944 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No.

4
INTRODUCTION
P
P-PMF is replacing PC/ABS and ABS in many au-
tomotive applications due to its good recyclability,
good weatherability and low cost. However, PP-PMF is
relatively soft compared to PC/ABS or ABS and is
susceptible to scratch and mar during the manufac-
turing processes and lifetime of consumer use. It is
critical to improve the scratch/mar resistance of PP-
PMF for future applications.
The problem of scratch/mar is a complicated me-
chanical process (1, 2). Scratch performance of poly-
mers is determined both by the scratch stress field as-
sociated with the indenter geometry and by material
properties. The geometry of the indenter has signifi-
cant effects on scratch resistance of polymer (3).
Sharp indenters create deeper and more brittle failure
modes. Here, we focus on the failure created by blunt
indenters, which is closer to the failure we see in
practice. In this study, a scratch indenter with a 1 mm
diameter ball was used to characterize the scratch/
mar behavior of PP blends.
Scratching of a flat solid surface under a spherical
indenter was modeled by Hamilton and Goodman (4).
Based on this model, the stress fields during scratch
clearly show a singularity due to the maximum ten-
sile stress just behind the indenter, which is a prob-
able location for the initiation of craze/crack on the
surface of polymers. The yield stress determines the
extent of the plastic zone on the surface and the sub-
surface of the scratched samples. Indentation hard-
ness and elastic recovery are also found to relate to
the residual scratch depth (5).
Scratch Resistance of Mineral-Filled
Polypropylene Materials
J. CHU
Materials Engineering Dept., Visteon Automotive Systems
401 Southfield Road, ETF, A103, Dearborn, Michigan 48121
C. XIANG and H.-J. SUE
Polymer Technology Center
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-3123
R. DAMON HOLLIS
Polymer Research & Development
Eastman Chemical Company
Longview, Texas 75607-7444.
Pigmented mineral-filled polypropylene (PP-PMF) is marketed as a potential alter-
native to acrylonitrile-butyldiene-styrene (ABS) and Polycarbonate/ABS for auto-
motive interior components. PP-PMF is more easily damaged by surface
scratch/mar, thus limiting its acceptance for such applications. This study focuses
on investigating the scratch/mar mechanisms of PP-PMF having different mineral
fillers and additives. A new method is introduced to characterize the scratch visibil-
ity by image analysis. A correlation is found between scratch visibility and scratch
hardness measured by interferometer. It is found that Wollastonite filler imparts
higher scratch/mar resistance. Addition of an interface modifier and a lubricant
can further improve scratch/mar resistance. It is also found that Talc-filled PP-PMF
has poor scratch/mar resistance, irrespective of the addition of an interface modi-
fier or a lubricant.
In general, for low modulus polymers, an increase
in modulus and a decrease in friction coefficient can
reduce the scratch depth and size of the plastic zone
on the scratch surface (5). Typically, three methods
are used to improve the tribological properties of a
given plastic material, namely, 1) modifying the poly-
mer molecular structure, e.g. crystallinity, 2) blending
with scratch resistant polymers, and 3) producing
polymer composites with various fillers and additives.
In the present study, the effects of different filler types
and additives are discussed. Also, a new lubricant
and an interface modifier, which are known to be able
to decrease the coefficient of friction and enhance the
rigid filler effectiveness, are evaluated.
It is well known that the hardness of PP is depen-
dent on the degree of crystallinity and can also be af-
fected by various factors such as the type of fillers or
additives used (6, 7). Here, we study the degree of
crystallinity of PP prepared with various formulations.
Polymers usually have a skin-core structure after in-
jection molding (8). In injection molded polymers, the
scratch performance is most likely affected by the
skin instead of the core. Therefore, the parameters for
describing the scratch resistance in this work are all
associated with the surface properties of PP-PMF. The
scratch direction is chosen to be along the melt flow
direction. In addition to the scratch depth, scratch
hardness which considers indenter geometry, applied
normal load and the resulting scratch depth are also
used to quantify the scratch resistance of PP-PMF.
Pigments affect scratch visibility. Scratches usually
show up more obviously in dark color plaques than in
light color plaques. A new method, which employs
image analysis to characterize scratch visibility, is in-
troduced. Results of the image analysis performed on
plaques with the same color were compared in this
study. The failure modes of filled PP were also investi-
gated and their effects on scratch visibility were dis-
cussed.
