Study of Abrasion Wear and Factors Affecting Wear Rate

Anoop Monga1, Shalav Gumber2 , Himanshu Grover3

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Baba Farid college of Engineering and Technology, Bathinda
ABSTRACT:
Wear of machine components or tools is one of the most common problems in industry today and it leads
economic losses to society. The monetary loss due to wear also includes cost involved in replacement and
downtime cost.Plethora of wear mechanisms have been recognized such as erosive wear, surface fatigue,
fretting wear, adhesive wear, abrasive wear and sliding wear, out of which abrasive wear is the most common
problem. Majority of wear problems in industry are due to abrasion. After studying the literature it has been
observed that the wear in agricultural equipments and tillage is the main problem along with many factors which
are responsible for abrasion wear. So with this problem, number of factors comes in front that are very
economical to overcome these problems. Hard facing is the most suitable method to resist over this wear and to
increase the life of tillage. As hard facing is economical method when compared to other surface treatment
methods, also other aspects were analyzed but those were also not considerable on the basis of feasibility and
economics.
Keywords: Wear, Abrasive Wear, Hardfacing, Wear Testing.

1 INTRODUCTION

Wear is called to be a phenomenon of engineering material removal of the one surface or in some cases both the
surface in solid state contact, due to combination of sliding as well as rolling motion with each other. Every
machines/machine components faces wear problems in industry today and it also economically affects the
society. Furthermore, wear is one of the major issues in minerals processing industries, and can be seen in
number of components, tools and machine parts. The major issues with inefficient working of machines in a
variety of engineering applications is wear related to machine components [Jha et al, 1998]. Especially in ground
engaging tools, usually in agriculture equipments, it is very common problem The great wear rate of ground
engaging tools make a cause of massive mutilation of material, periodic labour, downtime and replacement costs
of worn out parts. Due to loss of material lifespan of the tool will also affect (Bayhan, 2006). The process of
wear is not only accountable for removal of material but also leads to early malfunction of engineering tools.
The financial loss due to wear also contains cost involved in replacement. Some of the types in wear of
engineering material are: abrasion, erosion, adhesion, impact and surface fatigue.

Wear is excogitated as ruining of surface under diverse service conditions. Many

engineering tools and equipment fail frequently because of high tribology and corrosion in destructive
interrelating atmospheres. Tribological parts in gas turbine plant and hydro power plant are consequently failing

113 | P a g e
more frequently due to wear and corrosion usually open to such severe working conditions (Gupta and sharma,
2011). Erosion due to silt, also known as silt erosion is also a severe problem in many Indian hydropower
stations, resulting in drop of efficiency, forced outages, and repair which grounds a loss of approximately US$
120–150 million in a year for these hydro power stations (Mann and Arya, 2001). The rate of wear generally
modulates through number of different known stages namely primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary stage
consist of the early run – in- period in which the surfaces familiarize with one another and rate of wear is
observed to be varying between high and low. In the next stage, that is, Secondary stage is known to be as a mild
age process in which the stable rate of ageing is in motion, Due to this the components operational life is
generally comprised in this stage. In the last stage, that is, Tertiary stage is process where the components are
subjected to rapid failure due to high rate of ageing. There are many types of wear and also many factors that
affect its severity and rate. Numerous types of wear are documented, For instance, two bodies wear also known
as sliding wear, and three bodies wear also known as abrasive wear, erosive wear and chemically assisted fretting
wear, surface fatigue, (Sapate et al, 2008. However each of the wear mechanisms in numerous types of wear
morphologies is often associated with plethora of different machine components of different machines.
Operation situation in various machine affect the size, shape and surface texture of wear particles (Stachowiak et
al, 2008).
1.1 TYPES OFWEAR
Following are five main types of wear:

