VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA - 590018

A PROJECT REPORT ON

“DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF WEAR TESTING MACHINE”

In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the Award of the Degree of Bachelor of
Engineering in Mechanical Engineering

SUBMITTED BY

PRAVEENKUMAR M SOBARAD 2KL15ME067 9008236916

KUSH S BUDIHAL 2KL15ME034 9019084339
PRAVEEN KIRAN NAIK 2KL15ME065 9480594980
TRIPALGOUDA G 2KL15ME110 8880835428

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

Prof. N. K. Kelageri

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Accredited by NBA

KLE Dr. M. S. SHESHGIRI

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
BELAGAVI – 590008

2018-2019
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Before we turn towards the project, we would like to add a few heartfelt words for the
people who have been part of this project by supporting and encouraging us.

In particular, we would like to take this opportunity to express our honor, respect,
deep gratitude and genuine regards to our Guide Prof. N. K. Kelageri, Mechanical
Engineering Department for giving us all guidance required for our project apart from
being a constant source of inspiration and motivation.

We would like to sincerely thank Prof. S. B. Yadwad, Mechanical Engineering

Department for his kind help and valuable suggestions.

We are grateful to Dr. S. F. Patil, Head of Department, Mechanical Engineering

Department, for providing us the necessary help and encouragement whenever needed
which has resulted in the success of this Project.

We wish to express our sincere thanks to Dr. B. G. Katageri, Principal, K.L.E Dr. M.
S. Sheshgiri College of Engineering and Technology, Belagavi for providing a
healthy environment in our college, which helped us in concentrating on our task.

We owe special thanks to Our Parents for their moral support and warm wishes, and
finally we would express our appreciation to all Our Friends for their support which
helped us to complete the first phase of project successfully.
 KLE Dr. M S SHESHGIRI

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY,

BELAGAVI -590008

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Certificate
This is to certify that the project work entitled “DESIGN AND FABRICATION

OF WEAR TESTING MACHINE” has been carried out by Praveenkumar M

Sobarad (2KL15ME067), Kush S Budihal (2KL15ME034), Tripalgouda G
(2KL15ME110), Praveen Kiran Naik (2KL15ME065) are bonafide student of KLE Dr.
M S Sheshagiri College of Engineering & Technology Belgaum, in partial fulfillment for
the award of Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical branch of the Visvesvaraya
Technological University Belagavi, during the academic year 2018-19. It is certified that
all corrections/suggestions indicated have been incorporated in the report. The Project
report has been approved as it satisfies the academic requirements in respect of project
report prescribed for the said degree.

GUIDE HOD PRINCIPAL

Prof. N. K. Kelageri Dr. S. F. Patil Dr. B. G. Katageri
 DECLARATION
We hereby declare that the project work entitled “Design and Fabrication of Wear
Testing Machine” submitted to Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi is a record
of an original work done by me under the guidance of Prof. N. K. Kelageri KLE Dr. M. S.
Sheshgiri College of Engineering and technology, Belagavi and this project work is submitted
in the partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of bachelor of Mechanical
Engineering degree. The results embodied in this project have not been submitted to any
other University or Institute for the award of any degree.

Date: Signature
Place:
 ABSTRACT
The present work is about the design and fabrication of pin on disc wear testing machine
which is used for determining the wear of given specimen. The objective is design and
fabrication of pin on disc wear testing machine, capable of determining the wear rate of
materials viz. Copper, Brass and aluminium.

The machine is developed as per ASTM G99 standard. The outcomes of the machine are
compared in terms of standard wear rate available for copper, aluminium and brass. The
machine shown results which very closer to the standard wear rates. Further, the machine is
capable of handling different load and speed levels.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter No. Description Page No.
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Avoiding wear failures 4
1.2 wear failure and mechanisms 5
1.2.1 Examples of Abrasive Wear 13

2 Literature survey 16

3 Objectives and Methodology 19

3.1 Working principle 19
3.2 Steps involved in manufacturing the machine 20
3.3 Specifications of machine 20
4 Design calculations 21
4.1 Beam analysis 21
4.2 Design of beam 22
4.3 Stress on support 23
4.4 Power required 24
4.5 Disc specifications 24
4.6 Frame specifications 24
4.7 Test specifications 25
5 Experimental results 26
5.1 Experimental results for Brass 27
5.2 Calculations for Brass 28
5.3 Experimental results for Copper 28
5.4 Calculations for Copper 29
5.5 Experimental results for Aluminium 29
5.6 Calculations for Aluminium 30
6 Conclusions and Future scope 31
Appendix 1 32
Appendix 2 34
Appendix 3 36
Appendix 4 37
References 38
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Description Page No.
1.1 Pin on disc wear mechanism 2

1.2 Force acting on the wear track 3

1.2.1 Abrasive wear Mechanism 14

3.2 Steps involved in manufacturing the machine 20

5.1 Schematic representation of Beam 21

5.2 Load applied on Beam 22

LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Description Page No.
1.2 Factors influencing abrasive wear behaviour 6

6.1 Voltage and Speed Parameters for Brass 26

6.2 Voltage and Speed Parameters for Aluminium 26

6.3 Voltage and Speed Parameters for Copper 27

ABBREVIATIONS
RPM - Rotations per Minute

MRR – Material removal rate

RPS – Revolutions per second

ASTM – American society for testing and materials

MS – Mild Steel
 NOMENCLATURE

K – Constant probability of surface contact and Debris formation

s – Sliding distance

P – Load applied

P1 – Flow pressure

E – Elastic modulus

σy – Flow stress

n – Rotational speed in RPS

fr – Feed per revolution in mm

σ – Yield stress (Mpa)

I – Moment of inertia (kg-m2)

M – Moment (N-m)

C – Centroid (mm)

S – Elastic section modulus (mm 3)

ρ – Density (Kg/mm3)

f – Frictional force

µ - Coefficient of friction

W – Load applied

V – Volts
 DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF WEAR TESTING MACHINE

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION
Pin-on-disc wear test method covers a laboratory procedure for determining the wear of
materials during sliding using a pin traveling on a rotating disk. As the name implies,
such apparatus consists essentially of a pin in contact with a rotating disk. Either the pin
or the disc. The pin may be flat, spherical or indeed of any convenient geometry,
including that of actual wear components.

The pin-on-disk apparatus consists of several components which help the apparatus to
perform its functions properly. The main idea for the apparatus is that it should maintain
test specimens such as pin and disk to contact each other at a variable revolution per
minute which can be set from the controller. For the pin-on-disk wear test, two specimens
are required. Once the pin is positioned perpendicular to the other, usually a flat circular
disk. A ball, rigidly held, is often used as the pin specimen. The test machine causes the
disk specimen to revolve about the disk centre. In this case, the sliding path is a circle on
the disk surface. The plane of the disk is oriented horizontally. The pin specimen is
pressed against the disk at a specified load usually by means of an arm or lever and
attached weights. Wear results are usually obtained by conducting a test for a selected
sliding distance, load and speed.

