Metallic nanofillers effect in assessing the

abrasive wear performance of carbon fabric

reinforced epoxy composites
Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 2057, 020050 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5085621
Published Online: 11 January 2019

G. S. Divya, and B. Suresha

AIP Conference Proceedings 2057, 020050 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5085621 2057, 020050

© 2018 Author(s).
 Metallic Nanofillers Effect in Assessing the Abrasive Wear
Performance of Carbon Fabric Reinforced Epoxy
Composites
G. S. Divya1, 2, a) B. Suresha1, b)
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The National Institute of Engineering, Mysuru-570 008, India
2
Department of Automobile Engineering, Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering, Bangalore 560078, India
a)
divyags29589@gmail.com
b)
sureshab@nie.a.in

Abstract. The potential of metallic nanofiller reinforcement in the carbon fabric reinforced thermoset polymers for
bettering the abrasive put on resistance has no longer been explored so far. Hence a sequence of 5 composites of epoxy
(Ep) matrix bolstered with high strength carbon fabric (CF/Ep) and aluminium (Al) and zinc (Zn) nanoparticles (0.5 and
1 wt. %) used to be fabricated by hand layup method and three-body abrasive put on overall performance of these
composites alongside with the mono-composite (CF/Ep) was once evaluated. A composite slab used to be abraded
against free silica sand particles under unique loads/distances. It used to be determined that both Al and Zn nanofillers
revealed extensive potential to improve abrasion resistance of mono-composites. The hardness of the composites,
however, should no longer be correlated with the abrasive wear performance. Worn surface evaluation by scanning
electron microscope on the other hand, helped to correlate the abrasive wear performance of the composites with the
worn surface topography, failure of fibers, resin and their interface. Difference in the failure-mode of the fibers/fillers
used to be notion to be broadly speaking accountable for controlling the abrasive put on performance of the epoxy
composites.

INTRODUCTION

A composite is a structural material that consists of two or more combined constituents that are combined at a
macroscopic level and are not soluble in each other. One constituent is called the reinforcing phase and the one in
which it is embedded is called the matrix phase. The reinforcing phase material may be in the form of fibers, particle
or flakes. They may be continuous or discontinuous. The matrix phase materials are generally continuous. Examples
of composite systems include concrete reinforced with steel and epoxy reinforced with graphite fibers, etc. [1]. In the
year 1960, considerable research was focused on composites and this area, emerged as a distinct discipline [2].
Earliest benefactor of the composite technology was the aerospace industry where the search was towards a material
that is efficient and lighter than the existing monolithic materials [3]. Synthetic fiber reinforced polymer composites
and thir hybrids are used widely in many applications like automotive parts, mechanical components, and artificial
human body parts due to their good mechanical and tribological characteristics. The selection of matrix material is
based on applications and service condition of the component, while the selection of reinforcement is based on two
criteria, firstly the properties of the reinforcement material and secondly the cost it contributes to the system’s cost
[4].
Incorporation of micro or nano particles in the composites decreases the void formation by increasing the
interfacial adhesion in the reinforcement and matrix, which in turn increases the mechanical and tribological
properties. Suresha et. al carried out fabrication carbon-epoxy composites with and without graphite particles and
evaluated three body abrasive wear performance under different load and abrading distances. Experimental results
proved that the incorporation of silane treated graphite particles increased the wear resistance. Interpretation of
experimental results is carried out using scanning electron micrographs [5].Suresha et. al showed SiC filled glass-
epoxy composites showed good wear performance compared to unfilled composite [6]. Major problem in micro filler
filled composites is reduced efficiency in mechanical reinforcement at high filler loadings. The surface area of
micro-fillers in high filler loaded composites is too high resulting in insufficient polymer molecules to wet the filler
surface and hence increased filler agglomeration occurs. Reducing filler dimension into the nano range can avoid
such difficulties. The nano filler filled polymer composites are designed to overcome problems associated with
micro filler filled composite technology. The dimension of fillers in the nano range also has advantage of utilizing
modern polymer processing technologies. Carbon fibers are known for their good mechanical properties, but they lad

Advances in Polymer Composites: Mechanics, Characterization and Applications

AIP Conf. Proc. 2057, 020050-1–020050-9; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5085621
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1785-4/$30.00

020050-1
in wear resistance. This hindered the use of carbon fibers in several applications, where combination good
mechanical properties and high wear resistance. Many material researchers have tried to improve wear resistance of
carbon reinforced composites by various approaches namely adding fillers, modifying the carbon surface with
chemical treatment, fabrication process etc. Ceramics, metals, oxides, sulphides, synthetic and natural materials used
from micro to nano size to improve the tribological properties [7]. Suresha et. al fabricated glass-epoxy and carbon-
epoxy composites and carried out three body abrasive wear test by varying abrading distances and loads. The
experimental results revealed that carbon-epoxy combination gives better wear resistance. They also found high
percentage of broken fibers in glass epoxy composites through micrographs [8].
In this study Bi-directional carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composites are prepared with and without metallic nano
fillers and hardness and abrasive wear behavior is investigated.