EXPERIMENTAL
Materials
Specimens of PP-PMF compounds with different
mineral fillers were obtained from Eastman Chemical
Company and are listed in Table 1. The PP copolymer
(SG-702) was received from Montell Polyolefins. Two
types of fillers were selected for this study: Talc with a
median particle size of 3 m (Luzenac 8230), and wol-
lastonite with a medium particle size of 8 m (Nylos8).
The Mohs hardness is 1.0 for the talc and 4.5 for the
wollastonite. Maleated PP (Epolene G-3003), obtained
from Eastman Chemical, was used in this study. The
specimens used for the scratch test were injection
molded. The surfaces of the molded plaques were
smooth on both sides. Medium dark graphite color
concentrate by weight of 4% was added. Myvaplex 600
was used as a lubricant and was obtained from East-
man Chemical.
Scratch Tests and Measurements
The scratch test was done using Ford Lab Test
Method (FLTM) BN108-13. This apparatus consists of
a movable platform connected to five beams with 250
mm in length. A scratch pin is attached to one end
of each beam. A highly polished hardened steel ball
(1.0 0.1 mm diameter) is placed on the tip of each
pin. Each pin is loaded with a weight that exerts a
force of 7N, 6N, 3N, 2N, and 0.6N, respectively. Driven
by compressed air, the beams draw the pins across the
polymer surface and generate scratches. The scratch
is made at a sliding velocity of approximately 100
mm/s. All tests were performed at room temperature.
Although the test method requires that grained sur-
faces be evaluated, only the smooth surfaces of the
specimens were tested in this study.
After the plaques were scratched, they were evalu-
ated with a reflected light polarizing microscope incor-
porating a Xenon light source. An image analyzer with
Image Analysis Software was used to measure the
gray scale mass, which is the total gray scale value
of the object. The camera objective lens is positioned
at an angle of 90 from the scratch. The objective lens
then registers a portion of the scratch about 1 mm
long. The electron signal for each scratch line is then
integrated and recorded. The optical mass of an ob-
ject, M, is the sum of the gray level values, GL, of all
pixels in the object. The individual gray level values
are assigned by the image analysis program in unit
steps in the range of 0255, where 0 black and 255
white. The optical mass, M, can be computed from:
(1)
Where n is the number of pixels. The brightness of the
object, B, is
(2) B
M
A
M
a
n
i 1
GL
i
Scratch Resistance of Mineral-Filled Polypropylene Materials
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4 945
Table 1. Materials Used in This Study.
Code Materials
E1 Unfilled PP copolymer
E2 PP copolymer with 3 wt% maleated PP
T1 PP copolymer with 20 wt% talc
T2 PP copolymer with 20 wt% talc, 3 wt% maleated PP
T3 PP copolymer with 20 wt% talc, 3 wt% maleated PP,
0.25 wt% lubricant
W1 PP copolymer with 20 wt% wollastonite
W2 PP copolymer with 20 wt% wollastonite,
3% maleated PP
W3 PP copolymer with 20% wollastonite,
3 wt% maleated PP, 0.25 wt% lubricant
Where A represents the area of the object. The per-
centage change in the brightness between the scratch
and the background is the scratch visibility, B, given
by,
(3)
The depth of the scratch was measured using an in-
terferometer (WYKO NT-2000, WYCO Corp., using
WYKO Vision-32 Analysis Software). The magnifica-
tion was set at 5. Depth measurements were made
from the depth histogram of the scanned area. The
scratches were also examined using a scanning elec-
tron microscope (SEM).
Indentation Hardness Tests
For the Rockwell Hardness test, the ASTM D 785
test procedure was followed. The Tru-Blue Hardness
Tester made by United Testing Systems, Inc. was
used. The indenter was a round steel ball with 12.5
mm in diameter (Rockwell R scale). The Rockwell
hardness number is a measure of the non-recoverable
indentation after a heavy load of 588N for a period of
15s, and subsequently reduced to a minor load of 98N
for another duration of 15 s. Normal hardness is then
defined as the load divided by the projected area.
The durometer hardness test was performed ac-
cording to ASTM D 2240 (type D). A portable testing
unit was used. The tester is spring loaded with a pro-
truding hardened steel indenter. The indenter has a
30 spherecone with a 0.1 mm tip radius. The depth
of penetration was measured using a dial gauge. The
scale (the hardness number) is graduated from 0 to
100, where each number represents 0.025 mm inden-
tation.
