JOURNAL OF

COMPOSITE
Article M AT E R I A L S
Journal of Composite Materials
0(0) 1–43
! The Author(s) 2015
Solid particle erosion of composite Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
materials: A critical review DOI: 10.1177/0021998315617818
jcm.sagepub.com

N Miyazaki1,2,3

Abstract
This article presents a critical review of papers dealing with solid particle erosion characteristics of polymer matrix
composites, metal matrix composites, and ceramic matrix composites. In addition, the solid particle erosion character-
istics of coatings for composite materials are also reviewed. Attention was paid to type of a reinforcement material
(fiber/filler), amount of fiber/filler, fiber orientation, and interfacial strength between fiber/filler and matrix, which affect
the solid particle erosion in addition to the variables affecting the solid particle erosion of monolithic materials, that is,
impact angle, particle velocity, temperature, particle flux, and erodent properties such as shape, size, hardness, and so on.
General characteristics of solid particle erosion for composites are extracted from the review of the papers.

Keywords
Solid particle erosion, polymer matrix composites, metal matrix composites, ceramic matrix composites, coatings

Introduction
Various materials such as metals, polymers, and cer-
amics are used as structural materials in various engin-
eering fields. Composite materials have been developed
to improve mechanical properties of monolithic mater-
ials. They are composed of matrix materials and
reinforcement materials, and classified based on
matrix materials as follows:
(a) polymer matrix composite (PMC),
(b) metal matrix composite (MMC), and
(c) ceramic matrix composite (CMC).
Various materials such as continuous long fibers,
woven cloths made of continuous long fibers, short
fibers, whiskers, particulates, and so on have been
used as reinforcement materials. Recently, carbon
nanotube (CNT) has been utilized as a reinforcement
material.
Because composite materials have good mechanical
properties, they have been used as structural materials
in various applications such as piping of hydraulic or
pneumatic transportation, noses of high velocity vehi-
cles, blades of water or wind turbines, internal liners of
piping and vessels used at elevated temperatures, tur-
bine blades of aircraft engines, helicopter blades, and so
on. In such applications of composite materials,
erosion, removal of material due to impingement of
solid particles, is one of the most important failure
modes. The first research paper on solid particle erosion
goes back to 19th century by Reynolds1 and was fol-
lowed by Rayleigh.2 The review articles concerning
solid particle erosion of monolithic materials were pub-
lished by Tilly3 and Finnie.4 As far as the author
knows, the first paper on the erosion of composite
materials was published in 1969 by Tilly.5 He per-
formed solid particle erosion experiments of two
kinds of PMCs, carbon fiber (CF) reinforced nylon
resin and glass fiber (GF) reinforced epoxy resin (EP).
Since then a lot of papers have been published on the
solid particle erosion of PMCs composed of various
kinds of thermosetting and thermoplastic resins includ-
ing various kinds of reinforcement materials. The
papers on the solid particle erosion of MMCs and
CMCs have been also published in addition to the
papers on PMCs. The erosion characteristics of com-
posite materials are complicated, compared with those
1
Green Electronics Research Institute, Kitakyushu, Japan
2
Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
3
Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
Corresponding author:
N Miyazaki, 1-8 Hibikino, Wakamatsu-ku, Kitakyushu 808-0135, Japan.
Email: miyazaki@grik.jp

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015

2 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
of monolithic materials, because composite materials
are composed of matrix materials and reinforcement
materials. In composite materials, type of a reinforce-
ment material (fiber/filler), amount of fiber/filler, fiber
orientation and interfacial strength between fiber/filler
and matrix affect the solid particle erosion in addition
to the variables affecting the solid particle erosion of
monolithic materials, that is, impact angle, particle vel-
ocity, temperature, particle flux, and erodent properties
such as shape, size, hardness, and so on.
Although several review articles were published on
the solid particle erosion on PMCs,6–9 there exists no
review article dealing with all types of composite mater-
ials, that is, PMCs, MMCs, and CMCs. In this review
article, erosion characteristics of all types of composite
materials are discussed. Only the solid particle erosion
caused by particles carried with air-flow is dealt with
and slurry erosion caused by particles carried with
liquid-flow is out of scope in the present article. In add-
ition, the solid particle erosion characteristics of coat-
ings for composite materials are also reviewed in the
present article.
Method for measuring erosion rate
Figure 1 shows the schematic diagram of a test appar-
atus used in the present author’s research group, which
is composed of an air compressor, a magnetic particle
feeder which keeps the feed rate of particles constant,
an ejector, a nozzle, and a specimen-holder which fixes
a specimen at a prescribed angle . Before performing
erosion experiments, the average velocity of solid par-
ticles ejected from a nozzle is measured using a dual
rotating circular disk10 and a calibration curve relating
the average velocity of solid particles with the air vel-
ocity at the exit of the nozzle measured by a pitot tube
can be obtained. The average velocity of solid particles
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of erosion test apparatus (cited
from Miyazaki and Hamao16).
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
in each experiment can be decided by measuring the air
velocity and using the calibration curve.
The weight loss of a test specimen due to erosion is
measured by a precision balance. Figure 2 shows a
typical erosion curve in the case of nylon 66 reinforced
by short GF, the weight content of which is 30 wt%
(N66/GF 30 wt%). The impact angle  and average
SiC-particle velocity Vp are 90 and 35 m/s, respect-
ively. The curve is composed of an incubation period,
in which no erosion occurs and a steady state, in which
weight loss is proportional to particle mass impacted.
The weight erosion rate can be defined by the slope of
the line in a steady state, that is, weight loss per particle
mass impacted. This definition is not suitable for com-
paring various materials, which have different densities.
Therefore, the volumetric erosion rate defined by the
volume loss per particle mass impacted is often used as
a measure of erosion rate. The volumetric erosion rate
can be calculated from dividing the weight erosion rate
by the density of a test specimen. The units of weight
erosion rate and volumetric erosion rate are [mg/kg]
and [mm3/kg], respectively.
Polymer matrix composites
Solid particle erosion characteristics of PMCs are
reviewed here by classifying PMCs into conventional
PMCs, natural filler reinforced PMCs, nanofiller rein-
forced PMCs, and hybrid PMCs.
Conventional PMCs
Tilly and Sage5,11 first presented the solid particle ero-
sion experimental data on PMCs. They obtained the
experimental data that the reinforcement of nylon by
either GF or CF reduced the erosion resistance and that
steel particles in an EP improved the erosion resistance.
Figure 2. Typical erosion curve; nylon 66 reinforced by short
glass fiber, Vp ¼ 34.0 m/s,  ¼ 90 (cited from Miyazaki and
Takeda15).
Miyazaki
These experimental data are, however, insufficient to
generalize above findings, because they performed ero-
sion experiments only at the particle impact angle of
90 and did not provide the detailed information on
reinforcements.
Williams and Lau12 performed systematic solid par-
ticle erosion experiments of unidirectional CF rein-
forced EP by varying erodent particle size d, erodent
velocity Vp and impact angle . They showed that the
weight loss due to erosion increased with increasing d
and Vp. According to the erosion rate versus , the
maximum erosion rate occurred around  ¼ 65 . In
general, ductile materials show the maximum erosion
rate at a lower impact angle,  ¼ 15–30 , while brittle
materials show the maximum erosion rate at  ¼ 90 .
Williams and Lau’s experimental results indicated a
semi-ductile erosion behavior.
Zahavi and Schmitt13 presented the erosion experi-
mental data on quartz-reinforced polybutadiene, glass
cloth-reinforced epoxy laminates, quartz-reinforced
polyimide (PI), and glass-epoxy laminates. Each test
material had 65% reinforcement and 35% resin.
Erosion experiments were performed using natural
sand with the size of 210–297 mm as erodent. The
sand velocity was 42 m/s and the impact angle () was
changed from 30 to 90 . They showed the ranking of
erosion resistance (hereafter, the erosion resistance is
defined as an inverse of erosion rate) for four kinds
of composite materials as follows: glass-epoxy lamin-
ates > glass cloth-reinforced epoxy laminates > quartz-
reinforced PI > quartz-reinforced polybutadiene. The
maximum weight loss due to erosion reached at
 ¼ 45 for the glass-epoxy laminates and at  ¼ 75
for other composites. So the composite materials
tested by Zahavi and Schmitt showed a semi-ductile
erosion behavior. Based on the SEM observations of
eroded surfaces, they proposed the erosion processes
that took place in these composites as follows:
(a) erosion and local removal of material in the resin
zones,
(b) erosion in the fiber zones associated with breakage
of fiber due to bending failure of unsupported sec-
tions where resin beneath these sections is
removed, and
(c) erosion of the interface zones between fibers and
the adjacent matrix.
Pool et al.14 carried out solid particle erosion experi-
ments of four composite materials; (a) a unidirectional
continuous-carbon-fiber-reinforced PI laminate (CF/
PI), (b) a woven [0/90] carbon-fiber-reinforced epoxy
laminate (CF/EP), (c) a woven aramid-fiber-reinforced
epoxy laminate in a quasi-isotropic [0/90/45] symmet-
ric lay-up (AF/EP), and (d) a chopped carbon-fiber-
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
3
reinforced polyphenylene sulfide (Chopped CF/PPS).
Hereafter, a composite material is denoted by A/B, in
which A and B represent a reinforcement material and
a matrix material, respectively. In the erosion experi-
ments, silica sand of 155 mm diameter was used as ero-
dent, and the particle velocity was 31 m/s. The ranking
of erosion resistance obtained was as follows: Chopped
CF/PPS > AF/EP > CF/EP > CF/PI. Erosion resist-
ance varies with the amount of a reinforcement mater-
ial as shown later of the present article. Because the
amount of a reinforcement material is not given in
Ref. 14, this ranking cannot be generalized. In the
cases of CF/PI and CF/EP, the maximum erosion
rate was located at the impact angle  of 90 . These
composites were composed of CF as a reinforcement
and thermosetting PI or EP as a matrix, both of which
were brittle materials. So the CF/PI and CF/EP com-
posites showed a brittle erosion behavior. On the other
hand, either of a reinforcement or a matrix was a duc-
tile material in the cases of the Chopped CF/PPS and
AF/EP composites. That is, both thermoplastic PPS
resin in the Chopped CF/PPS composite and aramid
fiber in the AF/EP composite were ductile materials.
Thus, the Chopped CF/PPS had a ductile erosion
behavior with the maximum erosion rate at  ¼ 25 ,
and the AF/EP composite had a semi-ductile erosion
behavior with the maximum erosion rate at  ¼ 90 –
45 . They also provided the erosion data on fiber orien-
tation for the CF/PI composite. They performed two
cases of erosion experiments, in which the erodent
stream and the fiber alignment direction were parallel
and perpendicular. The erosion rate of the perpendicu-
lar case was larger than that of the parallel case,
because of the reason that any bending stresses present
were of greater magnitude in the perpendicular case
than in the parallel case. Based on the above experi-
mental results, Pool et al. pointed out the factors gov-
erning erosion rates in composites as follows: (a) the
brittleness of the fibers, (b) whether the matrix is
thermosetting or thermoplastic, and (c) the interfacial
bond strength between the fibers and the matrix. The
last item was not validated by Pool et al.’s experimental
data, and later Miyazaki et al.15,16 clarified the effect of
interfacial bond strength between the fibers and the
matrix on erosion rate.
Solid particle erosion experiments of unidirectional
CF reinforced bismaleimide (BMI) composite, CF/
BMI, were performed by Mathias et al.17 The volume
content of CF was 65 to 70 vol%. The erodent particles
were angular-shaped alumina abrasive with the mean
diameters of 63, 130, and 390 mm. The particle velocities
were 20, 40, and 60 m/s and the impact angles were 30
and 90 . Erosion experiment of neat BMI resin was
performed for making a comparison with composite
data. It was found that the erosion rate of composite
4 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)

