Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

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

Technical Report

Dry sliding wear behavior of SiC/Al2O3 lled jute/epoxy composites

K. Sabeel Ahmed a,, Syed Sha Khalid a, V. Mallinatha b, S.J. Amith Kumar a
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jawaharlal Nehru National College of Engineering, Shimoga 577 204, Karnataka State, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, S.J.M Institute of Technology, Chitradurga 577 502, 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 ceramic llers like SiC and Al2O3 on wear behavior of jute/epoxy composite has been
Received 12 September 2011 experimentally investigated. The laminates of jute/epoxy composites with llers in 5%, 10% and 15%
Accepted 5 November 2011 based on weight of resin were prepared using hand layup technique. The dry sliding wear tests were
Available online 20 November 2011
conducted using pin-on-disc wear test machine. Tests were conducted for a constant sliding distance
of 1800 m and a track radius of 50 mm. For each composition, wear tests were conducted for different
sliding velocities (3 m/s, 4.5 m/s and 6 m/s) by applying normal loads of 30 N, 40 N and 50 N. The wear
loss and coefcient of friction were plotted against the normal load and sliding velocity for composites
with both types of llers. The results reveal that incorporation of llers leads to signicant improvement
in the wear resistance of jute/epoxy composite. It is observed that Al2O3 lled composite has better wear
resistant than SiC lled. Worn surfaces of selected samples were sputter coated with a thin layer of gold
and then subjected to scanning electron microscopy to analyze the mechanism of wear.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Bio (natural) ber composites are emerging as viable
alternatives to glass-ber reinforced composites especially in
automotive and building product applications. Bio bers offer
several advantages [1,2] like low cost, light weight, high specic
properties, renewable and biodegradable nature etc. Among, the
natural bers, jute is most popular one due to its distinctive
characteristics like high initial strength & secant modulus, good
dimensional stability, high roughness co-efcient, ease of
availability, low extension at break etc.
Signicant work has been reported on wear behavior of ber
reinforced composites [37]. Sampath kumaran et al. [3] discussed
the effect of variations in sliding velocity and applied load on the
wear behavior of GlassEpoxy composite and concluded that the
wear loss increases with the increasing applied load and sliding
velocity. Rajesh and Bijwe [4] reported that the abrasive particle
size is the most inuencing parameter in controlling the abrasive
wear behavior of aramid (Kevlar 29) fabric-reinforced
polyethersulfone (PES) composites, irrespective of the fabric
orientation. Suresha et al. [5], presented an experimental study
on friction and wear behavior of CarbonEpoxy and GlassEpoxy
composites. They concluded that increase in the sliding velocity
or decrease in the load results in lowering the coefcient of friction
and also the slide wear behavior of CarbonEpoxy samples are
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 7204 885064; fax: +91 8182 222450.
E-mail addresses: sabil_k@yahoo.com, principal@jnnce.ac.in (K. Sabeel Ahmed),
ssk3986@gmail.com (S.S. Khalid).
superior than GlassEpoxy. Harsha and Tewari [6], observed that
incorporation of glass ber in polyetherketone (PEEK) resulted in
an increase in wear rates under different types of loading. Bijwe
et al. [7], studied abrasive wear performance of polyetherimide
(PEI) reinforced with three types of fabrics viz. glass (with three
different weaves), carbon and aramid (Kevlar 29). They concluded
that the aramid fabric (AF) revealed signicant potential to
improve the abrasive wear performance of PEI.
Many times, llers are used in resin in order to impart
performance improvements that might not otherwise be achieved
by the reinforcement and resin ingredients alone [810].
Subramanian et al. [8], showed that addition of 3 wt% or more of
graphite in epoxy resin yielded extremely small amounts of wear.
Friedrich et al. [9] observed that the epoxy lled with the tungsten
carbide powders had highest value of wear resistance than silica
lled epoxy. Ray and Gnanamoorthy [10], studied friction and wear
behavior of unlled and y ash lled vinyl ester resin and observed
better wear resistance for 40% lled composites with a lower wear
loss.
The study by Zhang et al. [11] showed that incorporation
of polyuo-150 wax (PFW), or nano-ZnO and nano-SiC at
optimum content contribute to increase the wear resistance and
friction-reduction abilities of the carbon fabric composites. An
improvement in the mechanical properties and wear behavior of
SiC lled GlassEpoxy composites was noticed by Suresha et al.
[12].
Sandhyarani and Satapathy [13], evaluated that incorporation
of red mud particulates results in the improvement of erosion wear
resistance of bamboo ber reinforced epoxy composites and glass