Differential Scanning Calorimeter Analysis
The heat of fusion of the specimens was measured
using the differential scanning calorimeter analysis
(DuPont DSC 10) technique. In this study, the mater-
ial from the skin that is relevant to characterizing the
scratch performance was scraped from the surface of
the plaque. The heat change in each specimen was
measured twice. In the first run, the specimen was
equilibrated at 30C and then scanned at 10C/min
from 30C to 250C. After the first run, the specimen
was cooled to room temperature at the same rate. The
second run was used to determine the crystallinity of
specimens with the same thermal history. The re-
ported values of the heat of fusion were calculated
based on the polypropylene content alone.
RESULTS
Scratch visibility was measured using an image an-
alyzer and results from the 7N load scratch test are
shown in Fig. 1. Both grades of unfilled PP (E1, E2)
B
B
scratch
B
background
B
background
100%
J. Chu, C. Xiang, H.-J. Sue, and R. Damon Hollis
946 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4
Fig. 1. Scratch visibility of the 7N load scratch for various PP systems.
showed similar scratch visibility with slightly lower
visibility in the PP with additional maleated PP (E2).
Scratches are more visible in specimens filled with
20% talc (T1, T2, T3). The presence of additional
maleated PP and lubricant do not reduce their scratch
visibility. Wollastonite-filled PP (W1) has a scratch vis-
ibility comparable to that of the talc-filled PP. Scratch
visibility decreases with addition of maleated PP (W2)
and becomes even lower with the addition of lubricant
(W3). Specimen W3 has a scratch visibility compara-
ble to that of the unfilled PP.
The depth of the scratch is measured using an in-
terferometer. A typical surface profile of a scratch is
shown in Fig. 2. Ridges of deformed material are pro-
duced on both sides of the scratch (groove). Extensive
debris and cracking are observed at the bottom of the
scratches. The distance between the plaque surface
and the bottom of the groove, defined as the scratch
depth is calculated from the depth histogram. The
computed scratch depth is the average of at least
three measurements along the scratch and the results
are shown in Fig. 3. As can be seen from Fig. 3, the
unfilled PPs (E1, E2) have a relatively shallow scratch
depth. Talc-filled PP (T1, T2, T3) have deeper scratches
with a large data scattering regardless of the additives
used. The reason for the high variation of depth in the
talc-filled specimens is that the indenter skips on
the surface during the test. The scratch depths of the
wollastonite-filled PP (W1, W2, W3) are significantly
lower than those in talc-filled PP. A slight reduction in
scratch depth was also observed in specimens with
additional maleated PP (W2) and lubricant (W3). Spec-
imens W2 and W3 show scratch depths comparable to
those in unfilled PPs (E1, E2), similar to the scratch
visibility.
Figures 4 to 10 show the scanning electron micro-
graphs of the 7 N scratch test specimens. For unfilled
PP (E1), the scratch is shallow, with fine ripple marks
visible on the bottom of the scratch (Fig. 4). The rip-
ples form a parabolic shape with several visible fine
cracks between them. It is believed that the marks are
created by a continuous material flow around the in-
denter resulting in the formation of a uniform groove.
In addition, matrix debris is found in the middle of the
scratch. The boundary between the scratch and
plaque surface is not clear, suggesting that the scratch
is shallow and that the ridges formed at the sides of
the scratch are not well defined. A similar morphology
with a less amount of matrix debris in the scratch is
also observed in PP with maleated PP (E2).
Significant matrix plastic deformation is found in
the scratch of PP with 20% talc (T1), as shown in
Fig. 5. Multiple cracks are found at the boundary be-
tween the scratched and the unscratched areas. In
addition to matrix plastic deformation and voids,
some debonding between the talc and matrix is also
observed (Fig. 6). Fragmentation and smooth surface
of the talc suggest the presence of delamination within
Scratch Resistance of Mineral-Filled Polypropylene Materials
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4 947
Fig. 2. A typical surface profile of a scratch.
J. Chu, C. Xiang, H.-J. Sue, and R. Damon Hollis
948 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4
Fig. 3. The scratch depth of the 7N load scratch in various PP systems.
Fig. 4. SEM micrograph of scratch damage in unfilled PP (E1).
Scratch Resistance of Mineral-Filled Polypropylene Materials
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4 949
Fig. 5. SEM micrograph of scratch damage in PP with 20% talc (T1).