was much higher than the matrix polymer. According to represent the quantities relevant to fiber and matrix.
the short-beam strength and three-point flexural modu- Ballout et al. calculated the erosion rates of the com-
lus of the CF/BMI composite, the fiber-matrix bond was posite from the above equations using the experimental
supposed to be fairly weak, and the erosion of the com- erosion rate data of the EP and S-glass, and found that
posite material was dominated by removal of the CFs. the IROM was able to predict the erosion rate of com-
As a consequence, the CF/BMI composite was eroded posite better than LROM.
more rapidly than the matrix polymer. As for the effect Miyazaki et al.15,16,20 performed a series of solid par-
of erodent size on the erosion rate, larger erodent ticle erosion experiments of PMCs. They presented ero-
showed higher erosion rate because of its higher kinetic sion data on short GF or CF reinforced thermoplastic
energy. They also examined the effect of fiber orienta- resins. In Ref. 15, test materials were nylon 66 neat
tions on the erosion rate at the impact angle of 30 . The resin (N66), ABS neat resin (ABS), and their composite
perpendicular case, in which the erodent stream is per- materials, that is, nylon 66 resin reinforced by short GF
pendicular to the fiber alignment direction, showed (GF/N66) and by short CF (CF/N66), and ABS resin
larger erosion rate than the parallel case, in which the reinforced by short GF (GF/ABS) and by short CF
erodent stream is parallel to the fiber alignment direc- (CF/ABS). The detailed composition of these materials
tion, but the difference between both cases was small. is summarized in Table 1. In Ref. 20, test materials were
Supplementary erosion data of the CF/BMI composite polyetheretherketone resin (PEEK) and new type of
were provided by Karasek et al.18 thermoplastic PI resin (New-TPI), and their composite
Ballout et al.19 performed solid particle erosion materials. Table 2 provides the detailed composition of
experiments of unidirectional GF epoxy composites, these materials. The erodent used was SiC particles with
GF/EP, the fiber and matrix weight ratios f/m (f: fiber the diameter ranging from 100 to 150 mm. Figures 3(a)
weight, m: matrix weight) of which were 65/35, 50/50, and (b) show the relation between the volumetric ero-
and 35/65. Erosion experiments were performed at the sion rate and the impact angle  for the PEEK com-
impact angle  varying from 10 to 90 . The erodent posites and the New-TPI composites respectively, in the
particles used were alumina with 142 mm nominal diam- case of particle velocity Vp ¼ 34 m/s, together with the
eter and the particle velocity was 66 m/s. The erosion results of the corresponding neat resin.20 As shown
rates of EP and S-glass, the constituents of the GF/EP here, the erosion rates of composites are higher than
composite, were respectively obtained in addition to those of the corresponding neat resins and increase with
those of the GF/EP composites. A semi-ductile erosion the increase in fiber content. The CF composites show
behavior with the maximum erosion rate at  ¼ 45 was the higher erosion rate than the GF composites, when
observed for the GF/EP composites with f/m ¼ 50/50 the fiber weight contents are the same for both compos-
and 35/65. On the other hand, the erosion rate of the ites. The same results were obtained for N66 compos-
GF/EP composite with f/m ¼ 65/35 exhibited a brittle ites and ABS composites.15 Figure 4 shows the relation
erosion behavior with the maximum erosion rate at between the volumetric erosion rate and the fiber
 ¼ 90 . Judging from the fact that the EP and S-glass volume content for the PEEK composites and the
showed a semi-ductile erosion behavior and a brittle ero- New-TPI composites for Vp ¼ 34 m/s and  ¼ 60 .20
sion behavior, respectively, the shift of the location The plotted points are almost on the same curves, inde-
where the maximum erosion rate occurred to a higher pendent of kinds of fiber, which indicates that the ero-
impact angle for the GF/EP composite with f/m ¼ 65/35 sion rate of a composite is dominated only by the
was due to the high inclusion of GF. Composites showed
higher erosion rate than the neat EP, and the erosion
rate increased with increasing reinforcement fiber con- Table 1 Composition of tested materials; N66, GF/N66, CF/
tent. It should be noted that the reinforcement fiber may N66, ABS, GF/ABS and CF/ABS.
reduce the erosion resistance. The linear rule of mixture
(LROM) or the inverse rule of mixture (IROM) can be Fiber Fiber
applied to predicting the erosion rate ERc of composite Fiber weight Density diameter length
Designation content (%) (g/cm3) (mm) (mm)
materials. LROM and IROM are given as follows
N66 0 1.15 — —
LROM: ERc ¼ wf  ERf þ wm  ERm ð1Þ GF/N66 30 1.38 10–13 n.a
CF/N66 30 1.26 10–13 n.a
1 wf wm
IROM: ¼ þ ð2Þ ABS 0 1.04 — —
ERc ERf ERm
GF/ABS 20 1.19 10 n.a
CF/ABS 20 1.12 10 n.a
where w and ER represent the weight fraction and ero-
sion rate, respectively, and the subscripts f and m Note: n.a.: not available.

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015

Miyazaki 5

Table 2 Composition of tested materials; New-TPI, GF/New-TPI, CF/New-TPI, PEEK, GF/PEEK and CF/PEEK.

Fiber weight Density Fiber volume Average fiber Average fiber

Designation content (%) (g/cm3) content (%) diameter (mm) length (mm)

New-TPI Matrix 0 1.33 0 — —

New-TPI GF15% 15 1.44 8.5 13 130
New-TPI GF30% 30 1.55 18.4 13 130
New-TPI CF15% 15 1.37 12.4 7 150
New-TPI CF30% 30 1.42 25.3 7 150
PEEK Matrix 0 1.30 0 — —
PEEK GF15% 15 1.39 8.3 13 130
PEEK GF30% 30 1.51 18.0 13 130
PEEK CF15% 15 1.34 12.1 7 150
PEEK CF30% 30 1.38 25.1 7 150

Figure 3. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and impact angle; Vp ¼ 34.0 m/s (cited from Miyazaki and Hamao20). PEEK
composites. (b) New-TPI composites.

volume content of short fibers, if the matrix material is
the same.
In order to clarify the effect of the bond strength
between reinforcement fibers and matrix resin on the
erosion behavior of composites, Miyazaki et al.15
performed solid particle erosion experiments using
unsaturated polyester (UP) resin reinforced by woven
glass-cloths (GF/UP) and EP reinforced by unidirec-
tional CFs (CF/EP).16 The solid particles used were
SiC abrasive with the diameter ranging from 100 to
150 mm. Tables 3 and 4 show the material properties
of the GF/UP and CF/EP composites. In the erosion
experiments of the GF/UP composites, four kinds of
composites designated by A, B, C, and D were used in
addition to the UP neat resin designated by E. The
materials A, B, and C were composites whose fiber
weight contents were about 60 wt% but they had dif-
ferent fiber surface treatments. The fiber surface was
treated by acryl silane in the material A, treated by
chrome in the material B, and untreated in the material
C. According to fiber surface treatments, they had dif-
ferent three-point bending strength as shown in Table
3. The three-point bending strength of the material C
was only 67% of that of the material A. We can use the
three-point bending strength as an indicator of the
interface strength between fibers and a matrix resin.
The material D had the same fiber treatment as the
material A, but its fiber weight content was less than

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015

6 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)

the material A. In the erosion experiments of the CF/
EP composites, two kinds of composites designated by
materials B and C were used in addition to the EP neat
resin designated by the material A. CFs whose surfaces
were treated to strengthen the bond between a matrix
material and fibers were included in the material B,
while CFs with untreated surfaces were included in
the material C. As shown in Table 4, the tensile strength
of the material B was nearly 1.6 times as large as that of
the material C due to making the interface between a
matrix material and fibers strong. Figure 5 shows the
relation between the volumetric erosion rate R and the
impact angle  in the case of particle velocity Vp of
35 m/s for the GF/UP composites.15 It is found from
the figure that the composites A, B, C, and D have

Figure 4. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and fiber Figure 5. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and impact
volume content; Vp ¼ 34.0 m/s (cited from Miyazaki and angle for GF/UP composites; Vp ¼ 35.0 m/s (cited from Miyazaki
Hamao20). and Takeda15).

Table 3 Material properties of tested GF/UP composites.

Fiber surface Fiber weight Density 3-point bending

Designation treatment content (%) (g/cm3) strength (MPa)

A Acryle silane 60.4 1.79 556

B Chrome 60.3 1.80 446
C None 58.2 1.75 374
D Acryle silane 44.5 1.61 384
E — — 1.22 n.a.
Note: E: neat resin; n.a.: not available.

Table 4 Material properties of tested CF/EP composites.

Fiber weight Density Fiber volume Average fiber Tensile

Designation content (%) (g/cm3) content (%) diameter (mm) strength (MPa)

A 0 1.20 0 — —
B 65.0 1.67 52.7 9 38.7
C 61.4 1.62 48.8 9 23.9

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015

Miyazaki 7

Figure 6. Cross-sectional view of eroded surface of GF/UP composite C taken by optical microscope; Vp ¼ 35 m/s and  ¼ 90
(cited from Miyazaki and Takeda15).

much larger erosion rate than the corresponding neat

resin E. This can be confirmed by Figure 6 showing a
cross-sectional view of the eroded surface of the com-
posite C. We can see from the figure that the slope of
the eroded surface is steeper in the GF regions than in
the matrix regions. The fact indicates that the GF
regions were selectively damaged and suffered greater
damage than the matrix regions. This is an evidence for
the fact that the erosion rate of a composite is larger
than that of the corresponding neat resin. The peaks of
the erosion rates of the GF/UP composites shift to
higher impact angles. Comparing the results of the
materials A, B, and C of the UP composites which
have nearly the same fiber content but different fiber
surface treatments, we can find that the erosion rate of
the composites decreases with the increase in the inter-
face strength between the matrix and fibers. That is, the
material A, which has the strongest interface strength,
shows the best erosion resistance except around high
impact angles, and the material C, which has the weak-
est interface strength, shows the worst erosion resist-
ance. Comparing the results of the materials A, D,
and E, we can find that the erosion rate of the compos-
ite decreases with the decrease in fiber weight content. Figure 7. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and impact
Figure 7 shows the relation between volumetric erosion angle for CF/EP composites; Vp ¼ 55.7 m/s (cited from Miyazaki
rate R and impact angle  in the case of particle velocity and Hamao16).
Vp of 55.7 m/s for the CF/EP composites and the EP
resin.16 The erosion experiments of the composites were higher impact angles. The experimental results (a) to
performed in the cases, where the erodent stream and (c) are similar to those of the GF/UP composites
the fiber alignment direction were parallel and perpen- shown in Figure 5. The experimental result (d) partly
dicular. In Figure 7,  ¼ 0 and  ¼ 90 indicate parallel verifies the Pool et al.’s14 results, in which the erosion
impact and perpendicular impact, respectively. The fol- rate of the parallel impact was always higher than that
lowing are found from the figure: (a) The maximum of the perpendicular impact at the impact angle  ran-
erosion rate is located around  ¼ 30 for the neat ging from 0 to 90 .
resin A and around  ¼ 60 for the composites B and Afterwards Miyazaki and Funakura21 performed
C, that is, the peak of erosion rate for the composites solid particle erosion experiments of a composite
shifts to a higher impact angle compared with the cor- degraded by hot water. The composite used was UP
responding neat resin, (b) the erosion rate of the com- resin reinforced by chopped glass strand mats with
posites is larger than that of the corresponding neat the fiber volume content of 59 vol%. The test specimens
resin, (c) the erosion rate of the composite with were soaked in hot water of 80 C during 50–1000 hrs to
untreated fibers is larger than that of the composite cause damage. The solid particles used were SiC abra-
with treated fibers, and (d) difference in erosion rate sive with the diameter ranging from 100 to 150 mm. The
is found between the parallel impact ( ¼ 0 ) and the Vickers hardness of a resin rich region was measured,
perpendicular impact ( ¼ 90 ), that is, the perpendicu- and the interlaminar shear strength of the composite
lar impact has larger erosion rate than the parallel was obtained from a short beam three-point bending
impact at lower impact angles , and vice versa at test. According to these experimental data, the resin

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015

8 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)

Figure 8. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and impact Figure 9. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and impact
angle for unsaturated polyester resin reinforced by chopped glass angle for unsaturated polyester resin reinforced by chopped glass
strand mats; Vp ¼ 48.9 m/s (cited from Miyazaki and Funakura21). strand mats; Vp ¼ 19.0 m/s (cited from Miyazaki and Funakura21).

became soft and the interface between the matrix and

fibers was weakened due to degradation by hot water.
The relation between the volumetric erosion rate and
the impact angle are shown in Figure 8 for various
immersion times in the case of particle velocity Vp of
48.9 m/s. In this figure, ‘‘Normal’’ means the data for a
virgin composite and each numeral such as ‘‘100 hrs’’
means the data for a composite degraded during
immersion time. Both the effects of decreasing hardness
of the matrix resin which results in the decrease in the
erosion rate22 and decreasing the interfacial strength
which results in increasing in the erosion rate15,16 are
expected to appear in the erosion curves of the compos-
ites shown in Figure 8. Additional erosion experiments
were performed in the cases of a low particle velocity
Vp ¼ 19.0 m/s and a high particle velocity Vp ¼ 59.0 m/s
to separate the above two effects. At the low particle
velocity, the damage of the interface between the matrix
rein and fibers may be small because of small kinetic
energy of particles. In such a case, the effect of decreas- Figure 10. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and
ing hardness of the matrix is relatively enhanced by impact angle for unsaturated polyester resin reinforced by
chopped glass strand mats; Vp ¼ 59.0 m/s (cited from Miyazaki
suppressing the effect of decreasing interfacial strength
and Funakura21).
between the matrix resin and fibers. The results of
Vp ¼ 19.0 m/s are shown in Figure 9, in which the volu-
metric erosion rate of the degraded composite is lower shown in Figure 10, the volumetric erosion rate of the
than that of the virgin composite because of the effect degraded composite approaches that of the virgin com-
of decreasing hardness of the matrix resin. At the high posite in the range of higher impact angles and is larger
particle velocity, the damage of the interface between than that of the virgin composite in the range of lower
the matrix resin and fibers cannot be ignored. In such a impact angles.
case, the decrease in interfacial strength due to degrad- Miyazaki23 carried out experiments to study the
ation by hot water results in increase of erosion rate, solid particle erosion of composites with prior impact
which cancels the effect of decreasing hardness of the damage. Two kinds of EP composites reinforced by
matrix resin. Therefore, in the case of Vp ¼ 59.0 m/s aramid fibers (AR/EP) and by poly p-phenylene-