Now a days, pin wear tester is crucial to the development of new and improved cost-
saving applications. The purpose of pin wear tester research is ultimately the
minimization and elimination of losses resulting from wear and friction at all levels of
technology where the rubbing of surfaces is involved. Therefore, we are going to design a
circular pin disc wear tester. In designing a product, we need to have many steps that
should be taking noted. One of the important steps is to assembly the parts. If assembly
already not precise, therefore we cannot continue our project but need to make a new part.
If the part already welds without precise ways, the part cannot be used anymore and it
will be a loss for us especially in the budget which needs to buy and use a new materials.
All these step are important as pin wear tester is defined as the science and technology of
interacting surfaces in relative motion or in other words, the study of friction, wear and
lubrication. Since then the ‘rubbing’ between two surfaces has caused a sort of revolution,
today this has become a full- fledged branch of science, now known as pin wear tester.
The pin disc wear tester interactions of a solid surface's exposed face with interfacing

Dept. of Mech Engg, KLE Dr.MSSCET, Belgavi Page 1

 DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF WEAR TESTING MACHINE

materials and environment

Dept. of Mech Engg, KLE Dr.MSSCET, Belgavi Page 2

may result in loss of material from the surface. Pin wear tester characterization is critical
especially when they are intended to decreased friction and reduced wear as to increase
life and performance of materials.

Fig 1.1 pin on disc wear mechanism

There are several precise definitions for wear. However, for engineering purposes the
following definitions contains the essential elements. One key point is that wear is
damage and it is not limited to loss of material from the surface. However, loss of material
is definitely one way in which a part can experience wear. Another way included in this
definition is by movement of material without loss of mass. An example of this would be
the change of geometry or dimension of a part as a result of plastic deformation (e.g.,
from repeated hammering). There is also a third mode implied, which is damage to a
surface that does not result in mass loss or dimensional changes. An example of this third
mode might be development of network of cracks in a surface. This might be of
significance in applications where maintaining optical transparency is a prime engineering
concern. Lens and aircraft windows are examples where this is an appropriate definition
of wear. In the older definitions of wear their used to be a greater stress on the “loss of
material” , however now-a-days the newer and more general definitions of wear is very
natural to the design or device engineer , who thinks of wear in terms of a change to a part
that effects its performance. The focus is on the change which may be translated to
damage.

Wear is a persistent service condition in many engineering applications with important

economic and technical consequences. In terms of economics, the cost of abrasion wear
has been estimated as ranging from 1 to 4% of the gross national product of an
industrialized nation. The effect of abrasion is particularly evident in the industrial areas
of agriculture, mining, mineral processing, and earth moving. Likewise, wear is a critical
concern in many types of machine components; in fact, it is often a major factor in
defining or limiting the suitable lifetime of a component. An important example is the
wear of dies and moulds. Wear generally is manifested by a change in appearance and
profile of a surface. Some examples illustrating these types of changes are shown in Fig.
1. Wear results from contact between a surface and a body or substance that is moving
relative to it. Wear is progressive in that it increases with usage or increasing amounts of
motion, and it ultimately results in the loss of material from a surface or the transfer of
material between surfaces.

Fig 1.2 force acting on the wear track

Wear failures occur because of the sensitivity of a material or system to the surface
changes caused by wear. Typically, it is the geometrical or profile aspects of these
changes, such as a dimensional change, a change in shape, or residual thickness of a
coating, that cause failure. However, a change in appearance and the nature of the wear
damage also can be causes for failure. An example of the former would be situations
where marring is a concern, such as with optical scanner windows, lens, and decorative
finishes. Examples of the latter include valves, which can fail because of galling, and
structural components, where cracks caused by wear can reduce fatigue life. In addition to
these differences, the same amount or degree of wear may or may not cause a wear
failure; it is a function of the application. For example, dimensional changes in the range
of several centimetres may not cause wear failure on excavator bucket teeth, but wear of a
few micrometres might cause failure in some electromechanical devices. As a
consequence of these differences, there is no universal wear condition that can be used to
define failure. The specific nature of the failure condition generally is an important factor
in resolving or avoiding wear failures. It can affect not only the solutions to a wear
problem but also the details of the approaches
used to obtain a solution. While this is the case, there are some general considerations and
approaches that can be of use in resolving or avoiding wear problems.

1.1 Avoiding Wear Failures

The ideal way of addressing a wear failure is by designing the mechanism initially to give
adequate life. This approach is sometimes referred to as wear design. This method is
similar to that of resolving a wear failure and becomes identical to it once there are some
testing results. With design, the initial step is not the examination of hardware, as is the
case with a failure, but developing various scenarios about the operation of the device and
what constitutes a wear failure. As a minimum, the initial design should follow good
tribological Design practices and be selected to ensure that severe wear is avoided. For
some applications, this approach may be adequate. For applications that are more
sensitive to wear, analytical relationships for detailing the wear process may then be used
to further refine and evaluate designs. Once hardware is built and some testing done, worn
parts are available for examination, and the activities are identical to those that started
with a wear failure. It is essential to determine the root cause of the wear failure. Wear
failures and problems tend to be very individualistic in terms of wear behaviour and what
constitutes a failure. Because of this tendency, there is no one type of solution or model
that can be used as the basis for a solution. There are, however, some common elements
in approaches that are used to resolve or avoid wear problems, and these have been
described. Combined, they provide a general methodology for approaching wear failures.
A key aspect in resolving wear failures is to recognize that wear is a system property or
characteristic and not a materials property. While material changes are often involved in
solutions to wear problems, this is not the only way of resolving such problems. Often,
changes in other parameters are adequate by themselves or required in conjunction with a
material change. Very often a key to the resolution of a wear problem is detailed
examination of worn parts and studying the operation of the device. While not always
necessary, the use of analytical relationships for analysing wear failures and developing
solutions is feasible, generally worthwhile, and recommended. Further information about
techniques used to investigate wear failures, as well as information about failure modes
and wear behaviour in different situations, is presented in other articles of this section.
1.2 Wear and Failure Mechanisms