(a) Adhesive wear

(b) Fretting wear

(c) Sliding wear

(d) Corrosive wear

(e) Abrasive wear

Adhesive wear is measured as the repositioning of material from one solid surface made contacted to another
solid surface, which result in localized bonding between contacting surfaces (Deuis et al. 1996). This
phenomenon of degradation of surface can generally be seen in many components.
Fretting wear is commonly perceived failure type in bearing assemblies. It takes place, as the studies
mentioned, is due to minor amplitude oscillatory motion amongst the surfaces of bearing races, rolling elements
and many more, which are in higher pair position or contacting each other. Number of parameters effect the
fretting wear characteristics of engineering materials, for instance, material in mating combination, slip
amplitude, normal load, frequency, surface treatment, surface form and environment are few of them (Ramesh
and Gnanamoorthy,2006).
Sliding wear which is also known as two- body wear in which the degradation of surfaces is a result of a
relative motion occur among two surfaces and the initial mechanical contact amongst the surfaces. The

114 | P a g e
differentiation in sliding and abrasive wear is very sharp. Both are part of wear spectrum ranging from pure
cutting to ploughing type deformation without formation of cutting chips (Rigney et al. 1988).
Corrosive wear occurs due to the chemical reaction over the wearing surface, generally the corrosion is due to a
reaction between the metal and oxygen also known as oxidation. Corrosion products, usually oxide, allow such
wear failure as they have shear strengths different from those in the case of the wearing surface metals from
which they are formed. The oxides incline to flake away, resulting in the pitting of wearing surfaces. The
environment surrounding a sliding surface is corrosive in nature generally favorable to the corrosive wear (Bateni
et al,2006).
Abrasive wear, also called as three-body abrasion and can also be written as abrasion wear, by loose solid
particles is a regular issue in various industries and agricultural based work (Hosseini and Radziszewski 2011). It
is assessed that approximately 50% of all wear issues in industry are due to abrasion (Wirojanupatump and
shipway, 2000). It is estimated that the estimated cost of abrasive wear losses is as high as 1 to 4% in the gross
national product of any industrialized sound nation. Surface wear causing failure and damage counts for high
percentage of machine parts in the industry (Ming- Lin et al 2010). Several laboratory works have been observed
over the abrasive wear behavior with a wide range of engineering material (Eyre 1976). When particles are in
sliding movement, between hard and rough surface, and are able to move freely then the two-body abrasion
wear generally arise. Agricultural machinery which operates in sandy environment is susceptible to sand
particles entering and becoming entrapped between components, causing abrasive wear (Woldman et al, 2012).

1.2 ABRASION WEAR IN AGRICULTURALEQUIPEMENTS

The three body abrasion or Abrasive wear of soil-engaging components is a stern problem because of massive
loss of material in the agricultural based machines, thus increasing the cost of and time lost in the replacement of
worn tools and parts of agricultural machinery (Par and ER U, 2005).

To make tillage tool under low stress abrasive wear, the low carbon or low alloy steels are generally preferred in
making them (Yu and Bhole, 1990). In addition wear on parts of a plough body, more systematically dependent
on the tillage conditions or we can say the parameters such as plough area (or time), plough speed and tillage
depth, the normal forces between the soil and the surfaces of the plough area, theproportion,hardness, sharpness
and shape of soil particles, the moisture content of the soil, and environmental effects and weather changes
(Bayhan, 2006). While the wear confrontation of plough is mainly related with the hardness of surface and
ploughshare design, which in turns is related to the soil types and the cutting edge dimensions.
FACTORS AFFECTING ABRASIVE WEAR
The main factors affecting wear are as follow:
(a ) Applied load Load plays an important role on wear of materials. During working, there is significant
increase in wear rate, when load increases from lower to higher value. When graduation in load, the friction
coefficient also enhances and rate of wear also rises, as wear is directly proportional to frictionalforce.

(b) Abrasive particle shape, size and distribution If one of the surfaces which are in contact, is hard and
rough, it chips the

115 | P a g e
mating surface due to the presence of relative motion. The wear is called two- body abrasive wear. When the
abrasive particles are amongst the two bodies, the wear is called three-body abrasive wear. In three -body
abrasive wear, wear rate graduate as the diameter of abrasive particles alsoincreases.

(c) Contact area Contact area is inversely proportional with wear. When surface has only point contact with
abrasive particles, friction coefficient value is high and wear is more. When contact area is more, then friction
coefficient value is less and wear rate is lower.