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015

Miyazaki
benzobisoxazole fibers (PBO/EP) were used. The AR/
EP and PBO/EP laminates with the same layout struc-
ture had the volume contents of 55.8 and 53.8 vol%,
respectively. Prior to erosion experiments, the test
materials were damaged by the impact of a spherical
projectile with the velocity of 130 m/s shot from an air
gun. Solid particle erosion experiments were then per-
formed for the damaged composites. The erosion
experiments were performed at the particle velocity
Vp ¼ 57.8 m/s and SiC particles with the diameter ran-
ging from 100 to 150 mm were used as erodent. The
experimental results showed that the volumetric erosion
rates of the composites with prior impact damage were
less than those of the virgin materials. Less erosion
rates of the composites with prior impact damage
were probably because the composites with prior
impact damage had a lot of transverse cracks and
delaminations, which absorbed the kinetic energy of
the solid particles used in the erosion tests.
Roy et al.24 performed erosion experiments of four
different types of PMCs reinforced by GF, that is, glass
epoxy-resin, glass-phenolic resin (modified), glass-phe-
nolic resin (unmodified), and glass-polyester resin. The
glass-phenolic resin (modified) means that phenolic
resin is modified so as to improve the mechanical prop-
erties of the composites. For the purpose of reinforce-
ment, E-glass plain weave woven roving fabric was
used. The eroding particles were silica sand with the
size of 200 mm. Erosion rates of these composites were
evaluated at two impact angles  ¼ 30 and 90 , and
two particle velocities Vp ¼ 38 and 45 m/s. According
to the erosion experimental data, the glass-EP exhibited
the highest erosion resistance at all impact angles and
impact velocities, while the glass-phenolic resin (mod-
ified) composite exhibited the least erosion resistance.
They discussed the nature and mechanism of erosion
based on the erosion efficiency parameter  proposed
by Sundararajan et al.25 This parameter is defined as
the fraction of the volume that is actually removed as
erosion debris out of that which is displaced, and given
by the following equation
2Er HV
¼
V2p
where Er is the weight erosion rate, HV is the hardness,
 is the density of a target material and Vp is the particle
velocity. This equation is valid for normal impact ero-
sion (: impact angle,  ¼ 90 ). The extension of this
equation for oblique impact erosion will be shown later.
When ideal microplowing involving deformation of a
target material from the crater without fracture is
induced in a target material, the parameter  will be
zero. On the other hand, in the case of ideal cutting,
 will be unity. When erosion occurs by the formation
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
9
of a lip and its subsequent fracture,  will be in the
range from zero to unity. In the case of brittle mater-
ials, erosion occurs by spalling and interlinking of lat-
eral or radial cracks that results in the removal of large
chunks of material, the parameter  is expected to be
even greater than unity. The values of the erosion effi-
ciency parameter  for composite materials tested
varied from 19 to 43% for Vp ¼ 45 m/s and from 12
to 28% for Vp ¼ 38 m/s. Thus, it was concluded that
the erosion mechanism was the formation of a lip and
its subsequent fracture. According to Ref. 24, the ero-
sion efficiency values of the PMCs shown above are
lower than those of polymer resins calculated from
the literature data. Roy et al. thus stated that this was
because hard reinforcement fibers resisted the crack
propagation in a resin region and reduced the erosion
efficiencies. Such a statement cannot be accepted
because they did not perform erosion experiments of
the corresponding neat polymers. Suresh Arjula and
Harsha26 evaluated the erosion efficiency parameter 
defined by equation (3) for various polymers and PMCs
by collecting available erosion rate data from litera-
tures, and constructed the efficiency map, variation of
erosion efficiency as a function of hardness. The erosion
efficiency values of the short fiber reinforced composites
were slightly larger than those of the corresponding
neat polymers. This indicates that the same erosion
mechanism as the neat polymer may govern the poly-
mer composite. Moreover, the thermoplastic compos-
ites showed the erosion efficiency values in the range of
4–15%, a ductile erosion behavior, whereas the thermo-
setting composites showed  values in the range
of 20–25%, a semi-ductile behavior. According to the
erosion experiments performed by Mathias et al.17 and
Miyazaki et al.,15,16,20 composite materials had poor
erosion resistance compared with the corresponding
neat resin. Removal of reinforcement fibers caused by
the damage between the matrix and reinforcement
fibers during erosion process has an important effect
on the erosion characteristics of composite materials.
The erosion efficiency does not take account of such a
physical phenomenon. So the erosion efficiency 
cannot be always used as an indicator of erosion resist-
ð3Þ
ance for composite materials.
Saputra et al.27 studied the solid particle erosion
behavior of particulate-filled composite. The composite
material used was EP filled with spherical glass par-
ticles having the mean diameter of 17 mm at the
volume content of 30 vol%. In order to study the
effect of adhesion between glass particle fillers and
matrix on erosion behavior, four types of filler treat-
ment were used as follows: (a) glass particles treated by
-glycidoxypropyl trimesoxysiane (GPS), (b) as-
received glass particles already treated by silane cou-
pling agent, (c) glass particles with untreated surfaces,
10
that is, silane coupling agent was removed from the
surfaces of as-received glass particles by acetone, and
(d) glass particles with surfaces coated with silicone oil.
Solid particle erosion experiments were performed
using angular shaped glass particles with the diameter
of 178, 350, and 605 mm as erodent, and at the particle
velocity of 15 m/s. The following results were obtained
from the experimental data:
(a) The ranking of erosion resistance was as follows:
composite with GPS treated fillers > composite
with as-received fillers > composite with acetone
washed fillers > composite with silicone oil coated
fillers. This ranking was the same as that of flex-
ural strength, which represented the adhesion
between glass particle fillers and matrix. It was
therefore concluded that the stronger adhesion
between glass particle fillers and matrix showed
better erosion resistance or lower erosion rate.
This fact was conformed to the preceding
researches performed by Miyazaki et al.15,16
(b) The erosion rate of composite was larger than the
corresponding neat resin, and the increase in filler
content of composite causes the increase in erosion
rate.
(c) The maximum erosion rate of composites was
located at a higher impact angle in comparison
with the corresponding resin.
The results (b) and (c) were also already obtained in
preceding researches.
Solid particle erosion characteristics of polyetheri-
mide (PEI) composites were studied by Bijwe et al.28
The test specimens used were neat PEI resin (PEI), PEI
composite containing 20% short GF (GF20%/PEI),
and PEI composite containing 25% short GF and
three solid lubricants (GF25% þ SL/PEI). The erosion
experiments were performed at the impact angles of
15 , 30 , 45 , 60 , and 75 , using silica sand of about
80 mm size as erodent. The ranking of erosion resistance
was in the following order; PEI > GF20%/PEI > >
GF25% þ SL/PEI, so that the incorporation of fibers
into resin deteriorated the erosion resistance, similar to
other composites.
Huang et al. 29 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of silicone resin reinforced by SiC or
Al2O3 particles (SiC/Silicone, Al2O3/Silicone), which
can be used as heat-resistant coatings for elevated tem-
perature situations. The mean particle sizes of
reinforcement particles were 1.29, 5, and 20 mm. The
erodent was Al2O3 particles. The erosion characteristics
were given for the particle velocity of 14 m/s. The ero-
sion experiments were performed by varying the weight
content of the reinforcement particle and the impact
angle. According to the erosion experiments, the best
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
erosion resistance was obtained at the SiC weight con-
tent ranging from 60 to 75 wt% for the SiC/Silicone
composite and at the Al2O3 weight content of 60 wt%
for the Al2O3/Silicone composite. Although the authors
stated that the erosion resistance of a silicone matrix
was improved greatly through introducing evenly dis-
persed harder second phase ceramic particles, they did
not provide the erosion data on neat silicone resin. The
authors should provide such data in order to clarify
how much SiC and Al2O3 particles improve the erosion
resistance of composites.
Barkoula and Karger-Kocsis30 studied the solid par-
ticle erosion behavior of EP reinforced by unidirec-
tional GF with the volume content of 68 vol%. Two
kinds of composites were used. One had GFs with
EP-compatible sizing (GF/EP-M), and the other had
GFs without compatible sizing, that is, EP-incompati-
ble sizing (GF/EP). The interfacial shear strength of
GF/EP-M was larger than that of GF/EP, so that
GF/EP-M had better adhesion between fibers and
matrix resin than GF/EP. Erosion experiments were
performed at the particle velocity of 70 m/s and the
impact angles of 30 , 60 , and 90 , using angular cor-
undum particles with 60 and 120 mm as erodent.
Erosion experiments were also performed for two
kinds of relative fiber orientations. Fiber orientations
designated by Pa and Pe were respectively parallel and
perpendicular to the stream of erodent particles. The
experimental results showed that the good fiber-matrix
adhesion improved the erosion resistance. On the hand,
the erosion rate of Pe showed larger erosion rate than
that of Pa, but the difference was not so large. These
results verified the Miyazaki et al.’s experimental
results.16 Barkoula and Karger-Kocsis30 performed
not only solid particle erosion experiments of thermo-
setting resin composites (GF/EP-M and GF/EP) but
also those of thermoplastic resin composites.31 The
test specimens of thermoplastic resin composites were
as follows: polypropylene (PP) resin reinforced by ran-
domly oriented short GF (S-GF/PP, length of
GF  2 mm, fiber content ¼ 40 wt%), PP resin rein-
forced by randomly oriented long GF (L-GF/PP,
length of GF  10 mm, fiber content ¼ 40 wt%), and
PP resin reinforced by unidirectional GF (UD-GF48/
PP, UD-GF55/PP, and UD-GF60/PP, the numeral
means fiber weight content of GF). They also per-
formed erosion experiments for both relative fiber
orientations Pa and Pe for the PP resin reinforced by
unidirectional GF. Erosion data showed that the ero-
sion rate reached at the maximum at the impact angle
of 30 , which indicates a ductile erosion behavior and
increased linearly with the increase of fiber content in
the range from 0 to 60 wt%. As mentioned before, the
LROM given by equation (1) or the IROM given by
equation (2) can be applied to predicting the erosion
Miyazaki
rate ERc of composite materials. It was found from the
experimental erosion rate data and the theoretical pre-
dictions of LROM and IROM that the experimental
erosion rate data lay between LROM and IROM but
closer to IROM than to LROM. As for the effect of
fiber orientations Pa and Pe on the erosion rate, the
erosion rate of Pe was larger than that of Pa for both
GF/EP-M and GF/EP especially at the impact angle of
30 ,30 and vice versa for UD-GF/PP.31 The former
result is consistent with those of the preceding
researches,14–17 whereas the latter one is completely dif-
ferent from those of preceding researches. In the pre-
ceding researches, the matrix materials of composites
used were thermosetting resins such as PI resin,14 EP,16
and BMI resin.17 On the other hand, the latter result of
Barkoula and Karger-Kocsis31 was that of the compos-
ite made of PP, a thermoplastic resin. It may be
deduced that the effect of fiber orientations on the ero-
sion rate of PMCs depends on whether the matrix
material of composite is thermosetting or thermoplas-
tic. Barkoula and Karger-Kocsis31 discussed based on
the SEM observations of eroded surfaces why the ero-
sion rate of Pa was larger than that of Pe for UD-GF/
PP. The effect of interleaves in the CF/EP laminates on
the erosion behavior was studied by Barkoula and
Karger-Kocsis32. An interleaf was an adhesive inter-
layer of a modified EP with a thickness of 0.125 mm.
The CF/EP laminates with interleaves had higher ero-
sion resistance than those without interleaves, because
interleaves reduced the fiber bending due to impact, the
fragment of fibers were not so easily removed due to the
better adhesion between adjacent layer, and interleaves
acted as a cushion of the impacted ply.
Tewari et al.33 studied the solid particle erosion
behavior of unidirectional CF reinforced PEEK com-
posites (UD-CF/PEEK). The composites had 65 vol%
CFs. In the erosion experiments, steel balls with the size
of 300–500 mm were used as erodent, and the erodent
velocity and the impact angle were 45 m/s and 85 m/s,
and 15–90 , respectively. They carried out three cases of
erosion experiments, in which erodent stream is 0 , 45 ,
and 90 inclined to the fiber orientation, and these cases
are respectively designated as Pa (parallel), 45 and Pe
(perpendicular). The erosion rate data showed the max-
imum around the impact angle of 60 . This means a
semi-ductile erosion behavior. The order of erosion
rate for Pa, 45 and Pe cases was Pe > 45 > Pa. The
result Pe > Pa is in agreement with the previous ones
of Refs. 14, 16, 17, and 30, but in disagreement with the
result of Ref. 31. In addition to Pe and Pa, Tewari
et al.’s provided the erosion rate data on 45, and
showed that the erosion rate of 45 lay between those
of Pe and Pa. Recently Drensky et al.,34 and Pei and
Friedrich35 obtained the erosion rate data similar to
Tewari et al.33 Drensky et al.34 conducted an
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
11
experimental study to determine the erosion resistance
of a composite material of unidirectional CF reinforced
PEEK (UD-CF/PEEK) at temperatures up to 260 C.
About 10 mm Arizona road dust particles and 100 mm
sieved runway sand particles were used as erodent, and
the particle velocity was 152.4 m/s. As reported in pre-
ceding researches, the erosion rate of Pe was higher
than that of Pa at 21 C. The erosion rate was found
to increase with temperature except at the impact angle
of 90 . Drensky et al. stated in the conclusion of their
paper that the erosion rates of 90 fiber orientation (Pe)
were lower than those of 0 fiber orientation (Pa) at
260 C, but they did not provide the erosion rate data
validating this fact in their paper. As for the effect of
erodent size on the erosion rate, 100 mm sieved runway
sand particles caused higher erosion rate than 10 mm
Arizona road dust particle. Pei and Friedrich35 per-
formed solid particle erosion experiments for UD-CF/
PEEK with the CF volume content of 60 vol% under
the particle velocity of 25 m/s, but the effect of fiber
orientations on the erosion rate was very small com-
pared with the other effects such as particle velocity and
impact angle. Afterwards Friedrich et al.36 examined
the effect of erodent. They used angular steel grit and
angular sand grit. The results showed that no remark-
able differences were seen for the fiber orientations,
although the perpendicular orientation exhibited
slightly higher erosion rate than the parallel orienta-