The more we can characterize the full scale problem the easier it becomes to ensure that
the bench tests we run will provide useful information. Critical to the characterization
process and ultimately to the interpretation of the test results, is the determination of the
mechanisms of wear at work in the contact. Wear processes must be analysed and defined
before they can be modelled, for example abrasion, erosion, corrosion or other chemical
action, de-lamination or adhesive wear, the involvement of wear debris identified, the
appearance of failed surfaces established (for example, cracking, phase transformations,
melting, chemical layers). The type of wear process will, to a large extent, govern
whether it can be modelled at reduced scale and whether accelerated testing is valid. As a
general rule, contacts involving both sliding friction and wear can be modelled at reduced
scale and with accelerated testing. This is because it is usually possible to increase the
loading conditions in the contact without changing the wear regime. Processes involving
surface fatigue can in some cases be modelled at reduced scale, but for obvious reasons,
not at a reduced number of cycles. Of all the areas where abrasive wear is a problem,
probably the most severe environment is in the excavation, earth moving, mining, and
minerals processing industries, where component deterioration occurs in a wide variety of
equipment, such as bulldozer blades, excavator teeth, rock drill bits, crushers, slushes,
ball mills and rod mills, chutes, slurry pumps, and cyclones. However, abrasive wear is
not limited to these activities. Abrasion presents problems in many wear environments at
one point or another, even though it may not be the primary wear mechanism to begin
with. In any tribo system where dust and wear debris are not, or cannot be, controlled
and/or excluded, abrasive wear is eventually a major problem. The wear of parts, the cost
of repair

And replacement of these parts, and the associated downtime related to these activities
result in significant costs to many industries.
The individual factors that influence abrasive wear behaviour are shown in Table 1.2. For
both the abrasive and wear material, the majority of factors that affect abrasive wear
behaviour are related to their respective mechanical properties. Also of importance is the
mechanical aspect of the abrasive/wear material interaction. Chemical processes,
however, are also important, that is, corrosion or oxidation, because they directly
influence the rate of wear of a material in the environment of interest.
 Table 1.2 Factors influencing abrasive wear behaviour
Abrasive properties Particle size
Particle shape
Hardness
Yield strength
Fracture properties
Concentration
Contact conditions Force/impact level
Velocity
Impact/impingement angle
Sliding/rolling
Temperature
Wet/dry
pH
Wear material properties Hardness
Yield strength
Elastic modulus
Ductility
Toughness
Work-hardening characteristics
Fracture toughness
Microstructure
Corrosion resistance

The influence of the parameters listed in Table 1.2 can be explained by their effect on the
mechanism by which material is removed from a worn surface. The simplest model of
abrasive wear is one in which rigidly supported hard particles indent and are forced across
the surface of the wear material. Depending on the properties of the abrasive and wear
materials, one of several wear mechanisms.

 Ploughing occurs when material is displaced to the side, away from the wear
particles, resulting in the formation of grooves that do not involve direct material
removal. The displaced material forms ridges adjacent to grooves, which may be
removed by subsequent passage of abrasive particles.
  Cutting occurs when material is separated from the surface in the form of primary
debris, or microchips, with little or no material displaced to the sides of the
grooves. This mechanism closely resembles conventional machining.
 Fragmentation occurs when material is separated from a surface by a cutting
process and the indenting abrasive causes localized fracture of the wear material.
These cracks then freely propagate locally around the wear groove, resulting in
additional material removal by spalling.

The ploughing and cutting mechanisms involve predominately plastic deformation of the
wear material, while the third mechanism also involves fracture. Thus, the dominant
mechanisms that occur for a particular operating condition are influenced to a great extent
by the plastic deformation and fracture behaviour of the wear material. Materials that
exhibit high fracture resistance and ductility with relatively low yield strength are more
likely to be abraded by ploughing. Conversely, materials with high yield strength and with
low ductility and fracture resistance abrade through fragmentation. Additional wear
mechanisms can operate in materials that exhibit a duplex microstructure or that are made
up of two or more component phases (e.g., a composite-type material, such as a high-
chromium white iron, or a composite drill bit, such as diamond or tungsten carbide inserts
in a steel matrix), the individual components of which vary in their mechanical properties.
Under some abrasive wear conditions, removal of the softer phase (usually the matrix)
can occur by one or more of the previously mentioned mechanisms. This process then
leaves the harder phase unsupported, in which case it may either become detached from
the wear surface by a pull-out mechanism or be more susceptible to wear by
fragmentation. In addition, the presence of an interface between the various components
of the composite may promote cracking and fragmentation of the harder phase,
particularly under impact- abrasion conditions. The rate of material removal (or its wear
rate) for any of the previously mentioned processes is influenced by the extent of
indentation of the wear material surface by the abrasive particle. This depth of
indentation, for a given load, is a function of the hardness of the wear material and the
shape of the abrasive particle. Angular particles indent the wear surface to a greater extent
than rounded particles, leading to higher wear rates. In addition, angular particles are
more efficient in cutting and machining.

The hardness of the wear material, or more particularly, the hardness of the worn surface,
is an important parameter in determining the resistance of a material to abrasion. An
increase in the surface hardness of the wear material reduces the depth of penetration by
the abrasive particle, leading to lower wear rates. However, an increase in the hardness of
a material is also accompanied by an attendant reduction in its ductility, resulting in a
change in the abrasion mechanism, for example, from predominately ploughing and/or
cutting to fragmentation. For mechanisms involving predominately plastic deformation,
that is, ploughing and cutting, the wear rate can be expressed through the following
parameters, the probability of wear debris formation, the proportion of ploughing and
cutting processes, the abrasive particle shape and size, the applied stress, and the hardness
of the wear surface. For brittle materials (e.g., ceramics), a transition from a purely
cutting mechanism to one that also involves fragmentation occurs when the nature of
contact changes from elastic-plastic indentation to Hertzian fracture. The conditions under
which this transition occurs are dependent on the size and shape of the abrasive particles,
the applied stress, and the hardness of the wear surface. In addition, the fracture resistance
of the wear material, as measured by the fracture toughness, is also important. Decreasing
the hardness of the wear material, and increasing the fracture toughness, increases the
critical abrasive size at which the transition to fragmentation occurs. Thus, reducing the
hardness of brittle materials, or alternatively, increasing their fracture toughness, leads to
lower wear rates. Abrasive wear mechanisms involving plastic deformation, cutting, and
fragmentation occur predominantly in materials with relatively high elastic modulus, that
is, metals, ceramics, and rigid polymers. As the elastic modulus decreases, the nature of
the abrasive/wear material contact changes, with localized elastic deformation becoming
more significant.