0261-3069/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2011.11.010
 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315 307

ber reinforced epoxy composites Experimental results by Wang
et al. [14], showed that graphite was more benecial than
nano-SiO2 in improving the tribological properties of basalt fabric
composites. Mohan et al. [15], concluded that the hard powders
(of tungsten carbide (WC) and tantalum niobium carbide) lled
GlassEpoxy composites exhibit lower wear volume loss and lower
specic wear rate when compared to unlled GlassEpoxy
composite.
Recently few attempts have been made to investigate the wear
performance of natural ber based composites [1622]. Chand and
Dwivedi [16] found that, addition of MA-g-PP coupling agent in
jute ber polypropylene composites, leads to improvement in their
wear resistance. Jin Tong et al. [17], examined dry sliding wear
behavior of bamboo against a grey iron using block-on-ring
machine. They concluded that wear volume increases with the
normal load and sliding velocity. Hashmi et al. [18] developed
ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) modied
polyester-cotton composites and observed that the specic wear
rate of polyester resin decreased with the normal load and cotton
ber reinforcement. Dewivedi et al. [19], revealed that the wear
volume and coefcient of friction of bamboo was found to be
reduced when it was treated with Poly-vinyl-alcohol. Chin and
Yousif [20], investigated polyester composites based on sugarcane
bers. They observed that, the abrasive wear performance of
composites was better than the neat polyester. Yousif et al. [21],
concluded that presence of water improved the wear and frictional
performance of Betel nut Fiber Reinforced Polyester composite by
about 50% and 94%, respectively. Yousif et al. [22], investigated
the three-body abrasion wear and frictional behavior of treated
betelnut ber reinforced epoxy (T-BFRE) composite. They revealed
that the composite exhibited higher values in frictional coefcient
when it was subjected against coarse sand. Besides, the abrasive
wear of the composite is depending on the size of abrasive particles
and sliding velocity. Higher weight loss is noticed at high sliding
velocities.
A review of the literature reveals that, despite several
advantages of natural bers, investigation on tribological behavior
of natural ber composites is scanty. One of the reasons for this
could be poor wear resistance of natural bers. However, by
incorporating suitable wear resistance ller materials, it can be
expected that the wear properties of natural ber composites
may signicantly improve. The present work is an attempt towards
this goal, wherein, ceramic llers like SiC and Al2O3 have been used
in jute epoxy composites, to investigate their wear behavior.
2. Experimental
2.1. Materials
The materials used in the study consists of untreated woven
jute fabric of 22  12 (22 yarns in warp and 12 yarns in weft
direction per inch) having an areal density of 400 gsm and average
thickness of 0.8 mm, procured from jute vendor M/s Indarsen
Shamlal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkota as reinforcement. SiC and Al2O3 powders
of 48 and 32 lm mesh size respectively, procured from a ceramic
vendor M/s Bangalore Ceramics, Bangalore, India were used as
ller materials. Epoxy (LY 556) with 10% hardener (HY 951) as
matrix material both supplied by M/S Petro Araldite Pvt. Ltd.,
Chennai, India.