(d) Environment Environmental conditions effects the wear of material up to great extent. Wear is less in wet
conditions as compared to dry conditions. In moist conditions, moisture plays role of lubrication, hence reduces
the frictional value and decreases the wear rate. In dry conditions, frictional force is higher and enhances the
wear of materials.

(e) Material properties Material properties (hardness and microstructure) affect the wear of material up to
greater extent. Generally when hardness of material is more, low wear occurs and when material is soft, then
wear is on higher side. When microstructure is coarse, hardness is less and wear rate is higher. When
microstructure is fine, hardness is more and wear rate is on lowerside.

(f) Abrasive particles hardness when hardness of material is more than abrasive particles, then the rate of
wear is less. If abrasive particle are with more hardness,thenthe wear rate is on higher side, as abrasive particles
easily penetrate the material while working.
REMEDIES
Wear is excogitated as a major problem in engineering material throughout the world, for example,
Approximately $910 million every year in Canada, the losses in agricultural sector are due to wear (Ulusoy ,
1981) the similar losses estimations of approximately $4.4 million in Turkey every year (Gupta and Sharma ,
2011). In case of abrasion wear of tools, abrasion with hard soil particles is dominating (Gahr KH, 1998).
To avoid the issues of wear, there are numerous efforts have been made in various aspects such as
characterization of tillage and improvements of its design, operational modelling, some attempts have also been
made is changing the material of ploughshares followed by the surface treatment which is by hard facing for the
tools and equipment by alloying it or using a welding technique. For instance, geometrical characterisation in
some cases by the help of computer programmes help to study the behaviour of different designs (Gutierrez et
al, 2011). As far as the material used in mechanical machinery must be having an enough hardness to resist wear
(Foley et al, 1984). In comparison with other conventional methods such as carburising and nitriding, boriding is
more promising to have considerable hardness of the tool (Shadrichev and Rumyantsev, 1982). However, wear
defense methods have the essential assumption from the surveys and studies that higher the hardness is higher
will the resistance against the three body wear, but the effect of material is very much complex as only
hardness is not enough (Horvat et al, 2008). To gain these desired properties, the surface treatment has been
preferred method for which various processes has been established so far, such as hard facing, coating, cryogenic
treatment and heat treatment processes. In addition, to attain optimum solutions for abrasion wear protection,
surveys were combined tribosystem investigation as well as laboratory and exploitation surveys (Baldissera,

116 | P a g e
2010). Both the methods, Hard facing and coating are generally favored for abrasion wear as cryotreatment who
found its application in the high-cycle fatigue fields (Bayhan, 2006). A couple of studies found, who
investigated these surface treatments followed by hard facing. Amongst the plethora of these methods hard
facing by welding techniques has been considered as the most appropriate method (Ivusic V and
Jakovljevic,1992).Hard facing is a usually known technique employed in improvisation of the surface of the
material used in the making of the tillage tools, in which the property of an alloy is homogenously placed over
the surface of substrate material with welding technique (Mihaljevic T, 1993). Hard facing technique is
excogitated as one the effective method to diminish wear problem, also economical one (Buchley, 2005), In
addition, Hard facing is a extensively applied method for severe worn, corroded or oxidized surfaces to recover
its functionality (American Welding Society 1998). The hard faced deposits are chosen on the basis of welding
deposits (Mohanty et al 1996). The hard facing alloys such as Fe-Cr-C(Iron Chromium Carbide) and Fe-C-
B(Iron carbide) are commonly employed for bulk materials for the improvisation in their tribological
performances (Badisch et al 2008). Plethora of methods for depositing these alloys onto the surface have been
recognised so far, few of them are oxyacetylene gas welding (OAW), gas metal arc welding (GMAW), Shielded
metal arc welding (SMAW), Manual Metal arc welding (MMAW) and submerged arc welding (SAW) etc.
Manual metal arc welding (MMAW), for instance, is commonly used method due to the low cost and easier
application. Coating is another widely used resistant method against the wear problem (Gandra, 2013). Based on
the criteria such as energy used and deposition processes various processes are designed such as laser cladding,
thermal spraying etc. (Dorfman, 2002). Thermal spray is utilized as the first preference in world’s industries
(Brinell,1921).