The probability of wear occurring by plastic deformation mechanisms decreases, such

that for elastomers, cutting mechanisms can occur only with contact against sharp
abrasive particles. For contact against blunt abrasive particles, the two main wear
mechanisms are tensile tearing and fatigue. For the abrasive wear of polymeric materials,
the following material parameters are important elastic modulus and resilience, friction
coefficient, tensile strength and tear resistance, elongation at break, and hardness. The
wear behaviour of elastomers is particularly sensitive to abrasive impingement angle,
because this influences the dominant modes of deformation and hence, the wear
mechanisms. At low impingement angles, tensile tearing occurs, and the tear resistance of
the material is important. At impingement angles close to 90°, the behaviour of the
elastomer is essentially elastic, and resilience is a major factor in determining wear
resistance. For abrasive wear conditions in which significant energy levels are dissipated
in the abrasive/wear material contact, elastomeric linings are usually designed such that
impingement angles are as close to 90° as possible. Contact Pressure. In general, higher
contact pressures between the
abrasive particle and the wear surface in abrasive wear situations cause higher wear rates.
As the force applied to an abrasive particle increases, the contact pressure between the
abrasive and component wear surface also increases. As the contact pressure nears and
exceeds the yield strength of the wear surface in the contact zone, the depth of abrasive
penetration increases. For a given length of relative motion between the abrasive and the
wear surface, deeper penetration generally removes more material or causes damage to a
larger volume of material. The contact pressure/wear rate relationship has been discussed
in more detail by several authors. One of the more general (and generally accepted) wear
equations was developed by Archard in 1953

𝑝
W= ks
𝑝1 (1.2.1)

where W is volume of worn (removed or disturbed) material, K is a constant related to

probability of surface contact and debris formation, s is sliding distance, P is applied load,
and p1 is flow pressure (related to hardness) of wearing surface. The constant K is usually
treated as a material property and is determined empirically. Typical values for various
materials have been established through extensive wear testing. Sliding distance is one
part of the volume aspect of affected material. Applied load combined with the flow
pressure/hardness provide a measure of the depth of penetration of abrasive particles and
supply the second volume dimension. Abrasive Characteristics. Abrasive particle size has
a significant effect on material wear, with the greatest effect being for non-metals (i.e.,
ceramics and polymers). In non-metals, the effect of particle size is associated with
changes in the predominant mechanism of material removal. Ceramics undergo a
transition to fragmentation above a critical abrasive particle size, whereas elastomers
undergo a transition from elastic behaviour to either tearing or fatigue. In metals, the
effect of abrasive particle size is minimal for particle sizes >100 μm. Below this particle
size, the wear rate decreases rapidly with decreasing particle size. This particle size effect
is usually attributed to the nature of the abrasive/wear material contact, with decreasing
size favouring elastic rather than plastic contact. Abrasive hardness, or the ratio of
hardness (Vickers) of the wear material to the hardness (Vickers) of the abrasive (H/Ha),
is a critical parameter in abrasive wear. It is well known that the abrasive wear rate
decreases as the hardness of the worn surface approaches that of the abrasive. When the
hardness of the worn material exceeds that of the abrasive, the wear rate decreases
rapidly.

This ratio effect of H/Ha on abrasive wear results from a change in the nature of the
contact mechanics. At H/Ha ratios between 0.6 and 0.8, the contact conditions give rise to
extensive
plastic deformation. At higher H/Ha ratios, the nature of the contact becomes essentially
elastic. As a result, wear rates decrease, unless material is removed by mechanisms other
than cutting and ploughing, for example, fragmentation. As the hardness of the worn
surface approaches that of the abrasive, plastic flow of the abrasive may occur, leading to
a reduction in the cutting ability of the abrasive particle. In addition, it is possible to
fracture the abrasive when the plastic zone in the abrasive particle reaches a critical size.
This effect for the abrasive particle is analogous to the transition from purely cutting to
fragmentation in the abrasion of brittle materials. The effect of H/Ha on wear behaviour is
also influenced by the size and compressive strength of the abrasive particles. Coarse
abrasives are more likely to fracture than fine abrasives, partly due to a decrease in tensile
strength with increasing particle size. In addition, fracture of the abrasive may regenerate
sharp facets and produce loose abrasive fragments, which in turn increase wear rates.
Loading conditions also have an effect, because increasing the contact stress between
abrasive and wear material increases the probability of fracture of the abrasive particles.
Contact Conditions. It is difficult to assess the effects of individual contact conditions on
the wear interactions among abrasive and wear material, because their effect is synergistic
in nature. Force, impact level, velocity, and impingement angle combine to influence the
wear rate of the material. Increasing the contact stress between the abrasive and the wear
surface results in greater indentation depths and an increased tendency for fracture and
fragmentation in both brittle wear materials and abrasives. This generally leads to
increased wear rates, although exceptions may occur if the abrasivity of particular
minerals decreases with failure of the abrasive particle.

The general effect of increasing nominal contact stress levels is to increase wear rates;
however, the occurrence of significant impact during the abrasive/wear material contact
may also accelerate the rate of material removal. This acceleration results from the
increased amount of kinetic energy dissipated during contact. This energy may arise either
from the moving abrasive particles or from the moving wear surfaces, as in the case of
impact crushers. For brittle materials, increased fragmentation occurs under impact
conditions, whereas elastomers may only suffer an increase in cutting and tearing modes,
associated with insufficient elastic recovery. The nominal force level may also determine
the level of constraint experienced by abrasive particles. Under low-stress abrasive
conditions, the abrasive particles can be free to rotate as they move across the surface of
the wear material and are less likely to indent and scratch the surface. The tendency for
the abrasive particle to rotate also depends on the abrasive particle shape, with angular
particles
being more likely to slide rather than roll. Increasing the nominal force acts to constrain
the abrasive particle in its orientation to the wear surface, thereby increasing the wear
rate. The effect of velocity on wear behaviour is associated with the dissipation of kinetic
energy during abrasive/wear material contact. For a large number of abrasive wear
environments, the velocity of abrasive particles is relatively low (<10 m/s) and therefore
of little importance. However, in slurry pumps, that is, the transport of abrasive particles
in slurry or pneumatic form, the effect of velocity is significant. Under these conditions,
the wear rate is proportional to velocity (W α Vn, where W is the wear rate, V is the
velocity of the abrasive, and n is a constant for the abrasive/wear material synergism).
The value of n falls in the range of 2 to 3, although the exact value for any particular
condition is dependent on the properties of both the abrasive and wear material and on the
angle of impingement. For softer abrasives, n tends to increase with decreasing abrasive
particle size. For brittle materials and high impingement angles, the value of n tends
toward the higher extreme. In erosion, a change in abrasive impact velocity can lead to a
change in the dominant wear mechanism, resulting in a change in wear rate. Higher
values for n are associated with increased cutting and fragmentation

The influence of impingement angle on wear depends on the properties of the wear
material and is associated with changes to the dominant wear mechanism. At high
impingement angles (60 to 90°), brittle materials typically experience elevated wear rates,
resulting from increased fragmentation and spalling. Conversely, elastomers are more
effective under these conditions, because much of the impact energy can be dissipated
through elastic deformation. At low impingement angles (10 to 30°), elastomers cut and
tear more readily, leading to increases in wear rates. Hard, brittle materials usually
perform better under these conditions. For materials intermediate in their mechanical
properties, for example, some metals, the effect of impingement angle depends on the
ductility of the material.