2.2. Fabrication of laminates

Laminates of woven jute fabric and epoxy were prepared by

hand layup technique in a mold at room temperature. PVA release
agent was applied on the surfaces of the mold to facilitate easy
removal of the laminate after curing. For preparation of lled
composite laminates, ller was mixed to the known amount of
epoxy resin and mechanically stirred to ensure uniform
distribution of ller in the resin. Hardener in the aforementioned
ratio is added to the resin with llers and further stirred. The resin
system impregnated jute fabric layers (250  250) mm were laid
down on the surface of the mold one over the other until the
desired thickness is reached. A roller was used to achieve uniform
distribution of resin system throughout the layer surface. Each
laminate was cured under a pressure of 30 bar using a hydraulic
press for 24 h. The laminate was then removed from the mold
and further cured at room temperature for at least 48 h before
use. All the laminates were made with eight plies. All the
Fig. 1. Experimental set up.
composites were processed at a total ber weight fraction of 50%

Table 1
Wear loss results.
3
Wear loss in (g)  10
Load N Filler Sliding velocity
3 m/s 4.5 m/s 6 m/s
0% 5% 10% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15%
30 SiC 9.3 3.0 1.9 1.7 10.2 3.2 2.0 1.8 12.5 3.5 2.1 1.8
Al2O3 2.6 1.3 1.0 2.7 1.4 1.2 2.7 1.6 1.3
40 SiC 12.1 3.4 2.5 2.3 15.1 3.6 2.9 2.4 18.5 3.8 3.0 2.6
Al2O3 3.0 2.5 1.9 3.1 2.7 2.2 3.2 2.8 2.3
50 SiC 21.8 6.1 4.8 3.3 25.7 6.4 5.0 3.4 38.0 6.8 5.1 3.4
Al2O3 5.0 3.1 2.9 5.2 3.3 3.0 5.3 3.3 3.1
308 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315

Fig. 2. Wear loss vs normal load for constant velocity of 3 m/s: (a) For Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

Fig. 3. Wear loss vs normal load for constant velocity of 4.5 m/s: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

Fig. 4. Wear loss vs normal load for constant velocity of 6 m/s: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

(1.5). The thickness of all the laminates was maintained uniform
at 5 mm using spacer.
2.3. Specimen preparation
Specimens of size (5  5) mm were cut from the laminate using
a diamond cutter as per ASTM standard G99 and nished to the
required dimensions using emery paper. The specimens were
glued using an adhesive, to metal pins of diameter 6 mm and
length 30 mm in such a way that the contact surface is oriented
parallel to the plane of the laminate. The contact surface was
polished with an emery paper of 600 grit size to ensure uniform
contact with the rotating disc.
2.4. Test Procedure
Dry sliding wear tests were conducted using a pin-on-disc wear
test machine (Ducom TR 20) in the laboratory in accordance with
ASTM G99 [23]. The experimental set up for wear test is shown
in Fig. 1. The contact surface was polished with an emery paper
 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315 309

Fig. 5. Wear loss vs sliding velocity for constant load of 30 N: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

Fig. 6. Wear loss vs sliding velocity for constant load of 40 N: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

Fig. 7. Wear loss vs sliding velocity for constant load of 50 N: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

of 600 grit size to ensure uniform contact with the rotating disc.
Both the disc and the specimen surfaces were cleaned using
acetone. The specimen-pin assembly was weighed using high
precision digital electronic balance (0.0001 g accuracy) and then
mounted on the specimen holder of the wear testing machine.
All the tests were conducted for a constant sliding distance of
1800 m and a track radius of 50 mm. For each composition, wear
tests were conducted at different sliding velocities (t = 3 m/s,
4.5 m/s and 6 m/s) by applying normal loads of N = 30 N, 40 N
and 50 N. After each test, the specimen assembly was weighed
again and wear loss was calculated. The frictional force was
recorded from the control unit of the machine and coefcient of
friction (l) was calculated. Three identical specimens were tested
for each composition and average results are reported.
310 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315

Table 2
Percentage reduction in wear loss compared to unlled composite.

Percentage reduction in wear loss compare to unlled composite

Velocity m/s Filler Load N
30 40 50
5% 10% 15% 5% 10% 15% 5% 10% 15%
3 SiC 67.75 79.56 81.72 71.90 79.33 80.99 72.01 77.98 84.86
Al2O3 72.04 85.69 89.24 75.2 79.33 84.29 77.06 85.77 86.69
4.5 SiC 68.03 80.39 82.35 79.60 83.7 86.51 75.09 80.54 86.77
Al2O3 73.52 85.98 87.94 82.58 84.83 87.64 79.76 87.15 88.32
6 SiC 72.0 83.2 85.6 79.45 85.4 85.94 82.10 86.57 91.05
Al2O3 78.4 87.2 91.2 82.7 84.86 87.56 86.05 91.31 91.84

Table 3
Coefcient of friction (l) results.