tion. Friedrich et al.36 also performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments of high density polyethylene (HDPE)
reinforced by polyethyleneterephthalate (PET) microfi-
brillar composite (PET/HDPE). The weight content of
PET microfibrillar was 30 wt%. Similar to brittle fibers
such as GF and CF, the inclusion of ductile PET micro-
fibrills in HDPE resin increased the erosion rate com-
pared with the neat resin. That is, the erosion resistance
of the composite PET/HDPE was worse than the
HDPE resin. The erosion rates of 200 mm thick PEEK
film and 300 mm thick thermoplastic polyurethane
(TPU) film were evaluated, and they were much less
than the erosion rate of the composite CF/PEEK.
This fact indicates that the use of such films can be
considered as a possible method for protecting compos-
ites surface from solid particle erosion as used in the
wind energy rotor blade industry.
Tewari et al.37 also performed the solid particle ero-
sion experiments of unidirectional CF or GF reinforced
epoxy composites (UD-CF/EP or UD-GF/EP), the
experimental conditions of which was the same as
those of UD-CF/PEEK performed by Tewari et al.33
The volume contents of fibers were 56 vol% for UD-
CF/EP and 53 vol% for UD-GF/EP, respectively. The
comparison between UD-CF/EP and UD-GF/EP
showed that the weight erosion rate of UD-GF/EP
was higher than that of UD-CF/EP under the condition
12
that both UD-CF/EP and UD-GF/EP composites have
almost the same fiber volume contents. Although the
composite materials used in the erosion experiments in
both Refs. 33 and 37 were different, the same results
were obtained for the effect of a fiber orientation to
erodent flow on the erosion rate.
Harsha et al.38 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of short fiber reinforced composites. The
fibers used were GF and CF, and the resins used were
three types of polyaryletherketones (PAEKs) having dif-
ferent chemical structures and ketone/ether linkage
ratios, that is, PEEK, polyetherketone (PEK), and poly-
etherketoneketone (PEKK), the ketone/ether linkage
ratios of which were 33, 50, and 67%, respectively.
They used four kinds of PEEK composites, the filler con-
tents of which were 20 wt% GF, 30 wt% GF, 30 wt% CF
and combination of three types of fillers, 10 wt% particu-
late polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), 10 wt% particulate
graphite and 10 wt% CF, three kinds of PEK compos-
ites, the filler contents of which are 10, 20, and 30 wt%
GF, and two kinds of PEKK composites, the filler con-
tents of which were 30 wt% CF and combination of three
types of fillers, 10 wt% particulate PTFE, 10 wt% of par-
ticulate graphite, and 10 wt% of CF. The erosion experi-
ments of neat resins, PEEK, PEK, and PEKK, were
conducted in addition to composite materials. In the ero-
sion experiments, angular-shaped silica sand particles of
the size ranging between 150 and 212 mm were used as
erodent. The impact angles and the particle velocities
were 15 , 30 , 60 , and 90 , and 39, 68, and 90 m/s,
respectively. The following conclusions were obtained
from the experimental results:
(a) All composite materials had larger erosion rates
than the corresponding neat resins.
(b) The erosion rate increased with increase in filler
content.
(c) The peak of erosion rate for some composite mater-
ials, that is, PEEK with 30 wt% GF, 30 wt% CF and
the combination of PTFE, graphite and CF, shifted
to a higher impact angle than that of the neat PEEK
resin, because of inclusion of brittle fillers in resins
with ductile nature of erosion behavior.
(d) The CF composites showed the higher weight ero-
sion rate than the GF composites, when the fiber
weight contents were the same in both composites.
(e) Fillers such as PTFE and graphite were detrimen-
tal to erosive wear performance.
Among the conclusions mentioned above, the con-
clusions (a), (b), and (c) are very common findings that
many researchers were already pointed
out.11,15,16,19,20,27 Considering that the CF composite
has lower density than the GF composite under the
condition of the same fiber weight content, the
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
conclusion (d) was the same as Miyazaki and
Hamao20 pointed out in their preceding research.
Harsha and Thakre39 and Suresh Arjula et al.40 per-
formed solid particle erosion experiments of PEI matrix
composites. Harsha et al.39 used PEI resins reinforced
by short E-GF, short CF, and combination of short E-
GF and solid lubricants (PTFE, graphite, MoS2). The
erosion experiments given in Ref. 39 were almost the
same as those given in Ref. 38 except that the compos-
ites used in the erosion experiments were different, that
is, PEI matrix composites in Ref. 39 and PAEKs matrix
composites in Ref. 38. There was no new finding in this
research compared with their previous one.38 Suresh
Arjula et al.40 used unidirectional CF reinforced PEI
(UD-CF/PEI). In this case, the difference lay only in
a matrix material compared with the erosion experi-
ments performed in Ref. 33. That is, PEI resin was
used in Ref. 40, whereas PEEK resin in Ref. 33. The
conclusions obtained in Ref. 40 were essentially the
same as those obtained in Ref. 33
Suresh Arjula et al.41 examined solid particle erosion
characteristics of four kinds of composite materials,
UD-GF/PEEK, UD-CF/PEEK, UD-GF/PEKK, and
UD-CF/PEKK, the fiber volume contents of which
were 60 vol%. The erosion experiment of PEEK neat
resin was also performed in addition to the composites.
Angular silica sand particles with the size of
150–250 mm were used as erodent. The erosion data
obtained in this research verified the following solid
particle erosion phenomena already obtained in the
preceding researches:
(a) The erosion rate of a composite is larger than that
of a corresponding neat resin.
(b) The peak of the erosion rate of a composite shift to
a higher impact angle due to the inclusion of brittle
fibers.
(c) A GF reinforced composite has higher weight ero-
sion rate than a CF reinforced composite, if the
matrix material and the filler volume content are
the same in both composites.
(d) The erosion rate of a composite in the case of per-
pendicular impact to the fiber orientation is higher
than that of a composite in the case of parallel
impact, especially in the lower angle below 60 .
Suresh Arjula et al. provided the ranking of erosion
resistance as follows: PEEK > UD-CF/PEEK >
UD-CF/PEKK > UD-GF/PEKK > UD-GF/PEEK.
Although a series of Harsha et al.’s researches37–41 are
useful for constructing erosion database, they provided
almost no new finding for the solid particle erosion
characteristics of PMCs.
As for PEEK-based composites, Sari et al.42 carried
out solid particle erosion experiments of short GF
Miyazaki
(S-GF) or CF (S-CF) reinforced PEEK resin compos-
ites (S-GF/PEEK or S-CF/PEEK) at the low erodent
particle velocity of 1.57 m/s. Sand-blast type or slinger
type erosion test rigs were used for solid particle ero-
sion experiments under a high particle velocity, while
Sari et al. used a low velocity particle erosion rig con-
sisting of a chamber full of erodent particles and a
sample holder rotating at the fixed speed. Fiber
weight contents of both composites, S-GF/PEEK and
S-CF/PEEK, were 30 wt%. Brown fused Al2O3 par-
ticles with the size of 500–710 mm were used as erodent.
Both composites showed a semi-ductile erosion behav-
ior with the maximum erosion rate at the impact angle
of 45 . The weight erosion rate of S-GF/PEEK was
smaller than that of S-CF/PEEK under the condition
of the same fiber weight content. Considering that S-
GF/PEEK has larger density than S-CF/PEEK under
the condition of the same fiber weight content, S-CF/
PEEK has larger volumetric erosion rate than S-GF/
PEEK. This fact was already pointed out by Miyazaki
and Hamao.20 They also pointed out in Ref. 20 as
shown in Figure 4 of the present review article that
the erosion rate of a composite was dominated only
by the volume content of short fibers irrespective of a
fiber material, CF or GF, if composites reinforced by
short fibers were made of the same matrix material. The
erosion data obtained by Sari et al.42 was insufficient to
confirm this point.
Suresh Arjula et al.43 performed sold particle erosion
experiments of PPS reinforced by short GF (S-GF/
PPS) with varying fiber content from 0 to 40 wt%,
and proposed the method using an artificial neural net-
work (ANN) technique for predicting erosion rate
based on the experimentally measured data of S-GF/
PPS. Angular silica sand particles with the size of
200  50 mm were used as erodent, and the impact
angles and the particle velocities were 15 , 30 , 60 ,
and 90 and 25, 50, and 66 m/s, respectively.
Common erosion characteristics for PMCs were
observed; the erosion rate of a composite was larger
than that of corresponding neat resin, and increased
with the increase in fiber content. An ANN technique
was first applied to a solid particle erosion problem for
polymers by Zhang et al.44 Suresh Arjula et al. followed
the ANN proposed by Zhang et al., and predicted the
erosion rates within relative error of 25%, which was
similar level of the wear measurements. They also
applied the ANN to the erosion rate estimations of
PEK reinforced by short GFs (S-GF/PEK) with vary-
ing fiber content (0–30 wt%).45 Although Harsha
et al.38 carried out solid particle erosion experiments
to obtain the erosion characteristics of PAEKs includ-
ing PEK, Suresh Arjula et al. performed solid particle
erosion experiments of S-GF/PEK and PEK neat resin
under the similar experimental conditions to the
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
13
previous erosion experiments38 to build up an erosion
rate database for S-GF/PEK and PEK neat resin. They
applied the ANN to the erosion rate database to predict
the erosion rate. The results showed that the predicted
data were well agreed with the measured values.
In addition to Harsha et al.’s researches on PEI com-
posites,39,40 Rattan and Bijwe,46,47 and Bijwe et al.48
examined the solid particle erosion characteristics of
carbon fabric reinforced PEI composites (CF/PEI). In
Ref. 46 woven carbon fabric reinforced (55 vol%) PEI
composites were fabricated using three types of weaves,
that is, plain (P), twill (T), and satin-4 H (S) by impreg-
nation technique in order to examine the effect of types
of weaves for carbon fabric on the erosion resistance of
composites. In addition to impregnation technique, film
technique was used to fabricate CF/PEI composites.
Silica sand particles with the size of 106–120 mm were
used as erodent. The impact angle and the particle vel-
ocity were 30 and 40 m/s, respectively. The following
results were obtained in Ref. 46:
(a) The composites fabricated using impregnation
technique showed higher erosion resistance than
those using film technique.
(b) In the case of impregnation technique, the plain
weave reinforced composite showed the maximum
erosion resistance followed by the satin and twill
weave reinforced composites. In the case of film
technique, the satin weave reinforced composite
showed the maximum erosion resistance followed
by the twill and plain weave reinforced composites.
In Ref. 47, solid particle erosion experiments of PEI
composite reinforced with plain weave carbon fabric
(CF/PEI) were performed at the impact angle of 30 ,
45 , 60 , 75 , and 90 using silica sand particles with the
size of 106–120 mm as erodent. The particle velocity was
26.88 m/s. The erosion data obtained showed that the
erosion rate of composite CF/PEI was larger than that
of the corresponding neat PEI resin. In other words, the
reinforcement of composite adversely affected the ero-
sion resistance of PEI. This fact is common to almost
all PMCs. Bijwe et al.48 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of plain weave carbon fabric reinforced
PEI composites (CF/PEI) to study the effect of
amount of fabric on the erosion resistance. They used
test specimens made by impregnation technique. The
volume content of carbon fabric in the test specimens
was changed from 40 to 85 vol%. The erosion experi-
ment of neat PEI resin was also performed.
Experimental conditions were the same as their previ-
ous research.46 Their erosion experiments showed that
the inclusion of reinforcement had adversely affected
the erosion resistance of the composite, similar to
most of PMCs.
14
Sari and Sinmazcelik49 performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments of unidirectional CF reinforced PEI
composite (UD-CF/PEI) under a low particle velocity.
Silica sand particles with the size of 150–200 mm were
used as erodent. The particle velocities were 1.96 and
2.88 m/s. The impact angle was changed from 15 to
90 . According to their erosion experiments, the UD-
CF/PEI composite showed a semi-ductile erosion
behavior in the relation between erosion rate and
impact angle under low impact velocities. Such an ero-
sion behavior was similar to that under a high particle
velocity.39
Sinmazcelik and Taskiran50 also performed high vel-
ocity particle erosion experiments of polyphenylenesul-
phide (PPS) reinforced by short GFs (S-GF/PPS), the
weight content of which was 40 wt%. In the PPS resin,
CaCO3 mineral particles were included with the weight
content of 25 wt%. So the composite material used in
the erosion experiments had three constituents, that is,
PPS resin, short GF and CaCO3 particle. As shown
later, composites whose matrix materials are modified
with fillers such as particulates, whiskers and so on are
called hybrid composites. Silica sand particles with the
size of 150–200 mm were used as erodent. The particle
velocities were 20, 40, and 60 m/s, and the impact angle
was changed from 15 to 90 . The experimental result
showed that the erosion rate was the maximum at the
impact angle of 60 , and thus a semi-ductile erosion
behavior. As described previously, the erosion data
obtained by Suresh Arjula et al.43 showed that the ero-
sion rate of the S-GF/PPS without CaCO3 particle
reached the maximum erosion rate at 30 . Such differ-
ence between the Sinmazcelik and Taskiran’s result50
and Suresh Arjula et al.’s result43 may be due to the
inclusion of CaCO3 particles in the matrix resin.
Inclusion of CaCO3 particles in the PPS resin induces
the increase in hardness of the composite material,
which results in the shift of erosion rate peak to
higher angle.
Sari51 and Sinmazcelik and Sari,52 respectively
examined the influence of erodent particle types and
the erodent size on the solid particle erosion of PPS
with CaCO3 particles reinforced by short GF (S-GF/
PPS) using a low speed particle erosion rig given in Ref.
42 In Ref. 51 the erodent particle types used in the
erosion experiments were 150–212 mm brown fused alu-
minum oxide (Al2O3), 150–200 mm silica sand and 150–
250 mm glass bead. The glass bead had a spherical
shape, whereas the Al2O3 and silica sand had sharp
and angular edges. In Ref. 52 Al2O3 particles with
three different sizes, 300–425, 150–212, and 45–75 mm,
were used. In both erosion experiments, the particle
velocity was 1.57 m/s, and the impact angle was chan-
ged from 15 to 90 . The test results of Ref. 51 showed
that the erosion rate caused by the glass bead was much
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
smaller than those caused by the Al2O3 and silica sand.
According to the test results of Ref. 52, small-sized
eroding particles (45–75 mm) showed the smallest ero-
sion rate because eroding particles had smallest kinetic
energy whereas the large-sized eroding particles (300–
425 mm) showed the largest erosion rate.
Sinmazcelik et al.53 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of cross-ply CF reinforced PPS composite