Properties of the Wear Material. The properties of the wearing material that influence
wear behaviour are grouped into the following categories: mechanical properties,
microstructure effects, and other properties (corrosion resistance, friction, thermal
effects). Because abrasive wear is primarily a mechanical process, particularly in the
absence of corrosive environments, mechanical properties are of major importance,
whereas the role of microstructure depends on the severity of the wear environment. The
following discussion is patterned after the approach of Mutton and Moore.
Mechanical Properties. The resistance to indentation (hardness) is an important variable in
determining abrasion resistance. Laboratory wear tests indicate that the abrasive wear
resistance for particular material types increases with increasing hardness. However, large
differences in abrasion resistance can also occur at similar hardness levels. These
differences arise from variations in the plastic flow characteristics of the various
materials, which in turn influence the predominant wear mechanism.

In the absence of fragmentation, ploughing and cutting involve plastic flow of the wear
material either in front of or to the sides of the indenting abrasive particles. The plastic
flow behaviour of the material can be characterized by the ratio E/σy where E is the
elastic modulus and σy is the flow stress of the non-work-hardened material. Decreasing
E/σy favours a cutting mechanism, in which a high proportion of material is removed as
microchips. Increasing the hardness of the wear material has a similar effect.
Although it indicates that changing E/σy can significantly affect the dominant wear
mechanism, its impact on wear resistance is not as clearly established. For a constant
value of E, a decrease in σy favours ploughing. This should lead to lower material wear
rates. However, decreasing σy also decreases hardness, which favours greater depths of
indentation and a reduction in the wear resistance of the material. For materials of
equivalent hardness, the general trend is for wear resistance to increase with higher E/σy
values. The wear material properties discussed thus far (i.e., hardness, elastic modulus,
and flow strength) relate to material behaviour at relatively low strains. For example, the
plastic strain produced by indentation hardness testing of metals is typically between 8
and 10%.

During the abrasive wear process, the extent of plastic strain experienced by a worn
surface may approach these values. For these cases, the behaviour of the wear material at
high plastic strains is important, and here, high values of the work-hardening coefficient
and ductility are favourable. Tensile strength and ductility are also important mechanical
property parameters in a wear environment, especially for polymers, which undergo
elongations-to-fracture approaching 500%. Laboratory wear studies indicate that the wear
resistance of both rigid and ductile polymers is roughly proportional to the work of
rupture, which is defined as the product of the rupture stress and elongation-to-fracture.
The abrasion resistance of polymers also increases with increasing indentation resistance,
although this relationship is not as well defined for polymers as it is for metals and
ceramics. This is due in part to the viscoelastic nature of polymer deformation behaviour.
In addition, the absolute hardness levels for polymers are much lower than those for
metals
and ceramics. For elastomeric materials such as natural rubbers and polyurethanes, the
deformation behaviour during abrasive wear may be entirely elastic, in which case
resilience or hysteresis loss is important. High resilience favours increased abrasion
resistance, while increasing hysteresis losses under high impact levels result in material
breakdown, exacerbated by heat build-up. For materials that undergo wear by
fragmentation, abrasion resistance varies with fracture toughness. However, the
contribution from micro cracking and fragmentation depends on the severity of the wear
environment, in particular the applied load and abrasive particle size.

1.2.1 Examples of Abrasive Wear

Jaw-Type Rock Crusher Wear: Although rock crushing and mineral commination
components are expected to lose surface material during their operating lifetime, this loss
of material still results in reduced and/or eliminated component function and leads
directly to failure. In this type of system, mineral ore flows down a feed chute into the
upper portion of the crushing zone, which consists of two plates, one stationary and one
moving. The chunks of rock enter at the top and are reduced in size each time the jaws
cycle toward each other. The mineral then moves through the crushing zone until it
reaches the desired size at the bottom, where the crushed pieces exit through the gap at
the bottom of the plate assembly each time the plates separate to accept new rock. jaw
crusher wear plates after processing a quantity of mineral ore. In this case, the crusher
plates are of the size and type outlined in ASTM G 89. The plates were quenched-and-
tempered, low-alloy steel (~0.30 wt% C at 514 HB hardness), with an elliptical motion of
the movable plate relative to the fixed plate. In this case, the entering rock is 50 to 75 mm
(2 to 3 in.) in size. On exiting the jaw crusher plate assembly, the mineral is
approximately less than 6 mm (0.2 in.) in size. Notice that for this jaw crusher
configuration, the stationary plate absorbs the most severe gouging-abrasive wear (right
side of the plate).

Electronic Circuit Board Drill Wear. Very small drill bits are used for drilling holes in
electronic printed circuit boards (PCBs). To be economical, the drilling process must be
completed quickly, because of the large number of holes in each board. This high-speed
drilling operation thus requires automatic drilling machines capable of identifying hole
location, starting and stopping quickly, and changing worn drill bits as needed. The
maximum drilling rate for the system is the rate of maximum drill bit breakage. Generally,
the optimal drilling conditions are determined by pushing the drilling conditions to their
limit, that is, until drill bit failure. The failure of the drill bits is then analysed.
Commercial
drill bits vary in size, but popular sizes for drilling holes in PCBs are on the order of 0.343
to 0.457mm (0.0135 to 0.0180 in.) in diameter by 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) in length. In this
case, the drill bits are made of Cobalt with approximately 50 % of uniformly distributed
0.1 μm sintered WC particles in the cobalt matrix. Vickers hardness of the drill bits was
measured at 1589 HV. The PCBs are composite materials, with layers of fiberglass epoxy
resin sandwiched between copper layers. A PCB contains as many as 14 layers of copper
and fiberglass-resin layers. The glass fibres in the fiberglass have a hardness of 500 HV,
while the copper has a hardness of 40 HV. The drilling process is computer operated and
numerically controlled. Typical operating conditions are as follows: the feed for drilling
PCB holes is approximately 2000 mm (80 in.)/min. The speed corresponds to the number
of drill bit rotations per minute, and for this application, it was between 80,000 and
100,000 rpm. The hit rate, or the number of holes drilled in a particular time interval, was
80 holes/min. After 1500 hits, the drill bits were resharpened. The material removal rate
(MRR) is 4.8 mm3/s and is given by the following equation
MRR= nf 𝜋𝑑2 (1.2.2)
r
4000

Where d is the diameter in millimetres, n is the rotational speed in revolutions per second,
and fr is the feed per revolution in millimetres. In this study, a sharp, new 0.343 mm
(0.0135 in.) diameter drill bit was loaded into a tool holder and operated at the appropriate
drilling conditions to drill a hole in a PCB.