Coefcient of friction (l)

Load N Filler Sliding velocity
3 m/s 4.5 m/s 6 m/s
0% 5% 10% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15%
30 SiC 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.47 0.56 0.56 0.54 0.50 0.60 0.58 0.57 0.52
Al2O3 0.50 0.48 0.43 0.55 0.53 0.48 0.59 0.57 0.50
40 SiC 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.48 0.60 0.60 0.59 0.51 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.53
Al2O3 0.55 0.50 0.46 0.59 0.57 0.50 0.63 0.60 0.52
50 SiC 0.58 0.58 0.57 0.54 0.62 0.62 0.60 0.55 0.68 0.64 0.63 0.59
Al2O3 0.57 0.52 0.50 0.61 0.60 0.55 0.64 0.61 0.57

Fig. 8. Coefcient of friction vs normal load for constant velocity of 3 m/s: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

Fig. 9. Coefcient of friction vs normal load for constant velocity of 4.5 m/s: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.
 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315
Fig. 10. Coefcient of friction vs normal load for constant velocity of 6 m/s: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.
2.5. Microscopy
After the wear test, the worn surfaces of selected samples were
examined by scanning electron microscope (JEOL, JSM-6390LA) to
analyze the mechanism of wear. SEM specimens were coated with
a thin layer of gold using sputter coating machine to enhance their
electrical conductivity.
3. Results and discussion
Wear properties of unlled and lled jute/epoxy composites
have been studied in terms of wear loss (wear behavior) and
coefcient of friction (friction behavior).
3.1. Wear loss
A summary of wear loss results is presented in Table 1.
To study the effect of normal loads, the wear loss is plotted
against the normal loads for Al2O3 and SiC lled composites in Figs.
24 for different sliding velocities. For all the samples and for all
sliding velocities, wear loss increases with the increase in the
normal load, the rate of increase being more for unlled
composites. Similar trend in the wear loss was obtained in the
literature for GlassEpoxy composites [3], CarbonEpoxy
composites [5] and jute-polypropylene composites [16]. It can be
seen from the gures that unlled jute epoxy composites depicted
drastic loss of material when compared to lled composites, under
identical test conditions. Wear loss is signicant for unlled
Fig. 11. Coefcient of friction vs sliding velocity for constant load of 30 N: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.
311
composites beyond 40 N normal load, as can be seen by high
gradient in the wear loss curve. This is because of the reason that
natural bers are poor wear resistant materials. Also, at higher
loads, friction between the sample surface and the disc surface
is more resulting in excessive heat generation. Natural bers
being poor heat resistant materials, a sharp rise in the wear loss
due to heat generation is noticed in unlled composites at higher
loads.
It is evident from Fig. 2, that the maximum wear loss for unlled
composites at 50 N normal load, is 21.8  10 3 g at a sliding
velocity of 3 m/s. With the incorporation of llers, a drastic
reduction in the wear loss is noticed. With the increase in the
normal load, lled composites depicted gradual increase in the
wear loss as can be seen by less gradient in the wear loss curve.
For 15 wt% Al2O3 lled composites, the maximum wear loss at
50 N normal load is found to be 2.9  10 3 g and for 15 wt% SiC
lled composite, it is 3.3  10 3 g.
Fig. 3 shows the variation of wear loss with normal loads for a
sliding velocity of 4.5 m/s. At this velocity, the wear loss for
unlled jute epoxy composites is increased by 17.8% at 50 N
normal load when compared to the wear loss at 3 m/s, whereas,
for 15 wt% lled composites the increase is just about 3%.
The wear loss is plotted against normal load at a sliding velocity
of 6 m/s in Fig. 4. The trend of wear loss plot is similar to those of
Figs. 2 and 3. However, at 50 N, the wear loss for unlled composite
in this case is 74% higher when compared to wear loss at 3 m/s,
whereas for lled composites an increase of 6% for 15 wt% Al2O3
lled and 3% for 15 wt% SiC lled composites is noticed.
312 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315

Fig. 12. Coefcient of friction vs sliding velocity for constant load of 40 N: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

Fig. 13. Coefcient of friction vs sliding velocity for constant load of 50 N: (a) for Al2O3 and (b) for SiC.