(CF/PPS) using angular silica sand particles with the
size of 150–200 mm as erodent. The particle velocities
were 20, 40, and 60 m/s, and the impact angle was chan-
ged from 15 to 90 . The composite had the maximum
erosion rate at the impact angle of 45 , showing a semi-
ductile erosion behavior. They obtained the residual
flexural strengths of composite test specimens after
solid particle erosion. The residual flexural strengths
after erosion at large impact angles and higher particle
velocities were smaller compared with acute angles and
lower particle velocities. This fact means that not only
the erosion rates but also fiber fracture and subsurface
deformations such as matrix cracks and deformations
due to the impingement of particles affect the residual
flexural strength.
Yilmaz54 examined the effect of annealing period at
the temperature of 180 C on the solid particle erosion
behavior of PPS hybrid composites, that is, short GF
(40 wt%), CaCO3 particulate (25 wt%) reinforced PPS
(S-GF/PPS). In the erosion experiments, silica sand
with 150–250 mm was used as erodent. The particle vel-
ocity was 60 m/s, and the impact angle was changed
from 30 to 90 . Erosion rates were evaluated at four
different annealing periods, 30, 60, 90, and 120 min.
Except for annealing period of 120 min, the increase
in annealing period resulted in the increase in the rela-
tive degree of crystallinity  defined by the improve-
ment in crystallinity compared with an as-received
sample. The ranking of degree of crystallinity was as
follows:
ð90 minÞ 4 ð60 minÞ 4 ð120 minÞ
4 ð30 minÞ 4 ðas-receivedÞ
On the other hand, the ranking of the erosion rate of
the composite ER was as follows:
ERð90 minÞ 5 ERð60 minÞ 5 ERð120 minÞ
5 ERð30 minÞ 5 ERðas-receivedÞ
Annealed composite showed lower erosion rate, thus
higher erosion resistance than as-received composite,
and the increase in the total crystallinity caused
improvement of the erosion resistance of the composite.
According to the previous research on the effect of crys-
tallization of thermoplastic PI resin on the erosion
resistance,22 the resin with higher crystallinity showed
Miyazaki
lower erosion resistance. As for the effect of crystallin-
ity on the erosion resistance, the present research pro-
vided the result opposite to this previous research. In
composite materials, crystallization formed at the fiber-
matrix interface is expected to play a more important
role than the crystallization in the matrix, and the pull-
out and debonding of fibers are prevented by the tran-
scrystalline layer formation or strong interfacial
bonding strength.
Recently, the erosion characteristics of PPS-based
composites have been studied for the application of
the composites to aircraft structure.55,56 Ahmed
et al.55 proposed a new anti/de-icing concept for ice-
prone composite structure based on multifunctional
structures. They proposed a leading edge structure
material composed of GF reinforced PPS (GF/PPS)
and a PPS layer including metal fibers for conductive
heater element. They performed solid particle erosion
experiments of such a leading edge structure material.
They prepared sample laminates for erosion experi-
ments composed of two top layers of GF/PPS on the
impact side, two top layers of CF/PPS on the side
opposite to the impact side. On the top of the GF/
PPS ply a metal mesh was embedded as a simulation
of a conductive heater element layer. The experimental
results using Australian (garnet) sand at the particle
velocity of 70 m/s showed that the erosion rate of the
GF/PPS laminate with a metal wire layer was almost
the same magnitude of erosion rate as an aircraft-grade
aluminum sheet, although the GF/PPS laminate with-
out a metal wire layer showed much greater erosion
rate than an aircraft-grade aluminum sheet. It was
therefore concluded that the proposed leading edge
structure material had both anti-erosion and anti/
de-icing characteristics. Avcu et al.56 performed solid
particle erosion experiments of chopped glass mat rein-
forced PPS resin to examine the effects of erodent par-
ticle, the particle impact angle and velocity on the
erosion behavior of GF/PPS composite. The volume
content of glass mat was 25 vol%. Sharp-edge alumina
(Al2O3) particles with the size of 212–300, 150–212 and
90–125 mm were used as erodent in the erosion experi-
ments. The impact angle and the particle velocity were
respectively changed from 30 to 90 , and from 56 to
100 m/s. There was no new finding except for the effect
of particle size on erosion rate. According to the experi-
mental results, the erosion rate of the composite
increased with increase in particle size under a higher
particle velocity, and vice versa under a lower particle
velocity.
Tsuda et al.57 obtained solid particle erosion charac-
teristics of various types of GF reinforced UP resin
(GF/UP). Three types of GFs were used for GF/UP,
a chopped glass-mat (Mat-GF), a plain-woven glass
cloth (Cloth-GF) and unidirectional glass bundles
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
15
with no twisted strands (UD-GF). The composites con-
taining these types of GFs are designated as Mat-GF/
UP, Cloth-GF/UP and UD-GF/UP, respectively. The
weight contents of GFs were 18.2–41.1 wt% for Mat-
GF/UP, 22.8–52.9 wt% for Cloth-GF/UP and
47.9 wt% for UD-GF/UP, respectively. The crashed-
glass-powder with the average diameter of 350 mm
was used as erodent. The impact angle  was changed
from 20 to 90 , and the particle velocity was 24.5 m/s.
The angle between the solid particle stream and the
fiber orientation, which is designated as , for the
UD-GF/UP was chosen at 0 (parallel impact), 30 ,
45 , 60 , and 90 (perpendicular impact). They found
the following erosion characteristics:
(a) The peak of the erosion rate in the composite
shifted to a higher impact angle with the increase
in GF content. Thus the erosion behavior of the
composite changed from a ductile manner to a
brittle one with the increase in GF content.
(b) For UD-GF/UP, the erosion rate increased with
the increase in the angle , and the effect of the
angle  on the erosion rate was larger at the lower
impact angle .
The above erosion characteristics were already
observed for other composite materials in the preceding
researches. Tsuda et al. also proposed an estimation
method for erosion rate of GF reinforced composite,
Ec, by knowing only the values of the erosion rate of
matrix resin, Em, and GF volumetric content, Vf, in
advance. They applied their proposed method to pre-
dicting the erosion rate of the experimental results
obtained in the preceding researches.15,30 The predicted
results were in good agreement with experimental
results.
As for the effect of the angle  between fiber orien-
tation and particle flow on erosion rate in a unidirec-
tional fiber reinforced composite, Kim and Kim58
reconfirmed the results of preceding researches by per-
forming solid particle erosion experiments of unidirec-
tional CF reinforced EP composites (UD-CF/EP).
They performed the erosion experiments for  ¼ 0
(parallel impact: (0)), 45 ((45)), and 90 (perpendicular
impact: (90)). The ranking of erosion rate was as fol-
lows: (90) > (45) > (0). They also performed the erosion
experiments of multidirectional laminated CF/EP com-
posites, [0/90], [45/  45], [90/30/30], and [0/60/60].
It was found that the erosion of multidirectional lami-
nated composites was not sensitive to the fiber direction
of laminates with respect to particle flow direction.
Biswas et al.59 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of GF reinforced EP (GF/EP) to examine
the effect of fiber content and fiber orientation on
the erosion characteristics of GF/EP composites.
16
The composites were fabricated with three different
fiber weight contents, 20, 30, and 40 wt%, and the
GFs in the composites were arranged in four different
fiber orientations, 15 , 30 , 45 , and 60 , with respect to
the base fiber. For example, in a composite with 15
fiber orientation, woven glass cloths were piled up in
such a way that the fiber orientations of two sequential
cloths are inclined by 15 . According to the authors’
conclusions, the composite with 20 wt% fiber content
showed the largest erosion rate for 30 fiber orientation,
and the largest erosion rate was found in the case of 15
fiber orientation for other two fiber contents, 30 and
40 wt%. In their paper, the authors provided the rela-
tion between the erosion rate and the impact angle,
indicating that the composites with all fiber contents,
20, 30 and 40 wt%, showed the largest erosion rate for
15 fiber orientation. This fact contradicts with the con-
clusion mentioned in the paper.
Mahapatra et al.60 and Patnaik et al.61,62 performed
solid particle erosion experiments of cross-plied E-GFs
reinforced UP resin (GF/UP). Both Refs. 61 and 62 have
the same content, so that Ref. 62 is neglected in this art-
icle. In both erosion experiments,60,61 different weight
contents of GF were used as test specimens, and different
sizes of dry silica sand were used as erodent. The weight
contents of GF in test specimens used were 40, 50, and
60 wt% in the Mahapatra et al.’s experiment,60 and 30,
40, and 50 wt% in the Patnaik et al.’s experiment.61 The
erodent size used was 300, 500, and 800 mm in the
Mahapatra et al.’s experiment,60 and 450, 600, and
800 mm in the Patnaik et al.’s experiment.61 The particle
velocities for both erosion experiments were 32, 45, and
58 m/s. The impact angle was varied from 15 to 90 .
They used the design of experiments approach named
Taguchi method to study the effect of various oper-
ational and material parameters on the solid particle ero-
sion characteristics of these composites. The results
obtained from these researches indicated a semi-ductile
erosion behavior with the maximum erosion rate at the
impact angle of 60 , and the increase in erosion rate with
the increase in GF content. It was shown that Taguchi
method provided a simple, systematic and efficient meth-
odology for finding out the control factors affecting ero-
sion rate and their interactions. They also successfully
applied the generic algorithm (GA) and the ANN to
obtaining the optimum value of factor settings for mini-
mizing erosion rate. In Ref. 61 the erosion efficiency 
was applied to qualitative characterization of erosion
behavior of the GF/UP composites used in the experi-
ments. The following erosion efficiency  considering the
erodent impact angle  was used instead of equation (3)
2Er HV
¼
V2p sin2 
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
The erosion efficiency () values of the GF/UP com-
posites used in the erosion experiments were 10–60%
for a low particle velocity and less than 10% for a high
particle velocity, so that the GF/UP composites exhib-
ited a semi-ductile erosion response for a low particle
velocity and a ductile erosion response for a high par-
ticle velocity. The erosion rate data given in Refs. 60
and 61 were greatly different from each other under
almost the same experimental conditions. For example,
in Ref. 60 the erosion rate is 6.164 mg/kg under the
experimental conditions; particle velocity ¼ 32 m/s,
fiber content ¼ 40 wt%, impact angle ¼ 90 , erodent
size ¼ 800 mm, and stand-off distance ¼ 160 mm. On
the other hand, in Ref. 61 the erosion rate is
272.79 mg/kg under the experimental conditions; par-
ticle velocity ¼ 32 m/s, fiber content ¼ 40 wt%, impact
angle ¼ 90 , erodent size ¼ 800 mm, and stand-off dis-
tance ¼ 180 mm. Such difference in erosion rate is
unbelievable.
Qian et al.63 conducted solid particle erosion experi-
ments of UP resin reinforced by unidirectional (UD)
various fibers. The reinforcement fibers used were inor-
ganic fiber, CF, and two kinds of organic high-polymer
fibers, ultrahigh strength polyethylene fiber (Dyneema:
DF) and poly (p-phenylene-2, 6-benzobisoxazole) fiber
(Zylon: ZF). The volume contents of the composites
were 49 vol% for UD-CF/UP, 46 vol% for UD-DF/
UP, and 40 vol% for UD-ZF/UP, respectively. The
erosion experiment of neat UP resin was also per-
formed. Angular alumina abrasive with the average
size of 11.5 mm was used as erodent. The particle vel-
ocity was 128 m/s and the impact angle  was changed
from 15 to 90 . We can make a comparison of erosion
rate among three kinds of UP composites, because dif-
ference in the volumetric fiber contents of the compos-
ite used in erosion experiments are relatively small.
According to volumetric erosion rate data obtained
from the experiments, the ranking of erosion resistance
of the composites including the neat UP resin was as
follows; UD-DF/UP  UD-ZF/UP > neat UP  UD-
CF/UP. It was therefore concluded that the inclusion of
reinforcement fiber enhanced erosion resistance of resin
for organic or ductile fibers such as DF and ZF, while
vice versa for inorganic or brittle fibers such as CF. The
peak of erosion rate for neat UP resin took place at the
impact angle  of 45 , while that for the UD-CF/UP
composite took place at the impact angle  of 60 . Such
a peak shift was caused by the inclusion of brittle fiber
in a ductile resin. On the other hand, UD-DF/UP and
UD-ZF/UP composites had the peak of erosion rate at
the impact angle  of 45 , the same impact angle at
which neat UP resin had the peak erosion rate. UD-
DF/UP and UD-ZF/UP composites were composed of
ð4Þ
ductile fiber and ductile matrix, so that the composites
had the same ductile erosion behavior as the neat resin.
Miyazaki
These erosion characteristics of the ductile organic-fiber
reinforced composites are new findings.
Solid particle erosion experiments of composites
including ductile organic fibers were performed by
Kumar et al.,64 Tejyan et al.,65 and Patnaik and
Tejyan.66 Kumar et al.64 performed erosion experi-
ments of short aramid fiber reinforced vinyl ester
resin. Four kinds of composite specimens VAF20,
VAF30, VAF40, and VAF50 were prepared for erosion
experiments. Each composite test specimen had the
fiber weight content of 20 wt% for VAF20, 30 wt%
for VAF30, 40 wt% for VAF40, and 50 wt% for
VAF50. Erosion experiment was also performed for
neat vinyl ester resin (VAF0). Dry silica sand was
used as erodent. The erosion rate of each composite
was evaluated by changing the experimental conditions,
that is, impact angle (30–90 ), particle velocity
(43–76 m/s), erodent size (250–600 mm), and stand-off
distance (55–85 mm), in order to clarify the effect of
various operational and material parameters on solid
particle erosion characteristics of these composites
using Taguchi method. According to the erosion data,
the ranking of erosion resistance was as follows;
VAF30 > VAF20 > VAF40 > VAF50 > VAF0 (neat
resin). This fact indicates that the inclusion of reinforce-
ment fiber helps enhancement of erosion resistance
compared with the neat resin, although nonlinear
dependence on the fiber weight content was observed
in the erosion resistance of composite. The decrease in
erosion resistance or the increase in erosion rate of the
composite at higher fiber contents, i.e. VAF40 and
VAF50, may be attributed to the reason that the
effect of fiber removal caused by fiber-matrix interfacial
damage becomes large compared with that of resin
removal. Kumar et al.67 performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments of short CF reinforced vinyl ester
resin under the same test conditions as the erosion
experiments for short aramid fiber reinforced vinyl
ester resin,64 and both composites showed quite similar
erosion characteristics, although the former composite
included brittle fiber while the latter one included duc-
tile fiber. That is, the result of Ref. 67 showed that the
short CF reinforced vinyl ester resin had lower erosion
rate than the vinyl ester neat resin. In the preceding