Fig 1.2.1 Abrasive wear Mechanism

1.3 Fretting Wear Failures
Fretting is a wear phenomenon that occurs between two mating surfaces; initially, it is
adhesive in nature, and vibration or small-amplitude oscillation is an essential causative
factor. Fretting frequently is accompanied by corrosion. Fretting of ferrous materials in air
produces a characteristic reddish-brown debris of ferric oxide, which, when mixed with
oil or grease, produces debris that is often referred to as “blood,” “cocoa,” or “red
mud.” In
components that are lubricated so that ordinary corrosion is not likely to occur, the
presence of reddish brown debris is indicative of fretting. If a component is not
lubricated, the presence of oxide powder may not necessarily signify fretting but, rather,
wear. Fretting also occurs in non-oxidizing materials, such as gold, platinum, and cupric
oxide. The debris formed by many nonferrous metals is largely unoxidized and is larger in
particle size than ferrous materials are. If fretting occurs in an inert or protective
atmosphere, little debris is produced.

The general characteristics of fretting wear, with an emphasis on steel, are reviewed in
this article. This review is followed by several examples of failures related to fretting
wear. Common sites for fretting are in joints that are bolted, keyed, pinned, press fitted, or
riveted; in oscillating bearings, splines, couplings, clutches, spindles, and seals; in press
fits on shafts; and in universal joints, base plates, shackles, and orthopedic implants.
Generally, fretting occurs at contacting surfaces that are intended to be fixed in relation to
each other but that actually undergo minute alternating relative motion that is usually
produced by vibration. There are exceptions, however, such as contact between balls and
raceways in bearings and between mating surfaces in oscillating bearings and flexible
couplings.
Chapter 2

LITERATURE SURVEY
Pramila Baiet. al. [1] reported that wear rate increased linearly with applied pressure but
was independent of sliding velocity. The value of the friction coefficient was found to be
insensitive to applied pressure, Si content and sliding velocity. The fact that no transition
in wear mechanism was observed with increased pressure, as reported by other authors
could be due to the narrow range explored (0.105-1.733 MPa).

Liang Y. N. [2] reported that the MMCs containing SiC particles exhibit improved wear
resistance. Particle size is one of the most important factors in determining wear of
particulate-reinforced metal composites. However, it appears to be difficult to draw a
fundamental conclusion from the reports about this problem. Some reports have suggested
that wear resistance of the composites increased with increasing particle size, while others
indicated that an increase in particle size had a negligible influence on the wear rate. A
further problem is that nearly all the studies have been carried out with such methods as
pin on disc or sand rubber wheel abrasion tests, in which the sliding speed was maintained
in a narrow range and the applied load in a steady state. It is thus necessary to study the
effect of particle size on wear properties of the composites under a variety of
experimental conditions. In this work, the effect of particle size on wear behaviour of SiC
particulate- reinforced 2024 Al composites has been investigated using three tests: sliding
wear, impact abrasion and erosion.

H.C. How and T.N. Baker [3] in their investigation of wear behaviour of Al6061-saffil
fibre, concluded that “saffil are significant in improving wear resistance of the
composite”. The steady-state wear of aluminium alloy AA6061 and AA6061-based
Saffilfibre- reinforced composites, manufactured by a PM route, was investigated with a
pin-on disc configuration under dry sliding conditions. Using a constant sliding velocity,
the wear rates of the monolithic alloy and the composites increased proportionally with
the applied load. The benefit of Saffil reinforcement at volume fractions of 5, 10 and 20%
was not substantial at 47 loads ranging from 4.9 to 48.3 N. As the applied load decreased
to 1.1 N, the composite showed a promising improvement in wear resistance as the
volume fraction of Saffil reinforcement increased. At loads of 19.2 N and above, the wear
resistance of the AA6061 composite was slightly impaired when the volume fraction of
the Saffil reinforcement was increased from 5 to 20%. Compared with over-aged samples,
the
improvement of the wear resistance due to peak-ageing was not significant, although the
Vickers hardness of the peak-aged samples was double that of the over-aged samples. The
surface morphology of both the monolithic alloy and the composites after testing under
loads of 9.8 or 48.3 N revealed a compacted layer which comprised mainly aluminium
and iron. The amount of iron transferred increased with the applied load and with the
volume fraction of Saffil in the composite. Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDAX) analysis
indicated that the wear debris was generated mainly from the compacted layer. On the
basis of the experimental observations, delamination was considered to be the controlling
wear mechanism for the monolithic specimens tested at all loads and the composite
specimens tested at loads ranging from 4.9 to 48.3 N. At a load of 1.1 N, surface fatigue,
which caused surface cracking, was evident for the composite specimens.

R. Dasgupta, R. Thakur, and B. Govindrajan [4] concluded in their study that “the high
stress wear behaviour is dependent on the combination of a number of experimental
factors. The behaviour can be explained based on the material removal mechanism
operating under a combination of experimental factors. A regression analysis of the
experimental data shows that the dependence is nonlinear. The equation arrived at by
regression analysis helps in predicting the wear rate.

M.S. Zaamout [5] the objective of this research is to investigate the abrasive wear
behaviour of polymer base auto motive paint, which is locally used for steel painting.
Research has been conducted under dry, water lubricated, and water-soap lubricated
conditions. The effects of applied load, sliding distance, abrader surface roughness, and
paint drying time on the abrasive wear volume and abrasive wear rate were investigated
under controlled environment of 23 C temperatures and 40% humidity. The examined
paint was used directly on steel substrate with no primer. Preliminary results show that
wear volume increases with increasing applied load, sliding distance and abrader
roughness. However, results also show decreasing wear volume with increasing drying
time up to 50 hr. beyond this value, time seems to have little effects on abrasive wear
behaviour. This argument is valid for all four conditions of tests. As for abrasive wear
rate, results show decreasing abrasive wear rate with applied load, sliding distance,
abrader surface roughness, and drying time. Results clearly indicate that the presence of
water significantly increases the wear volume and wear rate. Furthermore, the addition of
soap to water increases the wear volume and rate to even higher levels.
L. J. Yang [6] in their study found that the Wear coefficient values obtained from
different investigators can vary significantly up to a deviation of 1000% due to lack of a
standard test method. Higher wear coefficient values can be obtained when the wear tests
are carried out 49 within the transient wear regime, or with an excessive sliding distance
in the steady- state wear regime.

Ameer Fareed Basha, studied about the model of a disc brake used in Honda Civic.
Coupled field analysis (Structural, Thermal) is done on the disc brake. The materials used
are Cast Iron. Analysis is also done by changing the design of disc brake. Actual disc
brake has no holes; design is changed by giving holes in the disc brake for more heat
dissipation.