Table 4
Percentage reduction in l compared to unlled composite.

Percentage reduction in l compare to unlled composite

Velocity m/s Filler Load N
30 40 50
5% 10% 15% 5% 10% 15% 5% 10% 15%
3 SiC 1.8 3.7 11.3 0 3.5 10.7 3.3 5 13.3
Al2O3 5.6 9.4 18.8 1.7 5.3 14.2 16.6 5 16.6
4.5 SiC 1.7 3.5 14.2 0 1.6 15 1.5 1.5 17.1
Al2O3 1.7 10.7 17.8 1.6 5 16.6 1.5 6.2 18.7
6 SiC 0 1.7 6.8 0 3.2 11.2 5.8 7.3 13.2
Al2O3 1.7 10.3 13.7 1.6 3.2 11.2 5.8 10.2 16.1

To study the effect of sliding velocities, the wear loss is plotted
against the sliding velocities for Al2O3 and SiC lled composites in
Figs. 57 for different normal loads.
Fig. 5, shows that the maximum wear loss for unlled
composites at a normal load of 30 N and at a sliding velocity of
6 m/s, is 12.5  10 3 g. With the increase in the sliding velocity,
the increase in the wear loss for lled composites is less signicant
as can be seen by the negligible gradient in the wear loss curves.
For 15 wt% Al2O3 lled composites, the maximum wear loss at
sliding velocity of 6 m/s is found to be 1.3  10 3 g and for SiC
lled composite, it is1.8  10 3 g.
Fig. 6 shows the variation of wear loss with sliding velocities for
a normal load of 40 N. At this load, the wear loss for unlled jute
epoxy composites at 6 m/s sliding velocity is increased by 48%
when compared to the wear loss at 30 N, whereas, for lled
composites the increase is 76.9% for Al2O3 and 44% for SiC.
The wear loss was plotted against sliding velocity at a normal
load of 50 N in Fig. 7. The trend of wear loss plot is similar to those
of Figs. 5 and 6. However, at 6 m/s, the wear loss for unlled
composite in this case is 200% higher when compared to wear loss at
30 N, whereas for lled composites the increase is 138% for Al2O3
lled and 88% for SiC lled composites. The comparison of results
reveals that, the effect of normal load on wear loss is more
signicant than the effect of sliding velocity. The results presented
in Table 1 reveal that the wear resistance of juteepoxy composites
can be signicantly improved with the incorporation of llers. The
 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315 313

Fiber
Breakages

(a) (b)
Fig. 14. SEM features of unlled sample at: (a) 3 m/s and (b) 6 m/s.

Pits

Debris Formation

(a) (b)

Multiple Cracking

(c) (d)
Fig. 15. SEM features of 5% lled sample: (a) 3 m/s (SiC), (b) 6 m/s (SiC), (c) 3 m/s (Al2O3), and (d) 6 m/s (Al2O3).