Fig. 6. Higher magnification SEM micrograph of scratch damage in PP with 20% talc (T1).
some of the talc fillers. More cracks and extensive
plastic deformation are found in specimens with
maleated PP (T2) and with lubricant (T3). Fine cracks
extend from both sides of the scratch at an angle of
about 30 to the scratch in specimen T3 (Fig. 7). In
the middle of the scratch, a significant but randomly
oriented matrix plastic zone is observed, with the pres-
ence of some voids. In addition, talc/resin debonding
and delamination between talc layers was also ob-
served. The scratched specimen has more distinct
boundaries between the scratch and the unscratched
area. This suggests that the scratch is deeper and
plastic deformation is significant.
In PP with wollastonite (W1), a very different mor-
phology is observed. The plastically deformed matrix
also contains parabolic marks with fine cracks ex-
tending from both sides of the scratch at an angle of
about 30 to the scratch (Fig. 8). The width of the
cracks is larger and the distance between successive
parabolic marks seems to be longer than that in un-
filled PP. In the middle of the scratch, a significant
amount of matrix debris, voids, and filler/resin
debonding are also observed (Fig. 9). In the specimen
with maleated PP (W2), a similar morphology is ob-
served with much less filler/matrix debonding and a
smaller plastic deformation in the matrix. With the
addition of a lubricant (W3), the extent of cracking
and matrix plastic deformation reduces even more
(Fig. 10). This may explain the decrease in scratch vis-
ibility in the wollastonite-filled specimens (W2, W3) as
shown in Fig. 1.
The results from both Rockwell R and Shore D
hardness tests are shown in Fig. 11. The Shore D
hardness of the filled PP increases slightly with the
addition of fillers, regardless of the type of filler used.
The addition of maleated PP or lubricant does not af-
fect the hardness. Like the Shore D hardness, Rock-
well R hardness of the filled PP is higher than the un-
filled PP regardless of the filler. Additional maleated
PP and lubricant seems to have a positive effect on
the Rockwell hardness. None of the hardness mea-
surements can accurately predict the differences in
scratch performance of the various PP materials.
All three talc-filled specimens show similar mor-
phologies, in that they exhibit significant matrix plas-
tic deformation, voids and talc delamination. These
fracture features contribute to the whitening observed
in the scratch. Addition of maleated PP or lubricant
does not change failure features. Wollastonite-filled PP
shows a smaller extent of matrix plastic deformation
as compared with talc-filled PP. Bonding between filler
and resin is also improved with maleated PP, and the
void fraction in the matrix is reduced to the same level
as that in the unfilled PP. The addition of lubricant
further reduces the amount of fracture features. The
scratch hardness due to the presence of wollastonite
J. Chu, C. Xiang, H.-J. Sue, and R. Damon Hollis
950 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4
Fig. 7. SEM micrograph of scratch damage in PP with 20% talc, interface modifier and lubricant (T3).
Scratch Resistance of Mineral-Filled Polypropylene Materials
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4 951
Fig. 8. SEM micrograph of scratch damage in PP with 20% wollastonite (W1).
Fig. 9. Higher magnification SEM micrograph of scratch damage in PP with 20% wollastonite (W1).
J. Chu, C. Xiang, H.-J. Sue, and R. Damon Hollis
952 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4
Fig. 10. SEM micrograph of scratch damage in PP with 20% wollastonite, interface modifier and lubricant (W3).
Fig. 11. Hardness results from both Rockwell R and Shore D hardness tests.
can reduce the scratch depth and the accompany-
ing damage (matrix plastic deformation, void) in the
resin. A lower coefficient of friction and better bonding
strength between filler and resin are also important
factors that determine the amount of fracture features
(scratch visibility) in shallow scratches. It is found that
neither a lubricant nor an interface modifier could
reduce the scratch visibility of deep scratches in talc-
filled PP.
The DSC results from both 1st heating scan and
2nd heating scan are plotted in Fig. 12. The speci-
mens are taken from the skin of the plaques and no
significant difference between the results of unfilled
and filled PP is found. This is due to the high nucleat-
ing tendency of PP. The heat of fusion of PP remains
the same in both filled and unfilled PP.
DISCUSSION
Hardness defines the ease with which a material
can be indented, drilled, or abraded. It is a complex
property, which is related to the test methods and the
mechanical properties of the material, such as Youngs
modulus and yield stress, etc. The relationship be-
tween hardness and mechanical properties is not
usually straightforward. However, there is a tendency
for materials with a high modulus and strength to ex-
hibit higher hardness. Both indentation hardness and
scratch hardness are generally used to quantify
scratch resistance of materials (9). A correlation be-
tween these two types of hardness seems to exist
when the deformation is simply plastic deformation
induced by larger included angle indenters. But it has
also been shown that the above two types of hardness
measurements are not in good agreement with each
other when the deformation modes differ from each
other.
