI (MSc thesis) The development of dispersion
rate the hold condition for percentage reinforcement was 6% strengthened tin–silica composite for used as a material for
while that for sliding speed was 1.2 m/s. With the increase in plain bearing. Department of Mechanical Engineering, ATBU
load the wear increased as shown in Fig. 4. This may be due Bauchi; 2005. p. 5–25.
to the fact that with the increase in load keeping the sliding [5] Liu YB, Hu JD, Cao ZY, Rohatgi PK. Wear resistance of laser
processed Al–Si–graphitep composites. Wear 1997;206:83–6.
distance constant the high pressure is applied on the sliding
[6] Lin CB, Chang RJ, Weng WP. A study on process and
surfaces, which results in increased wear of the composite and
tribological behavior of Al alloy/Gr (p) composite. Wear
with increase in sliding distance keeping the load constant the 1998;217:167–74.
wear rate of composite increased because at higher sliding [7] Hassan AM, Tashtoush GM, Ahmed AKJ. Effect of graphite
distance the time of interaction between the sliding surfaces and/or silicon carbide particles addition on the hardness and
increased due to the amount of material removed increased. surface roughness of Al–4 wt.% Mg alloy. J Compos Mater
The combined effect of load and sliding distance increased the 2007;41:453–65.
[8] Akhlaghi F, Bidaki ZA. Influence of graphite content on dry
wear.
sliding and oil impregnated sliding wear behaviour of
Al2024–Gr composite produced by in situ powder metallurgy
4. Conclusion method. Wear 2009;266:37–45.
[9] Ted GML, Tsao CYA. Tribological behavior of self-lubricating
aluminium/SiC/graphite hybrid composites synthesized by
The Al6082/Gr composites were successfully fabricated by stir the semi-solid powder densification method. Compos Sci
casting process and the hardness of composite decreased as Technol 2000;60:65–74.
compared to cast Al6082. The wear resistance of compos- [10] Jha AK, Prasad SV, Upadhyaya GS. Dry sliding wear of
ite has been improved as compared to conventional AA6082 sintered 6061 aluminium alloy–graphite particle composite.
matrix. RSM is used for the empirical modelling of response, Tribol Int 1989;22(5):321–7.
36 j m a t e r r e s t e c h n o l . 2 0 1 6;5(1):29–36

[11] Liu YB, Lim SC, Ray S, Rohatgi PK. Friction and wear of [16] Kerti I, Toptan F. Microstructural variations in cast
aluminium–graphite composites: the smearing process of B4 C-reinforced aluminium matrix composites (AMCs). Mater
graphite during sliding. Wear 1992;159:201–5. Lett 2008;62:1215–8.
[12] Rohatgi PK, Liu Y, Ray S. Friction and wear of metal–matrix [17] Hashim J, Looney L, Hashmi MSJ. Metal matrix composites:
composites. ASM Handb 2004;18:801–11. production by the stir casting method. J Mater Process
[13] Baradeswaran A, Perumal AE. Wear and mechanical Technol 1999;92–93:1–7.
characteristics of Al 7075/graphite composites. Compos B [18] Sevik H, Can KS. Properties of alumina particulate reinforced
2014;56:472–6. aluminium alloy produced by pressure die casting. Mater
[14] Ravi KR, Sreekumar VM, Pillai RM, Chandan M, Des 2006;27:676–83.
Amaranathan KR, Arul KR. Optimization of mixing [19] Venkateswarlu K, Mohapatra S, Rao RG, Ray AK, Pathak LC,
parameters through a water model for metal matrix Mondal DP. High abrasive wear response of diamond
composites synthesis. Mater Des 2007;28:871–81. reinforced composite coating: a factorial design approach.
[15] Shorowordi KM, Laoui T, Haseeb ASMA, Celis JP, Froyen L. Tribol Lett 2006;24:7–14.
Microstructure and interface characteristics of B4 C, SiC, and [20] Rabinowicz ED. Friction and wear of work hardening in the
Al2 O3 reinforced Al matrix composites: a comparative study. design of wear resistant materials. New York: Wiley; 1965. p.
J Mater Process Technol 2003;142:738–43. 168.