V. M. M. Thilak, made an attempt to investigate the suitable hybrid composite material

which is lighter than cast iron and has good Young’s modulus, Yield strength and density
properties. Aluminium base metal matrix composite and High Strength Glass Fibre
composites have a promising friction and wear behaviour as a Disk brake rotor. The
transient thermo elastic analysis of Disc brakes in repeated brake applications has been
performed and the results were compared. The suitable material for the braking operation
is S2 glass fibre and all the values obtained from the analysis are less than their allowable
values. Hence the brake Disc design is safe based on the strength and rigidity criteria. By
identifying the true design features, the extended service life and long term stability is
assured.

M.A. Maleque, the widely used brake rotor material is cast iron which consumes much
fuel due to its high specific gravity. The aim of this paper is to develop the material
selection method and select the optimum material for the application of brake disc system
emphasizing on the substitution of this cast iron by any other lightweight material.
Material performance requirements were analysed and alternative solutions were
evaluated among cast iron, aluminium alloy, titanium alloy, ceramics and composites.
Mechanical properties including compressive strength, friction coefficient, wear
resistance, thermal conductivity and specific gravity as well as cost, were used as the key
parameters in the material selection stages. The analysis led to aluminium metal matrix
composite as the most appropriate material for brake disc system.
Chapter 3

OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

The objectives of the project are stated as follows,

 Design and fabrication of wear testing machine

 Validation of the same in accordance with G99 ASTM standards
 Parametric study of machine.

The working methodology of the wear testing machine is stated as follows

 The initial length and weight of the test specimen whose specific wear rate has to
be calculated are noted down
 The test specimen is fitted in the pin holder of the beam
 Load is applied on the extreme left side of the beam, such that the same load is
applied on the test specimen
 According to the speed parameter the time is calculated, and the specimen is
bought in contact with the disc
 The time is calculated such that the specimen covers a sliding distance of 5000m
 When the specimen completes 5000m sliding distance, it is dis-engaged from the
contact with disc.
 The length and weight of the specimen after the experiment is calculated.
 Change in length and change in weight are noted down and hence the specific
wear rate is calculated with the help of formulae.

3.1 Working Principle

In this test, the sample to study is mounted on a rotating stage and a pin comes in contact
with the sample surface, with a known force, to create the wear. A flat or a sphere shaped
indenter is loaded on to the test sample with a precisely known force. The indenter is
mounted on a stiff lever, designed as a frictionless force transducer. As the disk is rotated,
resulting frictional forces acting between the pin on the disk are measured.
3.2 Steps involved in manufacturing the machine

The overall process from defining the problem to fabricating the machine is
illustrated in the form of flow chart below,

Fig 3.2 Steps involved in manufacturing the machine

3.3 Specifications of Machine

Specifications of the machine are given below as per the standards

 Motor Drive- Range 0.3 To 3 Rad/Sec (60to600rpm)

 Test Specimen- The Typical Pin Specimen Is Cylindrical Or Spherical In Shape.
Typical Cylindrical Or Spherical Pin Specimen Diameters Range From 2 To
10mm
 Pin Specimen Diameter =2 To 10 mm
 Disc Specimen Diameters = 30 To 180mm
Thickness 2 To 10 mm
Test Parameters
 Load Values Of The Force At The wearing Contact Max load = 3-6Kg
 Speed- The Relative Sliding Speed Between The Contacting Surfaces In m/Sec
Chapter 4

DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Required dimensions to design and fabricate the wear testing machine are done as follows.

4.1 Beam Analysis

Following figure represents two dimensional view of the beam. It is fixed at point m and
weight mg is added at the extreme right side as shown in figure. Due to this weight
tension acts in the upward direction on the beam as shown in figure 5.1

T T

l2 l1
mg

Fig. 5.1 Schematic representation of Beam

Now, taking summation of force along y direction

ΣFy = 0,

Ry = mg – T

Taking moment about point ‘O’

ΣMo = 0

mgl2 + Mgl1 = 0

g (ml2 + Ml1) = 0

ml2 – unknown

Ml1 – known

Therefore, mgl2 = - Mgl1

This represents clockwise moment

After balanced, T = mg Therefore Mg = mg

4.2 Design of Beam

Assume length of the beam = 420 mm.

10Kg

420mm

Fig. 5.2 Load applied on Beam

To find ‘b’ and ‘h’ we know that,

𝜎 𝑀𝑐 E.q (7.2.1)
2
= 𝐼

Where, σ = yield stress (Mpa).

M = moment (N-m).

I = Moment of inertia (Kg-m2).

C = centroid (mm).

Since the material used for beam is steel, σ for steel =250 (Mpa).

M = 10×9.81×420 = 41202 N-mm.

I
We know that =S E.q (7.2.2)
c

Where S = elastic section modulus (mm3).

Substituting above values in Eq (7.2.1)

We get,

250 10×9.81×420
2 = 𝑆
S = 329.616 mm3.

Substituting above values in Eq (7.2.2)

I
= 329.616
c

For rectangular cross section of beam we have,

I = b ×h3 and c = h
12 2

I
= b×h2
c 6

b
6
×h2=329.616

b×h2=1977.696

Take b=10 mm

Therefore h = 14.06 mm

Since the standard values have to be used for this part, ‘h’ is taken as 20 mm.

Calculations to find the self-weight of the beam

W= Length × Density × Cross section area

We know that, ρ = 8 × 10-6 Kg/mm3 (density for steel material).

Therefore W = 420 × 8 × 10-6 × 20 × 10

W = 0.672 kg.

W = 6.59 Newton.

Weight of the pin holder = weight of the wire + weight of the pan

Tension in wire = weight added that is force or weight at the other end

4.3 Stress on the Support:

The stress on the support is calculated as follows,

𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒
Stress =
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎
3.024×9.81
Stress = = 9.44 N/mm2
𝜋
4.4 Power Required

We know that frictional force f = µ×W.

Where µ = co-efficient of friction = 0.15 to 0.2

The value of 0.2 has been selected.

F = 0.2 × 10 × 9.81 = 19.62 N.

Torque, T = f×160 = 19.62×160

= 3.13 N-m

Now power can be determined

ω = 17 rad/sec

Power = P = T × ω = 3.13 × 17

P= 53.21 watts

Hence motor of 1 HP is sufficient

1 HP motor gives 0.75KW amount of power

4.5 Disc Specifications

Diameter of the disc = 180 mm

Thickness = 8 mm

Material – steel

According to ASTM G-99 standards

4.6 Frame Dimensions

The frame of the apparatus is designed as per the standard machine dimensions

Length of the frame = 620 mm

Height of the frame = 640 mm

Width of the frame = 450 mm

4.7 Test Specimen

The typical pin specimen is cylindrical or spherical in shape

Standard range according to ASTM G-99 standards –

Pin specimen diameter = 2 to 10 mm

Chapter 5

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Variation of speed with respect to the input voltage of motor for different specimens are
listed below,

For Brass, Weight applied=1.3kg.