Indentation hardness can be measured by a quasi-
static penetration of the material surface with an in-
denter exerting a known force. In this study, two in-
dentation hardness methods were used to investigate
the scratch resistance of plastic materials. As shown
in Fig. 11, these indentation hardness measurements
cannot be used to differentiate between various mate-
rials and no correlation is found between the hard-
ness and the scratch/mar resistance of PP. This is
due to the difference in the nature of the two tests: in-
dentation test is primarily a quasi-static test while the
scratch test is generally considered as a dynamic
process dependent on the dynamic friction coefficient
during the sliding process (9). The indentation hard-
ness tests are obtained from static tests and the re-
sults obtained by such methods should not be con-
sidered a measure of the scratch/mar resistance of
the plastics in question.
Scratch hardness is generally used to parameterize
material resistance to scratch/mar (1). The original
definition of the scratch hardness, in analogy with in-
dentation hardness, is given by:
(4)
Where L is the normal load and A
s
is the sliding con-
tact area. For a spherical indenter, the sliding contact
area is circular and can be written as (10):
H
s

L
A
s
Scratch Resistance of Mineral-Filled Polypropylene Materials
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4 953
Fig. 12. DSC results from both 1st heating scan and 2nd heating scan.
(5)
where w is the measured scratch width. Generally,
polymers are viscoelastic-plastic in nature. A parame-
ter, q, is taken into account in the definition of the
scratch hardness H
s
(6)
as given by Briscoe et al. (2, 3); where L is the load on
the indenter, and q 2, for a plastic deformation, and
1 q 2 for a viscoelastic-plastic deformation. The
value of q is dependent on the viscoelasticity of the
material, the sliding velocity, and indenter geometry.
In this study, the same sliding velocity and indenter
are used in the tests. By assuming q to be a constant
between 1 and 2, no significant difference is found be-
tween the scratch hardness of PP and PP-PMF materi-
als. This is due to the fact that the scratch width is
very difficult to be determined accurately in a shallow
scratch.
A relatively high elastic recovery is found in poly-
mers during scratch (5, 11). For a spherical blunt in-
denter, we assume an even elastic recovery in the
scratch deformation region. Similar to previous stud-
ies (7), we introduce the geometry of the indenter to
calculate the relationship between scratch depth, d,
and scratch width w
(7)
where r is indenter radius. The scratch hardness, H
d
,
is then estimated by
(8)
As shown in the Fig. 13, based on the definition
given by Eq 8, a good correlation is found between
scratch visibility and the scratch hardness. Materials
with deeper scratches show a lower scratch hardness
and a higher scratch visibility, provided that they ex-
hibit similar scratch damage mechanisms
Studies have been made to investigate the mecha-
nisms for whitening during scratch (6, 7, 11). Stress
whitening, such as crazing, cracking, voids, etc., can
result in significant enhancement of scratch visibility.
A deeper scratch always results in a more complex
fracture surface and with more fracture features. This
increases scratch visibility. As shown in Fig. 5, addi-
tional talc fillers (T1) increase the chance for resin/
filler debonding and crazing, thus creating scratch
whitening. Exposed white talc fillers also contribute to
whitening of the scratch. Wollastonite-filled PP (W1)
shows similar fracture features on the specimen sur-
face and thus the scratch visibility (Figs. 8 and 10).
But, the amount of plastic deformation, which leads
to stress whitening, is smaller in the wollastonite-
filled PP (W1) than in the talc-filled PP (T1). Debonding
between wollastonite and the resin is overshadowed
by the plastic deformation in the resin phase. For
specimens with improved interfacial bonding (wollas-
tonite-filled PP (W2, W3)), the scratch depth (or
scratch visibility) can be reduced significantly.
Addition of maleated PP, an interface modifier, is
not as effective as in Wollastonite-filled PP (W2) in
improving both scratch depth and scratch visibility
in the talc-filled PP (T2). This is probably due to the
fact that Wollastonite does not have a layered struc-
ture and therefore, no delamination is observed in
Wollastonite. Also, the Mohs hardness of Talc is 4
times lower than that of wollastonite. Even when the
surface of talc is treated with an interface modifier,
H
d

L
12rd d
2
2
w 222rd d
2
H
s
q
L
A
q
4L
1w2
2
A
s

1w2
2
4
J. Chu, C. Xiang, H.-J. Sue, and R. Damon Hollis
954 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4
Fig. 13. Scratch visibility vs. scratch hardness of various PP systems.