increase in the percentage of ller content results in decrease in
wear loss. This may be due to better wear resistant characteristics
of ller materials used in jute epoxy composites. The wear
properties of lled composites mainly depend on the basic
characteristics of ller materials like hardness, wear resistance,
thermal conductivity, shape, size etc. A comparison in wear loss
results between alumina and silica lled composites in Table 1,
indicate that, alumina lled composites are better wear resistant
than silica lled under identical test conditions. This may be due
to better hardness, wear resistance and small mesh size of alumina
ller than silica. At v = 3 m/s, N = 50 N, 15 wt% Al2O3 composite
indicated 86.69% reduction in the wear loss compared to unlled
one whereas for the identical test conditions, 15 wt% SiC indicated
a reduction of 84.86%. The percentage reduction in wear loss was
also calculated for other velocities and loads and the comparison
is presented in Table 2. The wear loss results obtained for 15 wt%
lled juteepoxy composites are comparable with the literature
values [3,12] for unlled glass epoxy composites.
3.2. Coefcient of friction
A summary of coefcient of friction is presented in Table 3.
Similar to wear loss, unlled jute epoxy composites exhibited
higher coefcient of friction than lled composites. Similar
observation was made by Ray and Gnanamoorthy [10], where
the coefcient of friction for neat vinylester resin was more than
yash lled resin. This behavior was also noticed by Wang et al.
[14] where the friction coefcient of the basalt fabric reinforced
phenolic composites decreased with increase in graphite and
nano-SiO2 ller.
To study the effect of normal loads, the coefcient of friction is
plotted against the normal loads for Al2O3 and SiC lled composites
in Figs. 810 for different sliding velocities. For all the samples and
for all sliding velocities, coefcient of friction increases with the
increase in the normal load. As the normal load increases, the
contact pressure at the interface between the sample and the disc
also increases, which results in increase in the interface
314 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315
Micro cracks
Debris Formation
(a)
Wear Scars
Debris
(c)
Fig. 16. SEM features of 15% lled sample: (a) 3 m/s (SiC), (b) 6 m/s (SiC), (c) 3 m/s (Al2O3), and (d) 6 m/s (Al2O3).
temperature, which in turn results in increase in the frictional
force. The coefcient of friction was calculated by dividing the
frictional force with the normal load [18]. It can be seen from the
Figs. 810, that, there is marginal decrease in the coefcient of
friction for 5% and 10 wt% lled composites at each normal load,
whereas the decrease is signicant for 15 wt% lled juteepoxy
composites. The reduction in the coefcient of friction with the
increase in the ller content may be due to better wear and heat
resistant characteristics of ller materials.
It is evident from Fig. 8 that the coefcient of friction for
unlled composites at 50 N normal load, is 0.58 at a sliding velocity
of 3 m/s whereas, for 15 wt% lled composites, the coefcient of
friction at 50 N normal load is 0.5 and 0.54 for Al2O3 and SiC
respectively.
Fig. 9 shows the variation of coefcient of friction with normal
loads for a sliding velocity of 4.5 m/s. At this velocity, the
coefcient of friction for unlled jute epoxy composites is
increased by 6.8% at 50 N normal load, when compared to the
coefcient of friction at 3 m/s, whereas, for 15 wt% lled
composites the increase is 10% and 2% for Al2O3 and SiC
respectively.
The coefcient of friction is plotted against normal load at a
sliding velocity of 6 m/s in Fig. 10. The trend of coefcient of
friction plot is similar to those of Figs. 8 and 9. However, at 50 N,
the coefcient of friction for unlled composite in this case is
17.2% higher when compared to coefcient of friction at 3 m/s,
whereas for 15 wt% lled composites the increase is 14% for
Al2O3 and 9.2% for SiC.
To study the effect of sliding velocities, the coefcient of friction
is plotted against the sliding velocities for Al2O3 and SiC lled
composites in Figs. 1113 for different normal loads. Figures show