researches, the erosion rates of composites including
brittle fiber such as GF and CF were higher than
those of the corresponding neat resin. The result of
Ref. 67 was contrary to that of preceding researches.
Lower erosion rate of short CF reinforced vinyl ester
resin in comparison with that of neat vinyl ester resin
may be attributed to good adhesion between CFs and
vinyl ester resin. Tejyan et al.65 evaluated erosion rates
of PP-based needle-punched nonwoven reinforced
epoxy composites (NNC). The composites with three
different nonwoven material weight contents, that is,
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
17
20, 30, and 40 wt% were fabricated, and they are
respectively referred to as NNC20, NNC30, and
NNC40. The composites included ductile reinforcement
nonwoven material. Erosion experiments were per-
formed using silica sand particles with the sizes of
250, 350, and 450 mm. The impact angles and the par-
ticle velocities were 30 , 60 , and 90 , and 35, 45, and
55 m/s, respectively. The composites showed a semi-
ductile erosion behavior with the maximum erosion
rate at the impact angle of 45 . The ranking of erosion
resistance was as follows: NNC40 > NNC30 > NNC20.
Patnaik and Tejyan66 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of viscose fiber-based needle punched non-
woven fabric mat reinforced EP composites. Three
types of viscose fiber-based needle-punched nonwoven
fabric mats VS200, VS400, and VS600 gsm (gsm: g/m2)
were used for reinforcement material. The composite
specimens designated as follows were used in solid
particle erosion experiments: VS200-20, VS200-30,
VS200-40: VS400-20, VS400-30, VS400-40: VS600-20,
VS600-30, VS600-40. For example, VS200-20 indicates
an EP composite reinforced by viscose fiber-based
needle-punched nonwoven fabric VS200 gsm, whose
weight content of fabric mat is 20 wt%. Other designa-
tions of composites are based on this rule. According to
the erosion experiments performed at the particle vel-
ocity of 45 m/s using irregular shape silica sand with the
particle size of 450 mm, the rankings of erosion resist-
ance were as follows:
(a) VS200-20 > VS200-30 > VS200-40: for VS200 gsm
composites,
(b) VS400-40 > VS400-30 > VS400-20: for VS400 gsm
composites, and
(c) VS600-40 > VS600-30 > VS600-20: for VS600 gsm
composites.
The rankings of VS400 and VS600 gsm indicate that
inclusion of ductile reinforcement material enhances
the erosion resistance of composites, although such a
physical phenomenon can be confirmed if the erosion
rate of the neat resin is available and larger than those
of the composites. As shown here,63–66 the inclusion of
ductile fibers/materials as reinforcement of a composite
tends to improve the erosion resistance of neat resin.
Natural filler reinforced PMCs
In solid particle erosion studies on PMCs, much atten-
tion has been recently paid to natural filler reinforced
resins. Chittaranjan Deo and Acharya,68 Mishra and
Acharya,69 and Gupta et al.70 performed solid particle
erosion experiments of natural fiber polymer compos-
ites. Chittaranjan Deo and Acharya68 used chopped
lantana camara fiber reinforced EP composites as
18
erosion test specimens. Four composites with different
lantana camara fiber weight contents, 10, 20, 30, and
40 wt%, were fabricated by usual hand lay-up tech-
nique. The erosion rates of these composites were eval-
uated using angular shaped silica sand particles with
the size of 200 mm at the particle velocities of 48, 70,
82, and 109 m/s, and the impact angles ranging from
30 from 90 . The erosion data showed a semi-ductile
erosion behavior with the maximum erosion rate at the
impact angle of 45 , and the increase in erosion rate or
the decrease in erosion resistance with the increase in
fiber content. Mishra and Acharya69 performed solid
particle erosion experiments of bagasse fiber reinforced
EP composites with the fiber volume contents of 0 (neat
EP), 10, 15, and 20 vol%. Silica sand with the size of
200 mm was used as erodent. The particle velocities were
48, 70, 82, and 109 m/s, and the impact angle was chan-
ged from 30 to 90 . Both the composites and neat resin
showed a brittle erosion behavior with the maximum
erosion rate at the impact angle of 90 . Although no
relationship was found between the erosion rate or ero-
sion resistance and fiber volume content, the compos-
ites had better erosion resistance than the neat EP.
Gupta et al.70 evaluated the erosion rates of roving
bidirectional bamboo mat reinforced epoxy composites
using silica sand particles with the size of 125–300 mm.
Test specimens used were the composites with different
fiber weight contents, 10, 20, 30, and 40 wt%, in add-
ition to neat EP. The particle velocities were 30, 52, 60,
and 88 m/s, and the impact angle was changed from 15
to 90 . Both the composites and neat resin showed a
semi-brittle/semi-ductile erosion behavior with the peak
erosion rate at the impact angle of 60–75 . The erosion
rates of the composites are smaller than that of the neat
resin, so that the inclusion of bamboo fibers improves
the erosion resistance of the neat resin. Natural fibers
such as lantana camara fiber, bagasse fiber, and
bamboo fiber are organic materials. According to pre-
ceding researches,63–66 organic reinforcement fibers
improved the erosion resistance of neat resins. Both
the bagasse fiber and bamboo fiber had the same
effect on erosion resistance as the organic fibers used
in the preceding researches,63–66 whereas lantana
camara fiber reduced the erosion resistance of neat
resin. Satapathy et al.71 performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments of fish (Labeo-rohita) scale filled
epoxy matrix composites, whose filler weight contents
were 5, 10, and 15 wt%. The main element of fish scale
is hydroapatite, so that fish scale filler is a kind of inor-
ganic fillers. Silica sand particles with the sizes of 300,
500, and 800 mm were used as erodent and the particle
velocities were 32, 44, and 58 m/s. All the three com-
posites showed almost the same erosion rate irrespect-
ive of filler contents and the maximum erosion rate at
the impact angle  of 90 , which indicated a brittle
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
erosion behavior. They concluded that the composites
exhibited improved erosion wear performance com-
pared with neat EP, but they did not provide any ero-
sion data validating this conclusion. They calculated
the erosion efficiency  defined by equation (3). The
calculated  values ranged from 4% to 60%, which
indicated a ductile or semi-ductile erosion behavior.
On the other hand, an erosion rate versus impact
angle curve for the composite showed a brittle behavior
with the maximum erosion rate at  ¼ 90 . In this
study, the erosion efficiency was not able to predict
the erosion behavior.
Nanofiller reinforced PMCs
Recently, several papers have been published on the
erosion characteristics of nanofiller reinforced PMCs.
Qian et al.72 fabricated an UP composite including
vapor-grown CF (VGCF) as nanofiller. In addition to
neat UP resin, the nanocomposite specimens were pre-
pared with filler weight contents of 1.25, 2.5, and 5 wt%
of VGCF. Angular shaped alumina solid particles with
the size of 11.5 mm were used as erodent, and the par-
ticle velocities were 97.8, 128, and 152 m/s. The impact
angle was changed from 15 to 90 . The results of ero-
sion rate showed that the inclusion of nanofiller
improved the erosion resistance of the matrix resin.
Zhou et al.73 evaluated solid particle erosion character-
istics of the polyacrylate-based nanocomposite coat-
ings. Nanosilica particle was chosen as filler of
composites. For the composites with colloidal nanosi-
lica particles, the weight content of filler was changed
from 10 to 40 wt%. On the other hand, for the com-
posites with pyrogenic nanosilica particles, it was chan-
ged from 5 to 20 wt%. Both sharp-edged and round
steel balls were used as erodent. The particle velocity
was 17 m/s. Both the neat resin polymer coating and
nanocomposite coatings exhibited a brittle erosion
behavior. For sharp-edged erodent, the erosion weight
loss of the neat polymer coating was the maximum and
those of nanocomposite coatings drastically decreased
with the increase in filler content. On the other hand,
the erosion loss was insensitive to the filler content for
round erodent. Zhang et al.74 performed solid particle
erosion experiments of CF woven fabric (CF: 52 wt%)
reinforced epoxy composite (CF/EP) and CF/EP com-
posite coated by thin nanopaper made of carbon nano-
fibers (CNF) (CNF: 12 wt% and CF: 52 wt%). Silica
sand particles with the size of 150 mm were used as
erodent. The CNF-based nanopaper achieved much
better erosion resistance than the CF/EP composite,
and also better erosion resistance than the neat EP.
Zhang et al.75 also compared the erosion weight loss
of GF reinforced epoxy composite (GF/EP; GF:
65 wt%) with GF/EP coated by CNF-based nanopaper
Miyazaki
(GF: 65 wt% and CNF: 2.5 wt%), and obtained the
result that CNF-based nanopaper enhanced the erosion
resistance compared with GF/EP without CNF-based
nonopaper coating. These experimental results indicate
that the CNF-based nanopaper is a good protective
coating material for wind turbine blade made of com-
posite materials. Chen et al.76 performed solid particle
erosion experiments of CNT reinforced epoxy (EP)
composites (CNT/EP). Three kinds of CNT/EP com-
posites were used in the erosion experiments. They were
isotropic CNT/EP composites containing randomly
dispersed CNTs (0.32 wt%), vertically aligned CNT/
EP composites with nanotube tips exposed to the sur-
face and horizontally aligned CNT/EP composites with
side of CNTs exposed to the surface and impinging
direction parallel to the CNT axes. Angular olivine
sand with the size of 238 mm was used as erodent. The
impact angles were 20 , 30 , 45 , and 90 , and the par-
ticle velocity was 40 m/s. The ranking of erosion rate
of composite was as follows: isotropic CNT/
EP > horizontally aligned CNT/EP > Neat EP >
vertically aligned CNT/EP.
Hybrid PMCs
Recently, a lot of papers have been published on solid
particle erosion studies of hybrid PMCs including two
or more reinforcements. One of the objectives for
developing hybrid composites is to enhance erosion
resistance of conventional PMCs. For this purpose, a
low weight percentage of fillers are usually added to
conventional PMCs as modification of a matrix resin
in addition to a high weight percentage of fiber or filler
as reinforcement. Inorganic fillers, organic fillers, and
metal fillers are used to modify matrix resins. Among
them, inorganic fillers are most commonly used.
Flyash, SiC particles, Al2O3 particles, CaCO3 particles,
boric acid particles, and so on are typical fillers used for
hybrid PMCs. Solid particle erosion characteristics of
hybrid PMCs containing flyash particles were studied
by several researchers.77–79 The first solid particle ero-
sion study of a hybrid PMC was performed by
Srivastava and Pawar.77 They used GF reinforced
flyash filled EP composites as test specimens. The con-
tents of GF and flyash were not given in the paper.
Silica sand particles with the size of 150–250 mm were
used as erodent, and the particle velocities were 24, 35,
and 52 m/s. The impact angle was changed from 30 to
90 . The GF reinforced EP (GF/EP) with flyash filler
had lower erosion rate than the GF/EP without flyash
filler, and the addition of flyash filler improved the ero-
sion resistance of the GF/EP composite, although it
reduced the hardness, the tensile strength as well as
the density. Patnaik et al.78 and Bishoyee et al.79 pub-
lished the papers on the solid particle erosion study of
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
19
GF reinforced UP resin (GF/UP) with flyash filler as
test specimens, but these two papers are based on the
same experimental data. The weight content of flyash
filler in the composites was change as 0, 10, and
20 wt%, the weight content of GF being kept at
50 wt%. Dry silica sand of different particle sizes, 300,
500, and 800 mm, were used as erodent. The particle
velocities were 32, 45, and 58 m/s. The impact angle
was changed from 15 to 90 . All the test specimens
showed a semi-ductile erosion behavior with the max-
imum erosion rate at the impact angle of 60 . It was
also found that the presence of flyash in the composite
reduced the erosion rate. The composite with filler
weight content of 20 wt% showed the better erosion
resistance than that of 10 wt%. They applied Taguchi
experimental design method and proposed a predictive
equation for erosion wear of these fiber reinforced com-
posites. They also employed the ANN technique to pre-
dict the erosion rate of the composites in a parameter
space larger than the experimental domain. The calcu-
lated results of the erosion efficiency  defined by equa-
tion (4) for the flyash-filled GF/UP composites
exhibited a semi-ductile erosion response ( ¼ 10–
60%) for a low particle velocity and a ductile erosion
response ( < 10%) for a relatively high particle vel-
ocity. Before presenting the paper on the solid particle
erosion study on the GF/flyash-filled UP composites,
Patnaik et al.80 performed the solid particle erosion
studies on GF/Al2O3-filled UP composites and GF/
SiC-filled UP composites81 under the same experimen-
tal conditions as GF/flyash-filled UP composites,78,79
and obtained the same results as GF/flyash-filled UP
composites. Afterwards Patnaik et al.82 compared the
erosion resistance among three kinds of hybrid PMCs,
that is, GF/flyash-filled UP composites, GF/Al2O3-
filled UP composites, and GF/SiC-filled UP composites
using the experimental data shown in Refs. 78, 80 and
81. As a result, the Al2O3-filled composites showed the
best erosion resistance, the SiC-filled composites
showed the intermediate erosion resistance, and the
flyash-filled composites showed the worst one.
Mahapatra et al.83 published the paper by replacing
the erosion data of GF/flyash-filled UP composites
with those of GF/cement by-pass dust(CBPD)-filled
UP composites and provided completely the same con-
clusions as their previous research82 except for repla-
cing flyash with CBPD.
Hereafter, erosion results of various kinds of hybrid
PMCs including inorganic fillers were shown. Yilmaz
et al.84 studied solid particle erosion characteristics of
GF reinforced UP resin filled with CaCO3 particles
(GF/CaCO3-filled UP). Different CaCO3 particle sizes
of 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 mm were used as fillers. As for the
effect of CaCO3 filler on the erosion characteristics of
GF/CaCO3-filled UP, they provided no useful result
20
except that the GF/CaCO3-filled UP showed a brittle
erosion behavior with the maximum erosion rate at the
impact angle of 90 , and that the erosion rate became
higher with the increase in the CaCO3 particle size. It is
not clear whether or not the inclusion of CaCO3 par-
ticles improves the erosion resistance of GF/UP com-
posites. Karsli et al.85 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of CaCO3 particle-filled short GF rein-
forced ABS/PA6 resin composites (S-GF/CaCO3-filled
(ABS/A6)). Hereafter the notation a/b/c are used to
represent the weight contents of the respective constitu-
ents of S-GF/CaCO3-filled (ABS/A6) composites; a:
ABS/A6 matrix wt%, b: S-GF wt%, and c: CaCO3
particle wt%. Silica sand particles with the size of
150–250 mm were used as erodent, and the particle vel-
ocity was 60 m/s. The impact angle was changed from
15 to 90 . Various kinds of test specimens were used to
clarify the effects of CaCO3 particle, S-GF, and both
CaCO3 particle and S-GF on the erosion characteristics
of the composites. The rankings of erosion rate for