ABRASIVE WEAR AND ITS TESTS Abrasion wear is known to be as the three- body abrasion in which
the specimen is laden in contradiction of a rotating rubber wheel with abrasive particles being, entrained into
the contact zone. It is standardised by ASTM as G65 (a dry sand- rubber wheel abrasion test) (Wayne, 1990).
The abrasives can be utilized on the basis of their application such as, industrial equipment for grinding grain,
construction and farm. Also it has been observed that the wear resistance decreases with rise in content of
material used for coating and increasing grain size (Borik, 1970). The rubber wheel abrasion test has been the
subject of a large body of research with comparatively littlepublished work addressing abrasion with a steel
wheel. Indeed, in relatively early work on the rubber wheel apparatuscommercially available apparatus
supplied with steel wheels were being modified for use with a rubber wheel(Hosseini and Radziszewski , 2011).
Steel wheel abrasion test which can be conducted to study the wear and abrasive breakage of grains which can
be useful to consider as it is seen in ball mills and other industrial applications (Hosseini and Radziszewski,
2011). Steel wheel abrasion test is also useful for mining industry devices, as it provides similar working
conditions (Radziszewski, 2002).For the first time Rubber Wheel Abrasion Testing (RAWT) as stated by ASTM
standard G65 (Haworth, 1949). Rubber was used to uphold the contact pressure as the specimen under wear,
because it was noted that the

117 | P a g e
pistons of slurry pumps were made from rubber in order to maintain pressure as the liner wore. The specimen
was held against the vertical edge of the wheel and was 3 in (76.2 mm) long and 1 in (25.4 mm) wide, twice the
width of the wheel (Stevenson and Hutchings, 1996). The apparatus of RWAT is shown schematically in Fig
1.1.

Fig 1.1. Illustration of the rubber wheel abrasion testing (RWAT) apparatus described by ASTM G65 (Annual
Book of ATSM Standards volume 03.02, pp. 247-259).

REFRENCES

[1] Alipour M , Aghdam B G , Rahnoma H E, Emamya M, “Investigation of the effect of Al–5Ti–1B grain
refiner on dry sliding wear behavior of an Al–Zn–Mg–Cu alloy formed by strain-induced melt activation
process” Mater Design, Vol. 46, (2013) 766–775.

[2] Gandra J P,Vigarinho D, Pereira R.M, Miranda A. Velhinho P.V, “Wear characterization of
functionally graded Al– SiC composite coatings produced by Friction Surfacing”, Mater Design,Vol.52,(2013)
373– 383

[3] Min-xian W, Shu-qi W, Lan W, Xiang- hong C, Kang-min C, “Selection of Heat Treatment Process
and Wear Mechanism of High Wear Resistant Cast Hot-Forging Die Steel” Iron Steel Int. , Vol.19,issue 5,
(2012) 50-57.
[4] Gupta D,Sharma A K, “Investigation on sliding wear performance of WC10Co2Ni cladding developed
through microwave irradiation”, Wear, Vol. 271,issue 9-10, (2011) 1642-1650.
[5] Hosseini P, Radziszewski P, “Combined study of wear and abrasive fragmentation using Steel Wheel
Abrasion Test” ,Wear, Vol. 271 ,(2011) 689–696.

118 | P a g e
[6] Baldissera P , Delprete C , “Deep cryogenic treatment of AISI 302 stainless steel: Part II – Fatigue and
corrosion” ,Mater. Design, Vol. 31,(2010) 4731–4737.

[7] Wood P D ,Evans H E, Ponton C B ,“Investigation into the wear behaviour of Tribaloy 400C during
rotation as an unlubricated bearing at 600 °C”, Wear, Vol. 269, issues 10-11, (2010)763-769.K.H. Cho, H. Jang
, Y.S .Hong ,S.J. Kim ,R.H. Basch ,J.W. Fash, “The size effect of zircon particles on the friction characteristics
of braking lining materials” ,Wear, Vol. 264 (2008) 291-297.
[8] Natsis A, Petropoulaos G , Pandazaras C, “Influence of local soil conditions on mouldboard
ploughshare abrasive wear”, Trib. Int. Vol. 41, (2008) 151-157.

[9] Bayhan Y, “Reduction of wear via hard facing of chisel ploughshare” ,Tribol Int. Vol. 39, (2006) 570-
574.