that coefcient of friction for all the samples increases with the
increase in the sliding velocity. Similar behavior was observed in
Pits
(b)
(d)
[8] for graphite lled epoxy resin. The coefcient of friction for
unlled composites at a normal load of 30 N and at a sliding
velocity of 6 m/s, is 0.6 (Fig. 11). For 15 wt% lled composites,
the coefcient of friction at 6 m/s is 0.5 and 0.52 for Al2O3 and
SiC lled composites, respectively.
Fig. 12 shows the variation of coefcient of friction with sliding
velocity for a normal load of 40 N. At this load, the coefcient of
friction for unlled jute epoxy composites is increased by 6.6% at
6 m/s sliding velocity, when compared to the coefcient of friction
at 30 N, whereas, for 15 wt% lled composites the increase is 4%
and 2% for Al2O3 and SiC lled composites respectively.
The coefcient of friction is plotted against sliding velocity for a
normal load of 50 N in Fig. 13. The trend of coefcient of friction
plot is similar to those of Figs. 11 and 12. However, at 6 m/s, the
coefcient of friction for unlled composite in this case is 13.3%
higher when compared to coefcient of friction at 30 N, whereas
for lled composites the increase is 14% and 13.4% for 15 wt%
Al2O3 and SiC lled composites, respectively.
Initially, both the disc and the sample contact surfaces were at
room temperature. When the disc rotates at certain velocity, the
heat is generated at the interface between the sample and the disc.
As the sliding velocity increases, amount of heat generated also
increases, which increases the temperature at the interface. This
results in increase in the friction force. The results presented in
Table 3 reveal that the coefcient of friction decreases with the
increase in the ller content. This may be due to better wear and
heat resistant characteristics of ller materials.
At v = 3 m/s, N = 50 N, 15 wt% Al2O3 composite indicated 16.6%
reduction in the coefcient of friction compared to unlled one
whereas for the same test conditions, 15 wt% SiC indicated a
reduction of 13.3%. The percentage reduction in coefcient of
friction was also calculated for other velocities and loads and the
comparison is presented in Table 4.
 K. Sabeel Ahmed et al. / Materials and Design 36 (2012) 306315
3.3. Scanning Electron Microscopy
The morphology of worn surfaces is analyzed based on SEM
features (Figs. 1416) for selected samples tested under a
maximum load of 50 N for t = 3 m/s and 6 m/s. The worn surfaces
of samples tested at 3 m/s are smoother than those tested at 6 m/s,
with no sign of ber breakage, major cracks and pits. The
mechanism of wear at low velocity is characterized by plastic
deformation of the matrix (Figs. 14a and 15c) and microcracking
(Fig. 16a). Signs of debris formation (Figs. 15a and 16a and c) and
wear scars (Fig. 16c) are also noticed. At higher velocity, the
damaged caused to the sample is severe in the form of subsurface
interlaminar cracks that propagates leading to large-scale ber
fracture (Fig. 14 b), formation of pits (Figs. 15b and 16b) causing
greater wear of the material. SEM gures also reveal that the
extent of damage caused in SiC lled composites is higher than
that caused in Al2O3 lled.
4. Conclusions
The effect of ceramic llers on friction and wear properties of
juteepoxy composites has been investigated. Unlled juteepoxy
composites are detrimental to wear under higher normal loads and
sliding velocities. Incorporation of ceramic llers signicantly
improves the wear properties of jute epoxy composites. Wear loss
and coefcient of friction of all the composites increases with the
increase in the normal load at all sliding velocities. In the same
way, wear loss and coefcient of friction of all the composites
increases with the increase in the sliding velocities at all normal
loads.
Lowest coefcient of friction in 15 wt% lled juteepoxy
composites indicate their higher wear resistance.Al2O3 lled jute
epoxy composites exhibit low coefcient of friction and wear loss
compared to SiC lled for all compositions. The wear mechanism
of unlled juteepoxy composite was dominated by ber breakage