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

Materials
Carbon fiber is used as reinforcement with Epoxy LY556 resin of density 1.15g/cm3. Table 1 shows the
properties of carbon fabric used in the research work. HY951 Hardener is used as curing agent in the fabrication
process. Nano particles, Aluminum (Al) and Zinc (Zn) utilized as filler materials in the preparation of hybrid
composites. Table 2 demonstrates the properties nano materials utilized.

TABLE 1. Properties of carbon fabric

Properties Carbon Fabric

Weight (g/m2) 200

Fiber Carbon 3K
Weave 2/2 twill
Dry fabric Thickness (mm) 0.20
Tensile Strength (MPa) 4000
Tensile Modulus (GPa) 240
Typical Density (g/cm3) 1.8
Filament Diameter (µm) 7
Elongation (%) 1.7

TABLE 2. Properties of Nano materials

Properties Aluminum Zinc

3
Density (g/cm ) 2.7 7.14
Appearance Black Grey Grey
Morphology Spherical Spherical
Average particle size (nm) 60-80 60-80
Purity (%) 99.9 99.9

Composite Fabrication
In the first stage of fabrication, three sets of mono composites are fabricated by reinforcing 55 wt.%, 60 wt.%
and 65 wt.% carbon fibers (C1,C2 and C3 respectively) in resin using hand layup technique. For obtaining the good
adhesion, LY556 resin and HY951 are used in 10:1 weight ratio. After completing the first stage of fabrication,
density, hardness and three-body wear tests are performed to find the best composition of carbon fiber and epoxy
resin yielding good characteristics. Later in second stage, four set of hybrid composites are fabricated by

020050-2
incorporating 0.5 wt.% and 1 wt.% Al and Zn nano particles to the best combination of CF/Ep composites
separately. Table 3 shows the constituent composition in the prepared composites.

TABLE 3. Resin, Reinforcement and Filler content in the composites

Sample Code Fiber wt.% Matrix wt.% Filler wt.%

Al Zn
C1 55 45 - -
C2 60 40 - -
C3 65 35 - -
A1 60 39.5 0.5 -
A2 60 39 1 -
Z1 60 39.5 - 0.5
Z2 60 39 - 1

At room temperature, mixing of nano particles with resin is carried out using the as shown in Figure 1. As the
density of filler materials are more than the resin, uniform mixing of nano particles and resin process is carried out
for 30 minutes at 800 rpm to avoid agglomeration particles in composites.

Transducer

Beaker
Base

FIGURE 1. Ultrasonicator

Experiment
Hardness test

Shore-D Hardness number is found for the fabricated composites as per ASTM D2240 standard.

Three body Abrasive Wear Test

Three body abrasive wear test is conducted to understand abrasive wear performance of the composites using the
abrasive wear tester shown in Figure 2. The abrasive particles 218µm silica sand with sharp edges is introduced
between the rubber wheel and sample. Tests are carried out at constant rotating speed of 200 rpm, load of 25N and
rate of feeding the abrasive is 260 g/min by varying abrading distance in the range of 150m from 150m to 600m.
After the test, specimen is cleaned and weighed. Three test trials are conducted for each prepared composites using
ASTM G-65 standard with test sample dimension (26*75*3) mm3. Specific wear rate is calculated using wear
volume, speed, load and abrading distance.

020050-3
 Abrasive feed Weight

Sample

Rubber wheel

FIGURE 2. Three-body wear test setup

Scanning Electron Micrographs

The worn surfaces of the composite specimens are examined directly using scanning electron microscope (SEM)
to understand worn surface morphology and to validate the experimental results. Worn surfaces are cleaned and
coated with 100 Å thick gold in sputtering chamber to enhance quality of images. Further the samples are placed on
scanning electron microscope and observed at 10 kV. Micrographs are taken for the hybrid composite samples made
of Al and Zn nanoparticles having better wear resistance.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Hardness and specific wear rate of fabricated mono and hybrid carbon/epoxy composites are investigated and
related with void content in the prepared materials. In first stage, abrasive wear performance of CF/Ep mono
composites are investigated and later to the best combination of CF/Ep, showing better wear resistance is selected
for introducing Al and Zn nano metallic fillers.