[10] Bayhan Y, “Reduction of wear via hard facing of chisel ploughshare “,Tribol Int. Vol. 39 (2006) 570-
574.
[11] Buchely M F , Gutierrez J C , Leon L M, Toro A , “The effect of microstructure on abrasive wear of
hard facing alloys” ,Wear, Vol. 259, (2005) 52-61.

[12] Buchely M F, Gutierrez J C, Leon L M, Toro A, “The effect of microstructure on abrasive wear of hard
facing alloys” ,Wear, Vol. 259, issues 1-6, (2005) 52-61.

[13] Dorfman M, “ Thermal Spray Applications” ,Adv Mater Process , Vol. 2, (2002) 220-227.

[14] Dorfman M, “ Thermal Spray Applications” ,Adv Mater Process , Vol. 3, (2002) 220-227.

[15] Guul-Simonson F, Jorgensen MH, Have H, Hakansson I. “Studies of plough design and ploughing
relevant to conditions in Northern Europe”, Acta Agric Scand,Sect,B Soil Plant Sci ,Vol. 52, (2002) 57-77.
[16] Radziszewski P,“Exploring total media wear” , Miner Eng, Vol. 15, issue 12,(2002)
1073–1087
[17] Jayasuriya H P W, Salokhe V M , “A Review of Soil–tine Models for a Range of Soil Conditions” ,
j.agri. Engng Res.Vol. 79, issue 1, (2001) 1-13.

[18] Wirojanupatump S , Shipway P H, “ Abrasion of mild steel in wet and dry conditions with the rubber
and steel wheel abrasion apparatus” ,Wear, Vol. 239 ,(2000) 91-101.

[19] Hawk J A,Wison R D,Tylczak J H, Dogan O N, “Laboratory abrasive wear tests: investigation of test
methods and alloy correlation”, Wear, Vol. 225-229, part-2, (1999) 1031-1042.

[20] Khedkar J , Khanna AS, Gupta KM , “Triboloical behaviour of plasma and laser coated steels”, Wear,
Vol. 205, issue 1-2, (1997) 220-227.
[21] Kim K, “Investigation of fretting wear and fretting fatigue of coated systems”, Wear Vol. 200,(1996)
186.
[22] Mohanty M ,Smith R W, DeBonte M, Celis J P, Lugscheider E, “Sliding wear behavior of thermally
sprayed 75/25 Cr3C2/NiCr wear resistant coatings”, Wear Vol. 198, issues 1-2, (1996) 251-266.
[23] Rabinowicz E , Mutis A, “Effect of particle size on wear”, Wear, Vol. 8, issue 5, (1995) 381-390.

119 | P a g e
[24] Ivusic V, Jakovljevic M. Protection of agricultural machinery from wear. In:Proceedings of the
international conference “Science and Practice of Agricultural Engineering,” Djakovo, Croatia, (1992) 275-
283.

[25] H-J Yu ,Bhole SD , “Development of a prototype abrasive wear tester for tillage tool materials.Tribol
Int , Vol. 23, issue 5,(1990) 309-16.

[26] Wayne S F ,Baldoni J G , Buljan S T, “Abrasion and erosion of WC-Co with controlled
microstructures” , Tribol T. Vol. 33,(1990) 611-617.

[27] Foley AG , Lawton PJ ,Mclees VA, “The use of alumina ceramic to reduce wear of soil- engaging
components”, J Agric Eng Res , Vol. 30, issue 1, (1984) 37-46.
[28] Ulusoy E, “A research on determination of wearing of some tillage tool shares”, J Agric Fac Vol.
390,(1981) 377-389.
[29] Eyre T S, “ Wear characteristics of metals” ,Tribol. Int. , Vol. 10, (1976) 203-212

[30] Borik F ,Rubber wheel abrasion test, SAE Trans.79, 2145-2154,1970.

[31] Haworth R D Jr., “The abrasion resistance of metals”, Trans. Am. Sot. Met., Vol. 41 , (1949) 819-869.
[32] Brinell J, “Researches on the resistance of iron steel and some other materials to wear”, Wear, Vol.
76,(1921) 347-398.

120 | P a g e