and plastic deformation, whereas, in lled composites,
microcracking, pit and debris formation were the predominant
wear mechanisms. Finally, it can be concluded that jute epoxy
composite demonstrate better wear performance when lled with
Al2O3.
Acknowledgment
The authors are thankful to the Visvesvaraya Technological
University, Belgaum, India for the nancial support in the form of
sanctioning a research project (VTU/Aca./2009-10/A-9/2542) to
carry out the present investigation.
315
References
[1] Sabeel Ahmed K, Vijayarangan S, Naidu ACB. Elastic properties, notched
strength and fracture criterion in untreated woven jute-glass fabric reinforced
polyester hybrid composites. Mater Des 2007;28(8):228794.
[2] Yousif BF, El-Tayeb NSM. Mechanical and wear properties of oil palm and glass
bre reinforced polyester composites. Int J Precis Technol 2009;1(2):21322.
[3] Sampath kumaran P, Seetharamu S, Murali A, Kumar RK. Dry sliding wear
behavior of glassepoxy composite. J Reinf Plast Compos 1999;18(1):5562.
[4] Rajesh John J, Bijwe J. Statistical analysis of abrasive wear data of aramid
fabric-reinforced polyethersulfone composites. J Reinf Plast compos
2006;25(9):101322.
[5] Suresha B, Chandramohan G, Seetharamu S, Vynatheya S. Friction and wear
characteristics of carbonepoxy and glassepoxy woven roving ber
composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 2006;25(7):771882.
[6] Harsha AP, Tewari US. Tribological studies on glass ber reinforced
polyetherketone composites. J Reinf plast compos 2007;23(1):6582.
[7] Bijwe J, Indumathi J, Ghosh AK. On the abrasive wear behaviour of
fabric-reinforcement polyetherimide composites. Wear 2002;253(78):
76877.
[8] Subramanian, Asaithambi P, Kishore. Friction and wear of epoxy resin
containing graphite. J Reinf Plast Compos 1986;5:2008.
[9] Friedrich K, Zhong Z, Schlarb AK. Effects of various llers on the sliding wear of
polymer composites. Compos Sci Technol 2005;65(1516):232943.
[10] Ray Dipa, Gnanamoorthy R. Friction and wear behavior of vinylester resin
matrix composites lled with y ash particles. J Reinf plast compos
2007;26(1):512.
[11] Zhang Zhao-Zhu, Su Feng-Hua, Wang Kun, Jiang Wei, Men Xue-Hu, Liu
Wei-Min. Study on the friction and wear properties of carbon fabric
composites reinforced with micro and nano particles. Mater Sci Eng A
2005;404:2518.
[12] Suresha B, Sadananda Rao PR, Chandramohan G. Inuence of SiC ller on
mechanical and tribological behavior of glass fabric reinforced epoxy
composite systems. J Reinf Plast Compos 2007;26(6):56578.
[13] Biswas Sandhyarani, Satapathy Alok. A comparative study on erosion
characteristics of red mud lled bamboo-epoxy and glassepoxy composites.
Mater Des 2010;31(4):175267.
[14] Wang Qi-hua, Zhang Xin-rui, Pei Xian-qiang. Study on the friction and wear
behavior of basalt fabric composites lled with graphite and nano-SiO2. Mater
Des 2010;31(3):14039.
[15] Mohan N, Natarajan S, KumareshBabu SP. Abrasive wear behavior of hard
powders lled glass fabric-epoxy hybrid composites. Mater Des
2011;32(3):17049.
[16] Chand Navin, Dwivedi UK. Effect of coupling agent on abrasive wear behaviour
of chopped jute bre-reinforce polypropylene composites. Wear
2006;261:105763.
[17] Tong Jin, Arnell RD, Ren LU-quan. Dry sliding wear behavior of bamboo. Wear
1998;221:3746.
[18] Hashmi SAR, Dwivedi UK, Chand N. Friction and sliding wear of UHMWPE
modied cotton ber reinforced polyester composites. Tribol lett
2006;21(2):7987.
[19] Dewivedi Umesh K, Ghosh Ajoy, Chand Navin. Role of PVA modication in
improving the sliding wear behaviour of bamboo. J BioResour
2009;4(2):5228.
[20] Chin CW, Yousif BF. Tribological behaviour of KFRE composite. Wear
2009;267:15507.
[21] Yousif BF, Lau Saijod TW, McWilliam S. Polyester composite based on betelnut
ber for tribological applications. Tribol Int 2010;43:50311.
[22] Yousif BF, Nirmal Umar, Wong KJ. Three-body abrasion on wear and Frictional
performance of treated betelnut bre reinforced epoxy (T-BFRE) composite.
Mater Des 2010;31(9):451421.
[23] ASTM G 99. Standard test method for wear testing with a pin-on-disc
apparatus, vol. 3.02. West Conshohocken: ASTM International; 2002. p. 414.