various composites were as follows:
(a) Effect of CaCO3 particle: 100/0/0  95/0/5 < 90/0/
10 < 80/0/20 < 70/0/30. This result indicates that
the increase in the amount of CaCO3 particle
leads to the increase in erosion rate of the
composites.
(b) Effect of S-GF: 90/10/0 < 80/20/0 < 70/30/0 < 60/
40/0. This result indicates that the increase in the
amount of S-GF leads to the increase in erosion
rate of the composites.
(c) Effect of both CaCO3 particle and S-GF:
. 80/10/10 < 70/15/15 < 60/20/20. This result indi-
cates that the increase in total amount of
CaCO3 and S-GF increases the erosion rate of
the composites.
. 80/20/0 < 80/10/10 < 80/0/20, 70/30/0 < 70/15/
15 < 70/0/30. These results indicate that the add-
ition of CaCO3 particle in the conventional PMC
(S-GF/(ABS/A6)) leads to the increase in erosion
rate, thus does not improve the erosion resistance
of the composites.
In conclusion, the hybrid PMCs, S-GF/CaCO3-filled
(ABS/A6), are not suitable under erosive environment
condition.
Biswas and Satapathy86 studied solid particle ero-
sion characteristics of GF reinforced EP composites
(GF/EP) filled with copper slag particles. Copper slag
is a by-product obtained during smelting and refining
of copper, and composed of various oxides such as
Fe2O3, SiO2, CaO, Al2O3, and so on. Copper slag par-
ticles with the size of about 70 mm were used as filler of
the composites. Three kinds of the composites were
used in solid particle erosion experiments. They were
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
GF/EP composite without copper slag particles, GF/
EP composite with 10 wt% copper slag and GF/EP
composite with 20 wt% copper slag. Among the three
kinds of composites, the GF/EP composite with
20 wt% copper slag showed the best erosion resistance,
the GF/EP composite with 10 wt% copper slag showed
intermediate erosion resistance, and the GF/EP com-
posite without copper slag showed the worst erosion
resistance. Therefore the copper slag filler improved
the erosion resistance of the GF/EP composites.
Patnaik et al.87 evaluated solid particle erosion char-
acteristics of SiC particulate filled short GF reinforced
UP resin composites (S-GF/SiC filled UP). The weight
contents of short GF and SiC particulate were changed
from 10 to 50 wt% and from 0 to 20 wt%, respectively.
Silica particles with the size of 350 mm were used as
erodent. The composite S-GF/UP without SiC particu-
late had the peak of erosion rate at the impact angle of
60 , whereas the composites S-GF/UP with SiC par-
ticulate (S-GF/SiC filled UP) had the peak of erosion
rate at the impact angle of 75 . Such a shift of erosion
rate peak to a higher impact angle was attributed to the
addition of brittle SiC particulate. In addition, SiC par-
ticulate improved the erosion resistance of the S-GF/
UP composite. They also performed a finite element
analysis using explicit dynamic code ANSYS/LS-
DYNA to predict the erosion rate of the S-GF/SiC
filled PE composite.
Mahapatra88 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of two kinds of cross-plied woven E-GF
reinforced UP hybrid composites. CBPD particulate
with the size of 27 mm and alumina particulate with
the size of 44 mm were used as fillers of the hybrid com-
posites. Alumina is harder than CBPD. They are
named as GF/CBPD filled UP and GF/Alumina filled
UP. Erosion experiments were performed for these
hybrid composites and GF/UP composite without par-
ticulate filler. Particulate filler weight contents were 10
and 20 wt%. All the test specimens included 50 wt% E-
GF. Spherical shaped dry silica sand of different par-
ticle sizes, 300, 500, and 800 mm, was used as erodent.
Experimental results showed that the composites with
particulate filler had better erosion resistance than the
composites without particulate filler. He supposed that
the presence of hard particle fillers in the matrix helped
in absorbing a good fraction of this kinetic energy and
therefore energy available for the plastic deformation
of thermoplastic polyester became less, which led to
delay of the initiation of fiber exposure compared
with the composite without any filler. The hybrid com-
posites with higher filler content (20 wt%) showed
better erosion resistance than those with lower filler
content (10 wt%). All the composites tested showed a
semi-ductile erosion behavior with the peak erosion
rate at the impact angle of 60 . The hybrid composites
Miyazaki
with alumina filler showed better erosion resistance
than those with CBPD filler. He applied Taguchi
method and the genetic algorithm to find out the opti-
mal parameter settings for the minimum erosion rate.
Biswas and Satapathy89 performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments similar to Mahapatra’s study.88
They used E-GF reinforced EP filled with alumina par-
ticles. The alumina particle size was 70–90 mm. Erosion
experiments were performed under almost the same
conditions as Mahapatra.88 The results obtained are
similar to Mahapatra.88 That is, the hybrid composites
including alumina filler had better erosion resistance
than the composites without the filler, and the erosion
resistance increased with the filler content. All the com-
posites tested showed a semi-ductile erosion behavior
with the peak erosion rate at the impact angle of 60 .
Jha et al.90 evaluated solid particle erosion charac-
teristics of jute fiber reinforced EP composite (Jute/EP)
filled with SiC particles. They compared the erosion
resistance of Jute/SiC filled EP hybrid composites
with that of neat Jute/EP composite. They used two
kinds of Jute/SiC filled EP hybrid composites with dif-
ferent filler weight contents, 10 and 20 wt%. The Jute/
SiC filled EP hybrid composites and neat Jute/EP com-
posite had the same jute weight content, 40 wt%.
According to their experimental results, the inclusion
of SiC particles in Jute/EP composite improved the ero-
sion resistance, and the hybrid composite with 20 wt%
SiC filler had better erosion resistance than that with
10 wt% SiC filler. It was also found that the peak of the
erosion rate for the hybrid composites shifted to a
higher angle, compared with that for the neat compos-
ite, due to the inclusion of brittle SiC.
Bagci and Imrek91,92 examined solid particle erosion
characteristics of GF reinforced boric acid filled EP
composite (GF/Boric acid filled EP). The weight con-
tent of GF was 50 wt%. The test specimens used were
neat GF/EP composite without boric acid filler, GF/EP
composite with 15 wt% boric acid filler91 and GF/EP
composite with 30 wt% boric acid filler.92 Angular alu-
mina particles were used as erodent. According to the
erosion test data, addition of 15 wt% boric acid filler
sharply reduced the erosion resistance of the neat GF/
EP composite, while addition of 30 wt% boric acid filler
recovered the erosion resistance at the level of the neat
EP/GF composite. The authors explained these phe-
nomena as follows; In the case of 15 wt% boric acid
filler, the boric acid did not form a strong bond with
EP, but in the case of 30 wt% boric acid filler, it forms a
strong bond with EP. As for bond strength between
boric acid and EP, there was no evidence that validated
the authors’ explanation.
Kumar et al.93 used vinyl ester resin reinforced by
both short GF and short CF as test specimens for solid
particle erosion experiments. The weight contents of
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
21
GF and CF were same, and total fiber content was
changed from 0 to 50 wt%. They obtained the steady
state responses of these composites with respect to
impact angle, particle velocity, and erodent size, but
could not give how the inclusion of both GF and CF
influenced the erosion behavior of the hybrid
composites.
Recently, various inorganic fillers have been used in
hybrid composites. The fillers in the hybrid composites
used in the solid particle erosion experiments were
granite particles,94 organo-modified montmorillonite
nanoparticles,95 WC particles,96 blast furnace slag
(BFS) particles,97 and AlN particles.98 These fillers
improved the erosion resistance of PMCs.
Metal fillers and organic fillers can be used in hybrid
PMCs. Aktas99 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of bidirectional woven GF reinforced epoxy
(GF/EP) composite strengthened by metal powder,
the main composition of which was Ni. Four different
specimens were tested. One was GF/EP composite
without metal powder, and the others were GF/EP
composites with metal powder, the weight contents of
which were 5, 10, and 20 wt%, respectively. The results
showed that the erosion quantities measured by weight
loss of four different composites were nearly the same.
Aktas therefore concluded that the percentage content
of metal powder did not influence erosive wear consid-
erably. This conclusion is incorrect. Considering that
the densities of the GF/EP composites with metal
powder are larger than that of the GF/EP composite
without metal powder and increase with the increase in
percentage content of metal powder, we can conclude
that the erosion quantities measured by volumetric loss
of the GF/EP composites with metal powder are smal-
ler than the GF/EP composite without metal powder
and reduce with the increase in percentage content of
metal powder, if the erosion quantities measured by
weight loss of four different composites are nearly the
same. The present author is of opinion that the quantity
of erosion should be measured not by weight loss or
weight erosion rate but by volumetric loss or volumetric
erosion rate. Mohan et al.100,101 performed solid par-
ticle erosion experiments of aramid fabric reinforced
EP (AF/EP) composite filled with ultrahigh molecular
weight polyethylene particles (AF/UHMWPE filled
EP). In Ref. 101 they used AF/EP composite without
UHMWPE filler and two kinds of UHMWPE filled
AF/EP composites: U1-A-E and U2-A-E, as test speci-
mens. The weight contents of EP, aramid fabric and
UHMWPE filler were 60, 38, and 2 wt% for U1-A-E,
and 60, 36, and 4 wt% for U2-A-E. The ranking of the
erosion resistance was as follows; U2-A-E > U1-A-
E > neat AF/EP. So the inclusion of UHMWPE par-
ticle improved the erosion resistance of neat AF/EP
composite. In addition, the inclusion of UHMWPE
22
particle improved the mechanical properties such as
tensile strength, while the inclusion of inorganic fillers
in hybrid composites often deteriorate mechanical
properties.
Metal matrix composites
Solid particle erosion characteristics of MMCs are
reviewed here by classifying MMCs into fiber/particle
reinforced metals (FRMs/PRMs) and cermets.
FRMs/PRMs
Sreeran Srinivasan102 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of Al-4pct Cu metal reinforced by -alu-
mina fibers, the dimensions of which were approxi-
mately 2 to 3 mm in diameter with length up to 20 to
30 mm. The fiber volume contents were 0, 5, 20, and
30 vol%, in which 0 vol% represents a neat Al-Cu
matrix material. The erodent particles used were E-17
Norton Alundum. According to the experimental data,
the erosion rates of the composites were larger than
that of the neat matrix material and the erosion rate
increased with the increase in fiber volume content.
Hence the erosion resistance decreased with the inclu-
sion of fibers.
Morita et al.103 studied solid particle erosion behav-
ior of alumina particle reinforced cast iron composite.
The diameter and volume content of alumina particles
were 3 mm and 60 vol%, respectively. Three kinds of
erodent particles were used; silica sand with the size
of 0.65 mm, sinter steel grid with the size of 0.2 mm
and steel grit with the size of 0.3 mm. Experimental
results showed that the composite material had lower
erosion rate than the neat cast iron matrix material.
According to the study on the erosion behavior of
multiphase systems performed by Hovis et al.,104 the
IROM given by equation (2) exactly holds if the filler
size of a composite is larger than an impact event size.
When the erosion rate of filler ERf is larger than that of
a matrix material ERm, the IROM gives the smaller
erosion rate of a composite material ERc than that of
a matrix material ERm. In Morita et al.’s erosion
experiments, the size of alumina particle was much
larger than the erodent size, so that the erosion rate
of the composite could be evaluated by the IROM.
Moreover, alumina particle had smaller erosion rate
than cast iron; that is, ERf < ERm. That is why the
composite materials had lower erosion rate than the
neat cast iron matrix material.
Morrison et al.105 measured the erosion rates of an
aligned alumina-stainless steel composite. Alumina
rods with 500 mm in diameter were fully aligned and
formed a regular two-dimensional array. The volume
contents of the alumina rods and stainless steel were
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
approximately equal. Alumina erodent particles with
the mean diameters between 37 and 390 mm were used
in the erosion experiments. So the size and spacing of
the alumina rods were large compared with erosion
impact events. It was therefore possible to describe
the erosion rate of the composite in terms of the erosion
rate of the individual components.104 Morrison et al.
proposed a model, in which the erosion rate was con-
strained in such a way that the erosion rate of the stain-
less steel determines a stationary erosion surface profile,
and showed the reasonable agreement between the pre-
dictions by this model and the erosion test data.
Wu et al.106 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of 2014 Al reinforced by SiC or Al2O3 particles
(SiC/Al or Al2O3/Al). There was no information on par-
ticle content and the particle diameter except that Al2O3
particles were about the same size as SiC particle. As
erodent, angular Al2O3 particles with the average sizes
of 23, 42, 63, 143, and 390 mm were used for most ero-
sion experiments, and angular SiC particles were used
for some experiments. The particle velocities were 50,
75, and 100 m/s. The impact angle ranged from 10 to
90 . The MMCs had larger erosion rates than the neat
Al matrix metal. This may be due to the reason that
brittle reinforcement particles are fractured by the
impact of erodent, and easily removed from the
eroded surface. It was also found that the maximum
erosion rate occurred at the impact angle between 15
and 30 for the MMCs, while it occurred at the impact
angle of 15 for the neat Al matrix metal. The inclusion
of brittle fillers such as Al2O3 and SiC particles in
MMCs was supposed to induce the shift of the location
where the maximum erosion occurred to a higher
impact angle, compared with the neat Al matrix metal.
On the other hand, Saravanan et al.107 performed solid
particle erosion experiments of Al alloy reinforced by
SiC particles with the average size of 40 mm, the volume
content of which was 10 vol%, and showed that the ero-
sion rate of the MMC was comparable to that of the
unreinforced alloy.
Alahelisten et al.108 studied erosion characteristics of
alumina short fiber reinforced Al, Mg and Mg alloy
(Mg-9Al-1Zn). The alumina short fibers had the mean
diameter of 3 mm and the length of 500 mm, and the fiber
volume contents were 0, 10, and 30 vol% for the Al-
based MMC, and 0, 10, and 20 vol% for the Mg-
based and the Mg alloy-based MMCs, respectively.
SiC particles with the sizes of 100–150 and 300–
500 mm were used as erodent. The particle velocities
were 46 m/s for smaller erodent and 43 m/s for larger
erodent. The impact angle was 45 . The Al-based and
Mg-based MMCs displayed decreasing erosion resist-
ance with increasing fiber content. On the other hand,
the Mg alloy-based MMC showed the optimum erosion
resistance at the fiber content of 10 vol%. In general,
Miyazaki 23