Influence of Carbon Fiber Loading on Hardness and Specific Wear Rate

Before conducting the abrasive wear test, hardness and density tests are conducted. Specific wear rate and
hardness of materials are correlated with the void content. Actual density and theoretical densities of the composites
are used to know the void content in developed composites [9]. Among all the manufactured CF/Ep mono
composites, composite with 60 wt.% carbon and 40 wt.% epoxy showed lower void content as tabulated in Table 4.
Shore D hardness number is measured to understand the influence of fiber addition on the hardness. From obtained
results (Table 4), higher hardness is observed in C2 composite. In the initial stage, hardness increased as fiber
loading increased but when the carbon fiber loading increased from 60 wt.% to 65 wt.%, negative trend is observed.
It may be due to increased void content and lack of interlocking between the constituents.

TABLE 4. Density, void content and hardness of carbon-epoxy composites

Sl. No. Composite Theoretical Measured Density Void Shore D Hardness

Code Density (g/cm3) content (%) number
(g/cm3)
1. C1 1.435 1.403 2.19 47
2. C2 1.468 1.442 1.78 51
3. C3 1.503 1.449 3.56 48

020050-4
 Three body abrasive test is performed for the prepared samples of CF/Ep mono composites and result is
tabulated in Table 5. Result indicates that C3 composite has higher specific wear rate compared to all other
composites. It may be due to higher void content, which is mainly because of poor wetting of fibers in matrix.

TABLE 5. Carbon-epoxy composites’ specific abrasive wear rate for various abrading distances

Abrading Specific wear rate (m3/Nm)×10-10

distance (m) C1 C2 C3
150 0.413 0.3124 0.482
300 0.455 0.3456 0.501
450 0.6889 0.455 0.732
600 0.955 0.6986 0.988

Second higher specific wear rate is observed in C1 composite. Void content and hardness of C1 composite is
18.72% more and 8.5% less respectively compared to C2 composite. More void content between the matrix and the
reinforcement weakens the bond and will be reason for high material removal and less hardness during the test.
Figure 3 represents specific wear rate of CF/Ep mono composites.

FIGURE 3. Specific wear rate of carbon epoxy composites without filler at 25N load and 150m, 300m, 450m and
600m abrading distance

Among mono CF/Ep composites, C2 composite showed better wear resistance due to less void content and
higher hardness. Specific wear rate of C2 composite is 24.35% and 35.18% less compared to C1 and C3 composites
respectively at 150 m abrading distance. It is also observed that in all the three mono composite sets, specific
abrasive wear rate is directly proportional to abrading lengths. At 600 m, specific wear rate of C1 composite
increased more compared to C2 and C3 composites.

Influence of Nanoparticles Loading on Hardness and Specific Wear Rate

Addition of micro or nano fillers with reinforcement in the specified amount will contribute in improving
mechanical, tribological and thermal properties. Uniform distribution of the fillers in the system will lead to better
adhesion between the matrix and reinforcement by avoiding void percentage. Incorporation of fillers increases
interphase interaction between the constituents yielding good hardness and better wear resistance. As C2 composite
showed good hardness, low void content and optimum wear resistance, it is considered as base for fabricating hybrid
composites by adding a small quantity of Al and Zn separately. Density, void content and hardness of the prepared
hybrid composites are tabulated in Table 6.

020050-5
 TABLE 6. Density, void content and hardness of hybrid carbon-epoxy composites

Sl. No. Composite Theoretical Density Measured Density Void content Shore D Hardness
Code (g/cm3) (g/cm3) (%) number
1. A1 1.473 1.453 1.38 52
2. A2 1.479 1.459 1.29 54
3. Z1 1.476 1.456 1.32 53
4. Z2 1.484 1.466 1.23 55

From the experiment, it is observed that higher hardness is found in the composite with 1 wt.% zinc filled 60
wt.% carbon fabric reinforced composite. It is 7.27% higher than the base composite C2 and 1.81% higher than 1
wt.% Aluminium nano particle filled composite. It is also observed that lower void % is found in the Z2 composite,
which resulted in high hardness of composite. Addition of Zn nano particle showed higher hardness compared to
addition of Aluminium nanoparticles of same wt.%. Higher hardness of Zn compared to Al may be the reason for it.
In both the cases, as the filler content increased, increasing trend of the hardness number is found. CF/Ep hybrid
composites’ specific wear rate can be seen in Table 7.

TABLE 7. Specific abrasive wear rate of hybrid carbon-epoxy composites at different abrading distance

Abrading Specific wear rate (m3/Nm)×10-10

distance (m) A1 A2 Z1 Z2
150 0.2234 0.3456 0.3234 0.2588
300 0.2878 0.3989 0.3678 0.3245
450 0.3941 0.5567 0.5012 0.4123
600 0.6123 0.7898 0.7487 0.5898

Even though void content is high in A1 composite compared to other hybrid composites, it showed better wear
resistance due to the presence ductile aluminum metal nanoparticles. Due to low void content and improved
interlocking Z2 composite showed better wear resistance next to A1 composite followed by C2, Z1, A2, C1 and
C3composites as shown in Figure 4. Z1 and A2 composites showed higher specific abrasive wear in comparison
with C2 specimen. Higher wt.% of Al nano particles incorporation could be reason for higher abrasive specific wear
rate of A2 sample, which hindered wetting of constituents. Z1 composite showed higher specific abrasive wear rate
in comparison with Z2 composite due to non-uniform distribution of particles. From the experimental results it is
concluded that, the optimum Al nano filler loading is 0.5 wt.% and Zn nano particles is 1 wt.% at 150m abrading
distance.