Scratch Resistance of Mineral-Filled Polypropylene Materials
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE, APRIL 2000, Vol. 40, No. 4 955
supposedly to provide a good bonding with the resin,
the talc delaminates and creates other defects during
scratch, which is responsible for scratch visibility.
Lubricant is important in reducing scratch depth
and the amount of scratch whitening in filled PP. It
has been shown that an increase in friction coefficient
leads to shifting the plastic yield zone to the surface
and increases the yielded zone size on the surface, re-
sulting in an increase in scratch visibility (4, 5). In
this study, a typical glycol monostearate lubricant is
used. The lubricant flows to the surface due to its low
surface tension without affecting the physical proper-
ties of the original system. The effects of the lubricant
are not evident in the results of normal indentation
hardness tests (Rockwell and Shore D Hardness tests)
as shown in Fig. 11. Figures 1 and 2 show the effects
of lubricant on the measured scratch depth and
scratch visibility, respectively. For talc-filled PP, the
lubricant does not change either the scratch depth or
scratch visibility. This is probably because the scratch
is too deep to be affected by the lubricant on the sur-
face. The scratch depth and scratch visibility of wol-
lastonite-filled PP are reduced by the addition of lubri-
cant.
An increase in crystallinity on the surface may re-
sult in a higher scratch hardness PP, but an increase
in crystallinity can also embrittle the material. A
higher crystallinity in the skin may contribute to the
higher amount of debonding, cracking, and scratch
whitening observed in this specimen. DSC results
show that there is no difference in crystallinity be-
tween the specimens with or without fillers, probably
due to the already high crystallinity of PP.
CONCLUSIONS
A good correlation is found between scratch visibil-
ity and scratch hardness based on scratch depth
measurements. PP-PMF material with higher scratch
hardness exhibits lower scratch visibility. Material
with higher scratch hardness is more resistant to
scratch, resulting in less damage to the material.
Amongst the materials studied, the PP-PMF specimen
with 20 wt% wollastonite (W3) is the best in terms of
scratch visibility. Wollastonite is found to be able to
reduce scratch depth and scratch visibility. The addi-
tion of an interface modifier and a lubricant can fur-
ther reduce scratch depth and whitening. The PP-PMF
specimens with 20 wt% talc (T1, T2, T3) are the poor-
est in terms of scratch visibility in these specimen.
Talc is found to be ineffective in reducing scratch
depth and scratch visibility. The addition of an inter-
face modifier and lubricant does not reduce scratch
depth or whitening in talc-filled PP.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank Gary Phillip, Jeff Crist, Clark
Thomas, and Vald Beltran for their support and assis-
tance in this study. This study would not have been
completed without their help.
NOMENCLATURE
L Applied normal load.
d Scratch depth.
A
s
Sliding contact area.
w Scratch width.
H
s
Scratch hardness by width.
H
d
Scratch hardness by depth.
r Radius of the indenter.
B Brightness.
B Scratch visibility.
M Optical mass of an object.
GL
n
Sum of the gray level value of all pixels.
REFERENCES
1. J. A. Williams, Trib. Int., 29, 675 (1996).
2. B. J. Briscoe, E. Pelillo, and S. Sinha, Polym. Eng. Sci.,
36, 2996 (1996).
3. B. J. Briscoe, P. D. Evans, E. Pelillo, and S. K. Sinha,
Wear, 200 (1996).
4. G. M. Hamitonm and L. E. Goodman, J. Appl. Mech.,
33, 371 (1966).
5. C. Xiang, H.-J. Sue, and J. Chu, ANTEC 99, 3463
(1999).
6. J. Chu, L. Rumao, and B. Colman, SAE Tech. Paper,
970659 (1997).
7. J. Chu, L. Rumao, and B. Colman, Polym. Eng. Sci.,
38,1906 (1998).
8. S. Xavier, J. M. Schultz, and K. Friedrich, J. Mater. Sci.,
25, 2411 (1990).
9. B. J. Briscoe, P. D. Evans, S. K. Biswas, and S. K.
Sinha, Trib. Int., 29, 93 (1996).
10. M. J. Pickles and I. M. Hutchings, Automotice Automa-
tion Limited, 381 (1997).
11. V. Jardret, H. Zahouani, J. L. Loubt, and T. G. Mathia,
Wear, 218, 8 (1998).
12. R. Kody and D. Martin, Polym. Eng. Sci., 36, 298
(1996).