Effect of Matrix Properties and Sliding Counterface on the Wear Behavior of Magnesium Alloy Metal Matrix Composites

  • S. Jayalakshmi
  • R. Arvind Singh
  • T. S. SrivatsanEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series book series (MMMS)


Sliding wear behavior of two magnesium alloys, namely AM100 and ZC63, along with their saffil alumina short fiber-reinforced composites, produced by the technique of squeeze infiltration, is the focus of this technical manuscript. The wear tests were conducted against two different types of counterface materials, namely: (i) EN24 Steel, and (ii) SiC abrasive discs, using a pin-on-disc tribometer. Results revealed that for both the discs, the magnesium alloy based metal-matrix composites revealed enhanced wear resistance when compared one-on-one with the unreinforced counterpart. For both the chosen composite systems it was observed that against the EN24 steel disc, the wear rate decreases with an increase in fiber volume fraction, while against the SiC abrasive disc, the wear rate revealed an increase after certain volume fraction of the fiber reinforcement in the magnesium alloy metal matrix. Against both types of counter-faces, the magnesium alloy AM100 and its composite counterpart showed lower wear rate when compared one-on-one with the magnesium alloy ZC63 and its composite counterpart. The wear behavior of the chosen magnesium alloys, i.e., AM100 and ZC63 and their composite counterparts is discussed considering the conjoint and mutually interactive influences of nature of the matrix (brittle/ductile), characteristics of the counterface and the role of debris as ‘third body’ during sliding.


Magnesium alloys Alumina fiber Magnesium composites Hardness Wear Friction Matrix microstructure Third body 


  1. 1.
    Ceschini L, Dahle A, Gupta M, Jarfors AA, Jayalakshmi S, Morri A, Rotundo F, Toschi S, Arvind Singh R (2016) Aluminium and magnesium metal matrix nanocomposites. Springer Nature, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kainer K (2006) Metal matrix composites: custom-made materials for automotive and aerospace engineering. Wiley, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gupta MM, Sharon NML (2011) Magnesium, magnesium alloys, and magnesium composites. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taltavull C, Torres B, Lopez AJ, Rams J (2013) Dry sliding wear behavior of AM60B magnesium alloy. Wear 301:615–625Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Das S, Morales AT, Alpas AT (2010) Microstructural evolution during high temperature sliding wear of Mg–3% Al–1% Zn (AZ31) alloy. Wear 268:94–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blau PJ, Walukas M (2000) Sliding friction and wear of magnesium alloy AZ91D produced by two different methods. Tribol Int 33:573–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mehta DS, Masood SH, Song WQ (2004) Investigation of wear properties of magnesium and aluminum alloys for automotive applications. J Mater Process Technol 155–156:1526–1531Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lim CYH, Lim SC, Gupta M (2003) Wear behavior of SiCp-reinforced magnesium matrix composites. Wear 255:629–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jayalakshmi S, Kailas SV, Seshan S (2002) Tensile behavior of AM100 magnesium alloy and its Al2O3 fiber reinforced composites. Composites-A 33:135–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nunez-Lopez CA, Skeldon PS, Thompson GE, Lyon P, Karimzadeh H, Wilks TE (1995) The corrosion behavior of Mg alloy ZC71/SiC metal matrix composite. Corros Sci 37(5):689–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Komura Y, Mitarai M, Nakatani Iba H, Shimuzu T (1970) Structural changes in the alloy systems of Mg-Zn-Cu and Mg-Zn-Ag related to the Friauf-Laves phases. Acta Crystallogr A B26:666–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang W, Weatherly GC, Mccomb DW, Llyod DJ (1997) The structure of SiC-reinforced Mg casting alloys. J Microsc 185:292–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Arsenault RJ, Shi N (1986) Dislocation generation due to differences between the coefficients of thermal expansion. Mater Science Eng 81:175–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arsenault RJ, Fischer RM (1989) Microstructure of fiber and particulate SiC in 6061 Al composite. Scr Metall 17:67–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alderman M, Manuel MV, Hort N, Neelameggham NR (eds) (2014) Magnesium technology 2014. The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. Warrendale, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Archard JF (1953) Contact and rubbing of flat surfaces. J Appl Phys 24:981–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Suh NP (1986) Tribophysics. Prentice Hall Inc., New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alahelisten A, Bergman F, Olsson M, Hogmark S (1993) On the wear of aluminum and magnesium metal matrix composites. Wear 165:221–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hosking FM, Pertillo SV, Wanderlin R, Mehrabian R (1982) Composites of aluminum alloys: fabrication and wear behavior. J Mater Sci 17:477–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hughes D (1988) Textron unit makes reinforced Ti, Al parts. Aviation Week Space Technology, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Westengen H, Albright DL, Nygard A (1990) Development of cast Mg-matrix composites. SAE Tech. Paper 900534:606–612Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hutchings IM (1994) Tribological properties of metal matrix composites. Mater Sci Technol 10:513–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jayalakshmi S, Kailas SV, Seshan S, Fleury E (2006) Properties of squeeze cast Mg-6Zn-3Cu alloy and its saffil alumina short fiber reinforced composites. J Mater Sci 41:3743–3752CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Jayalakshmi
    • 1
  • R. Arvind Singh
    • 2
  • T. S. Srivatsan
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Aeronautical EngineeringKumaraguru College of Technology (KCT)CoimbatoreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringKumaraguru College of Technology (KCT)CoimbatoreIndia
  3. 3.The University of AkronAkronUSA

Personalised recommendations