FIGURE 4. Specific wear rate of hybrid and C2 composites at 25N load and 150m, 300m, 450m and 600m
abrading distance

020050-6
 Worn Surface Morphology

From the abrasive three-body wear test, it is concluded that lower specific wear rate is observed in A1 and Z2
hybrid composites respectively among Al and Zn filled composites. Figure 5 and 6 are worn surface morphology of
A1 and Z2 composites tested at four different abrading distances. From the micrographs, it is evident that at lower
abrading distance, lesser worn surface characteristics is observed. Clean fibers with less breakage are observed in
the tested samples under 150m abrading distance (Figure 5a and Figure 6a). As the abrading distance increased,
severe damage of fibers and matrix is seen. At 600m abraded distance (Figure 5d and Figure 6d), due to high
ploughing and cutting process by sharp edged silica grains more number of broken fibers and debris are found. More
material removal is also observed at higher abrading distance due to reduced bonding between the constituents of the
composite. From the worn surface morphology, it is also observed that clearer fibers are found in Al incorporated
CF/Ep composite compared to Zn nano particles incorporated composite. High debris accumulation, debris masked
fibers and more fiber breakage is found in Zn filled composite.

Fiber breakage

Particle
s Debris Debris

Long fiber breakage

(a) (b)

Debris

Fiber breakage

Fiber breakage
Debris

(c) (d)
FIGURE 5. SEM Micrographs of A1 composites at 25N: (a) 150m, (b) 300m, c) 450m, d) 600m abrading distance

020050-7
 Fiber damage
Clear fiber

Fiber breakage
Debris

Fiber breakage Debris

(a) (b)

Debris
More Debris

Fiber damage

Fiber breakage c Fiber breakage

(c) (d)
FIGURE 6. SEM Micrographs of Z2 composites at 25N: (a) 150m, (b) 300m, (c) 450m, (d) 600m abrading distance

CONCLUSION

Higher hardness is found with 1 wt.% Zn nano particle filled composite.

Composite with 65 wt.% carbon and 35 wt.% epoxy composite showed higher specific wear rate compared
to all other composites.
Specific wear rate in the composites increased with increased abrading distance.
Better wear resistance is offered by A1 (60 wt.% carbon, 39.5 wt.% epoxy and 0.5 wt.% Aluminum nano
particle) composite followed by Z2, C2,Z1,A2, C1 and C3 composites.
Optimum Al nano filler loading is 0.5 wt.% and Zn nano particles is 1 wt.% for the better wear resistance.
Z1 and A2 composites showed higher specific wear rate compared to C2 composite.

020050-8
 REFERENCES
1. Autar K. Kaw, “Mechanics of Composite Materials”, Taylor & Francis, LLC, Second Edition, 2006.
2. G Gubin, “Hand book of composites”, Van Nastrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1982.
3. B Harris, “Engineering composite materials”, The institute of metals, London, 1986.
4. D Hull and T W Clyne, “An introduction to Composite Materials”, Cambridge University Press, Second
Edition,1996.
5. B. Suresha, B. N. Ramesh, K. M. Subbaya, G. Chandramohan, Mechanical and Three-body Abrasive Wear
Behavior of Carbon-Epoxy Composite With and Without Graphite Filler. Journal of Composite Materials
44(21), 2509-2519 (2010).
6. B. Suresha, G. Chandramohan, Kishore, P. Sampathkumaran,S. Seetharamu, Mechanical and Three-Body
Abrasive Wear Behavior of SiC Filled Glass-Epoxy Composites. Polymer Composites 29(9), 1020-1025
(2008).
7. B. Shivamurthy, Siddaramaiah, M.S. Prabhuswamy, Influence of SiO2 fillers on sliding wear resistance
and mechanical properties of compression moulded glass epoxy composites. Journal of minerals and
materials characterization and engineering 8, 513-530 (2009).
8. B. Suresha, G. Chandramohan, P. Samapthkumaran, Siddaramaiah, S. Seetharamu, Three-body abrasive
wear behaviour of carbon and glass fiber reinforced epoxy composites. Materials Science and Engineering
443(1-2), 285–291 (2007).
9. Divya G S, B Suresha, Role of Metallic Nanofillers on Mechanical and Tribological Behaviour of Carbon
Fabric Reinforced Epoxy Composites. Materials Sciences and Applications 9, 740-750 (2018).

020050-9