Effect of different parameters on the tribological performance of polypropylene/thermoplastic polyurethane blends under dry sliding conditions

  • Soner SavaşEmail author


In this study, polypropylene/thermoplastic polyurethane (PP/TPU) blends (weight ratios of 75/25 and 25/75) were produced by melt blending, and a maleic anhydride-grafted polypropylene (PP-g-MA) copolymer was used as a coupling agent. The effect of the concentration of the coupling agent (5–11 phr), TPU concentration (25–75%), normal load (2–4 N) and sliding velocity (60–72 rpm) on the wear properties of the blends were characterized through a pin-on-disc abrasive wear test. A \(2^{4}\) full-factorial experimental design was chosen to screen the significant factors and their interactions influencing the tribological performance of the blends. After the tests, the morphology of the worn surface of the samples was observed using scanning electron microscopy. Shore D hardness tests were also conducted and the relationships between these behaviours were analysed on the basis of the findings. According to the wear test results, the factors that have the greatest effect on the wear rates are as follows: normal load, TPU concentration, sliding velocity and PP-g-MA concentration, respectively. The wear rate of the blends increases by increasing the normal load, TPU concentration and sliding speed, and slightly decreases by increasing the PP-g-MA concentration. As expected, the wear and hardness results showed the apparent superiority of the \(\hbox {PP}_{75}/\hbox {TPU}_{25}\) blends over the \(\hbox {PP}_{25}/\hbox {TPU}_{75}\) blends, because of the higher content of rigid segments in the blends.


Polymer blends maleic anhydride-grafted polypropylene abrasive wear hardness 



This work was supported by the Office of Scientific Research Projects in Erciyes University, Turkey, under project no. FYL-2017-7084.


  1. 1.
    Bajsić E G, Šmit I and Leskovac M 2007 J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 104 3980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Di Y, Kang M, Zhao Y, Yan S and Wang X 2006 J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 99 875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chuayjuljit S and Ketthongmongkol S 2012 J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 26 923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bajsić E G and Rek V 2004 e-Polymers 4-1 1Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu Q W and Macosko C W 2004 Polymer 45 1981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Luo J-S, Xu B-P, Yu H-W, Du Y-X and Feng Y-H 2015 Fiber Polym. 16 95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ajili S H, Ebrahimi N G and Khorasani M T 2003 J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 89 2496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bajsić E G, Pustak A, Šmit I and Leskovac M 2010 J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 117 1378Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kannan M, Joseph K and Thomas S 2015 Plast. Rubber. Compos. 44 245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jia S, Qu J, Liu W, Wu C, Chen R, Zhai S et al 2014 Polym. Eng. Sci. 54 716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kannan M, Bhagawan S S, Joseph K and Thomas S 2009 J. Compos. Mater. 43 1915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pötschke P and Wallheinke K 1999 Polym. Eng. Sci. 39 1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lan Y, Liu H, Cao X, Zhao S, Dai K, Yan X et al 2016 Polymer 97 11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jia S, Zhu Y, Wang Z, Chen L and Fu L 2015 J. Polym. Res. 22 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang X, Mu B and Wang H 2015 Polym. Compos. 36 897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chenglong W, Daoyuan P, Qibing W, Ruifang Z and Yuzeng Z 2014 Adv. Mat. Res. 915–916 193Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Poomali, Siddaramaiah, Suresha B and Lee J-H 2008 Mat. Sci. Eng. A-Struct. 492 486Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li B, Li M, Fan C, Ren M, Wu P, Luo L et al 2015 Compos. Sci. Technol. 106 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhou S, Huang J and Zhang Q 2014 J. Thermoplast. Compos. 27 18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Devaraju A, Perumal A E, Alphonsa J, Kailas S V and Venugopal S 2012 Wear 288 17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu T, Wood W, Li B, Lively B and Zhong W-H 2012 Wear 294–295 326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Prasad B K 2004 Wear 257 110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang L C, Zarudi I and Xiao K Q 2006 Wear 261 806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yu D, Wang C, Cheng X and Zhang F 2008 Appl. Surf. Sci. 255 1865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gottipati R and Mishra S 2010 Chem. Eng. J. 160 99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Antony J 2003 Design of experiments for engineers and scientists (Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yahiaoui M, Denape J, Paris J-Y, Ural A G, Alcalá N and Martínez F J 2014 Wear 315 103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Da Silva R C L, Da Silva C H and Medeiros J T N 2007 Wear 263 974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Myshkin N K, Petrokovets M I and Kovalev A V 2005 Tribol. Int. 38 910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mathew M T, Novo J, Rocha L A, Covas J A and Gomes J R 2010 Tribol. Int. 43 1400CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Engineering FacultyErciyes UniversityMelikgaziTurkey

Personalised recommendations