Table 6.1 Voltage and Speed Parameters for Brass

INPUT VOLTAGE (V) SPEED (RPM)

20 137
40 386
60 676
80 926
100 1198
120 1278

For Aluminium, Weight applied=1.3kg

Table 6.2 Voltage and Speed Parameters for Aluminium

INPUT VOLTAGE (V) SPEED (RPM)

20 120
40 331
60 578
80 860
100 1090
120 1350
For Copper, Weight applied=1.3kg

Table 6.3 Voltage and Speed Parameters for Copper

INPUT VOLTAGE (V) SPEED (RPM)

20 77
40 399
60 467
80 732
100 990
120 1340

5.1 Experimental results for Brass

Track diameter =150 mm

Speed (N) =1100 RPM

Sliding distance =5000 m

Initial length of the specimen =51 mm

Initial weight of the specimen =16.5 grams

5000∗60
Time= 𝜋∗0.15∗1100 = 578.74 seconds

Time = 9.64 minutes

Dimmerstat reading =100v

Weight on the specimen= 1.3kg

Final weight of the specimen (after test) = 16 grams

Final length of the specimen = 50 mm

Therefore, change in length = Initial length – Final length

= 51 – 50 = 1mm.

Change in weight = Initial weight – Final weight

= 16.5 – 16 = 0.5 grams.

5.2 Calculations for Brass

1. Area (A) = π*𝑟2

= π*42

A= 50.26 𝑚𝑚2

2. Volume loss = cross section area* height loss

= 50.26 𝑚𝑚3
𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
3. Wear rate =
𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

= 0.010052 𝑚𝑚3
𝑚
𝑤𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒
4. Specific wear rate =
𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑
𝑚𝑚
= 7.89*10−4 3
𝑁𝑚

5.3 Experimental results for Copper

Track diameter =150 mm

Speed (N) =990 RPM

Sliding distance =5000 m

Initial length of the specimen =52 mm

Initial weight of the specimen =23.66

grams

5000∗60
Time= 𝜋∗0.15∗990 = 643.05 seconds

Time = 10.7 minutes

Dimmer stat reading =100v

Weight on the specimen= 1.3kg

Final weight of the specimen (after test) = 23.62 grams

Final length of the specimen = 50 mm

Therefore, change in length = Initial length – Final length

= 52 – 51.5= 0.5mm.
Change in weight = Initial weight – Final weight
 = 23.66 – 23.62 = 0.04 grams.

5.4 Calculations for Copper

1. Area (A) = π*𝑟2

= π*42

A= 50.26 𝑚𝑚2

2. Volume loss = cross section area* height loss

= 25.13 𝑚𝑚3
𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
3. Wear rate =
𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

= 5.026*10-3 𝑚𝑚3
𝑚

4. Specific wear rate = 𝑤𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒

𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑

= 3.94*10-4 𝑚𝑚3
𝑁𝑚

5.5 Experimental results for Aluminium

Track diameter =150 mm

Speed (N) =1090 RPM

Sliding distance =5000 m

Initial length of the specimen =51 mm

Initial weight of the specimen =6.76 grams

5000∗60
Time= 𝜋∗0.15∗1090 = 584.05 seconds

Time = 9.73 minutes

Dimmer stat reading =100v

Weight on the specimen= 1.3kg

Final weight of the specimen (after test) = 6.72 grams

Final length of the specimen = 49 mm

Therefore, change in length = Initial length – Final length

= 51 – 49= 2mm.
Change in weight = Initial weight – Final weight = 6.76 – 6.72 = 0.04 grams.

5.6 Calculations for Aluminium

1. Area (A) = π*𝑟2

= π*42

A= 50.26 𝑚𝑚2

2. Volume loss = cross section area* height loss

= 100.52 𝑚𝑚3
𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
3. Wear rate =
𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

= 0.020104 𝑚𝑚3
𝑚
𝑤𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒
4. Specific wear rate =
𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑

= 1.57*10-3 𝑚𝑚3
𝑁𝑚
Chapter 6

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE SCOPE

After conducting the experimental work and discussing the results the following
conclusions can be drawn.

 The abrasive wear mechanism varies for each type of material. Brass rubbed
against hardened steel, has maximum specific wear rate compared to that of
Aluminium and copper.
 The specific wear rate of Brass, Copper and Aluminium are stated as follows,
𝑚𝑚
sSpecific wear rate for Brass = 7.89*10−4 3
𝑁𝑚

Specific wear rate for Copper = 3.94*10-4 𝑚𝑚3

𝑁𝑚

Specific wear rate for Aluminium = 1.57*10-3 𝑚𝑚3

𝑁𝑚

These obtained values meet the standard values.

Effect of different loading patterns can be studied by using different weights,

hence by varying the load the wear rate behaviour can be observed. Relationships can be
developed for % increase in wear under variable loading to that of corresponding mean
static loading conditions for given materials. Tests can be carried out with repeated
loading conditions.
Appendix 1

PART DRAWINGS
1.1 Beam

400 30

30
1.2 Support for Beam:

45
20

80
1.3 Column

15
90
30

1.4 Disc

O200
10

DISC
Appendix 2

3D MODEL OF MACHINE
The design of the machine is carried out using solid works software and the
different views are shown below.
Appendix 3
Actual images of the machine
Appendix 4

BILL OF MATERIALS
The overall cost of the fabricated machine is illustrated below,

Description Cost (Rs)

1HP Motor 180 volts(DC) 1500 RPM 5250.00
Electrical Dimmer 2250.00
Tachometer 1000.00
Weighing Machine 400.00
Fabrication Cost 1100.00
Total 10000.00
References
[1] Bai Pramila, B. N. And S.K. Biswas (1987), ‘Characterization of Dry Sliding
Wear of Al Alloy Wear, Pg. 61-74.
[2] Y. N Liang, Z. Y Ma, Li, S. Z., Li, S. And Bi, J., (1995) “Effect of Particle Size on
Wear Behaviour of Sic Particulate-Reinforced Aluminium Alloy Composites”,
Journal of Materials Science Letters, 14, 114- 116.
[3] How H.C., Baker T.N., (1997) “Dry Sliding Wear Behaviour Of SaffilReinforced
Al6061 Composites”, Wear 210, Pg. 263-272.
[4] R. Dasgupta, R. Thakur, And B. Govindrajan (2002), Regression Analysis Of
Factors Affecting High Stress Abrasive Wear Behaviour, Springer, Volume 2,
Number 2, 1 April 2002, Pp. 65-68(4).
[5] Zaamout M.S., (2004 A.D./1425 A.H.) Investigating The Abrasive Wear
Behaviour Of Locally Used Automotive Paint, Kau: Eng. Sci., Vol. 15 No. 2, Pp.
81-96.
[6] Yang L.J. (2005) “A Test Methodology for the Determination of Wear
Coefficient” Wear 259, Pg. 1453–1461.