Table 5. Composition of tested materials; bSi3N4/6061Al, Si-Ti-C-O/1070Al and SiC/Al.

Fiber volume Fiber Average fiber Density

Designation content (%) length (mm) diameter (mm) (g/cm3)

Si3N4/6061Al A 12 10–30 0.5–1.5 2.75

Si3N4/6061Al B 30 10–30 0.5–1.5 2.86
6061Al — — — 2.70
Si-Ti-C-O/1070Al 55 n.a. 8–12 2.51
1070Al — — — 2.71
SiC/Al 33 n.a. 10–15 2.53
Al — — — 2.63

brittle fibers tend to crack and their fragments are easily

removed from the eroded surface, so that the MMCs
have worse erosion resistance than the neat matrix
metals, as shown in the erosion study by Wu et al.106
In the case of Mg alloy-based MMC, the erosion behav-
ior was supposed to be affected not only by the inclusion
of fibers but also the microstructure of the alloy.
Miyazaki and Funakura109 carried out solid particle
erosion experiments of MMCs to clarify the effects of
fiber volume content, type of reinforcement fibers and
impact angle on the erosion characteristics of MMCs.
Three kinds of MMCs were used for the erosion experi-
ments. They were aluminum 6061 alloy reinforced by
Si3N4 whisker (Si3N4/6061Al), aluminum 1070 alloy
unidirectionally reinforced by Si-Ti-C-O fiber (Si-Ti-C-
O/1070Al), and pure aluminum reinforced by SiC
plain-woven cloth (SiC/Al). Table 5 shows the fiber
volume content, fiber length, fiber average diameter,
and density of the respective MMCs. The solid particles
used as erodent were SiC abrasive with the size ranging
from 100 to 150 mm. Erosion experiments were per- Figure 11. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and
formed under the several particle velocities Vp and the impact angle for Si3N4/6061Al composites; Vp ¼ 54.5 m/s (cited
impact angles  of 15 , 30 , 45 , 60 , and 90 . For the from Miyazaki and Funakura109).
case of the unidirectionally reinforced MMC, Si-Ti-C-
O/1070Al, the angle between the solid particle flow and matrix metal. As for the effect of the fiber orientation to
fiber alignment direction  was chosen as 0 (parallel erodent flow, the erosion rate of the perpendicular
impact) and 90 (perpendicular impact). The relations impact ( ¼ 90 ) is larger than that of the parallel
between the volumetric erosion rate and the impact impact ( ¼ 0 ). This phenomenon is also observed in
angle of the respective MMCs are respectively shown the erosion of unidirectional PMCs as described in the
in Figure 11 for Si3N4/6061Al, Figure 12 for Si-Ti-C- preceding chapter. As shown in Figure 12, the max-
O/1070Al, and Figure 13 for SiC/Al, together with imum value of erosion rate is located around  ¼ 45–
those of the corresponding neat matrix metals. In the 60 for the MMC and around  ¼ 30 for the corres-
case of Si3N4/6061Al shown in Figure 11, the erosion ponding neat matrix metal; that is, the peak of erosion
rate of MMC with the fiber volume content (Vf) of rate for the MMC shifts to a higher impact angle com-
12 vol% is nearly the same as that of the corresponding pared with the corresponding neat matrix metal. This is
neat matrix metal except around  ¼ 30 . On the other because brittle nature of reinforcement fibers appears
hand, the MMC of Vf ¼ 30 vol% has larger erosion rate due to the high volume content of fiber. In the case of
than the corresponding neat matrix metal, but the dif- SiC/Al composite shown in Figure 13, the MMC has
ference between two materials are small. In the case of much larger erosion rate than the corresponding neat
Si-Ti-C-O/1070Al shown in Figure 12, the MMC has matrix metal, and the peak of the erosion rate for the
much larger erosion rate than the corresponding neat MMC shifts to a little bit higher impact angle than for

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015

24
Figure 12. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and
impact angle for Si-Ti-C-O/1070Al composite; Vp ¼ 54.5 m/s
(cited from Miyazaki and Funakura109).
Figure 13. Relation between volumetric erosion rate and
impact angle for SiC/Al composite; Vp ¼ 33.1 m/s (cited from
Miyazaki and Funakura109).
the corresponding neat matrix metal because of small
amount of brittle fibers, compared with Si-Ti-C-O/
1070Al. The following important conclusions are
derived:
(a) For all MMCs including brittle fillers, the erosion
rates of MMCs are larger than those of the corres-
ponding neat matrix metals.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
Figure 14. Cross-sectional view of eroded surface of SiC/Al
taken by optical microscope; Vp ¼ 48.9 m/s and  ¼ 90 (cited
from Miyazaki and Funakura109).
Figure 15. A SEM micrograph of eroded surface of SiC/Al;
Vp ¼ 48.9 m/s and  ¼ 30 (cited from Miyazaki and Funakura109).
(b) In the case where the sizes of reinforcement fibers
are much smaller than those of the particles
impacted, almost all the fibers removed from the
MMC are included in a matrix material removed
by the impact of particles. In this case, the differ-
ence in erosion rate is small between the MMC and
the corresponding matrix metal.
(c) In the case where the reinforcement fibers are
included in form of unidirectionally long fibers or
cloths, fiber-rich parts are selectively eroded as
shown in Figure 14 and a lot of fibers are removed
from an eroded surface of the MMC as shown in
Figure 15. In this case, the MMC has much larger
erosion rate than the corresponding matrix metal.
Tu et al.110,111 studied solid particle erosion behavior
of alumina borate (Al18B4O33) whisker reinforced
AC4C Al alloy (Al18B4O33/Al). The volume content
of whisker was 19.5 vol%. Erosion experiments were
performed using angular silica sand with the size of
Miyazaki
106–149 mm under the particle velocities of 55, 140, 198,
and 243 m/s. The impact angle was changed from 15 to
90 . Experimental data showed that the erosion rate of
the MMC was larger than that of the neat matrix metal
except at a very shallow impact angle  ¼ 15 .110 They
conducted two reaction treatments in order to discuss
the effect of interface interaction between the Al18B4O33
whiskers and AC4C Al matrix.111 In the reaction treat-
ments, the specimens were treated at 500 C for 4 hrs
and 525 C for 8 hrs. Erosion experiments were per-
formed not only for heat-treated specimens but also
for untreated specimens. The ranking of the erosion
resistance was as follows: Treated specimen (500 C
for 4 hrs) > Untreated specimen > Treated specimen
(525 C for 8 hrs). In the specimens treated at 500 C
for 4 hrs, formation of a strong bond between the whis-
kers and matrix metal resulted in higher erosion resist-
ance. On the other hand, in the test specimen treated at
525 C for 8 hrs, a weak and brittle layer was maybe
formed at the whisker-matrix interface due to excessive
treatment. Fracture of such a weak bond between the
whiskers and matrix metal reduced the erosion resist-
ance of the test specimen treated at 525 C for 8 hrs,
compared with that of the untreated specimen.
Levin et al.112 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of Al2O3/Ni composites fabricated using
a hot isostatic pressing (HIP) and an electrodeposition
technique. The composites fabricated by the HIP con-
tained 0–45 vol% of Al2O3 particles with the size of
12 mm. On the other hand, the electrodeposited com-
posites contained 0–39 vol% of much smaller Al2O3
particles with the size of about 1 mm. In the latter
case, erosion test specimens were made by depositing
an Al2O3/Ni coating layer with the thickness of about
100 mm on a pure Ni substrate. The erosion experiments
were performed using angular alumina particles with
the size of 355–425 mm as erodent, the impact angle
and the particle velocity of which were respectively
90 and 40 m/s. It was found that for both types of
composites the erosion resistance of each composite
was lower than that of the neat matrix metal and
decreased with the increase in Al2O3 content. The elec-
trodeposition composites with small Al2O3 particles
(1 mm) had better erosion resistance than the compos-
ites fabricated by the HIP with large Al2O3 particles
(12 mm).
Gui et al.113 studied solid particle erosion character-
istics of 15 vol% TiC particle reinforced Al-5Cu-based
composite (TiC/Al-5Cu) as well as the monolithic
Al-5Cu alloy. The size of TiC particles was in the
range of 1–3 mm. The erodent particles used were
silica sand. The particle velocity was 83 m/s and three
impact angles, 15 , 35 , and 90 , were chosen. The ero-
sion rate of the TiC/Al-5Cu composite was higher than
that of the monolithic Al-5Cu alloy by 15–20%.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
25
Das et al.114 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of SiC particle reinforced Al alloy composites
(SiC/Al). The average size of SiC particle was 75 mm,
and its weight content was 10 wt%. Two kinds of SiC/
Al composites, that is, as-cast composite ((SiC/Al)AC)
and heat-treated composite ((SiC/Al)HT), were used as
erosion test specimens. Erosion experiments of as-cast
Al alloy (AlAC) and heat-treated Al alloy (AlHT) were
carried out in addition to the composites. In the erosion
experiments, Al2O3 erodent with the average size of
75 mm was used, and the particle velocity was 100 m/s.
The impact angle was changed from 15 to 90 . The
following results were obtained for erosion resistance:
(a) The erosion resistance of each composite, (SiC/
Al)AC or (SiC/Al)HT, was higher than that of the
matrix metal, AlAC or AlHT.
(b) The erosion resistance of the heat treated material,
(SiC/Al)HT or alloy AlHT, was higher than that of
the as-cast material, (SiC/Al)AC or AlAC.
The result (a) is different from the preceding
researches,102,106,108,109–113 in which the erosion resist-
ance of composite was lower than that of correspond-
ing matrix metal. Erosion resistance of composites
depends on the bonding between the metallic matrix
and the fillers. The SEM observation showed the
good bonding between the Al alloy matrix and the
SiC particles, which led to high erosion resistance.
Kumar et al.115 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of A356 alloy reinforced by in situ TiB2
particles which were fabricated by the reaction of
halide salts with aluminum melt, and formation of brit-
tle Al3Ti phase was completely suppressed. The par-
ticles were less than 2 mm. The weight content of TiB2
was 10 wt%. SiC particles with the average sizes of 50
and 110 mm were used as erodent. The particle velocities
were 20 and 50 m/s, and the impact angles were 30 and
90 . They used Taguchi’s design of experiment tech-
nique to obtain the erosion experimental data effect-
ively, and developed a mathematical model for
predicting erosion rate by using regression analysis.
Their results showed that the inclusion of in situ TiB2
particles improved the erosion resistance of
unreinforced A356 alloy as in the case of Das et al.’s
study.114 They supposed that the higher hardness of
TiB2 than that of SiC erodent particle and good bond-
ing strength between TiB2 particles and Al116 led to the
improvement of erosion resistance compared with the
neat A356 alloy. Similar result was obtained in solid
particle erosion experiments of aluminum reinforced
with redmud composite117 and bronze reinforced with
diamond particulate composite.118 Redmud is a major
waste material during production of aluminum from
bauxite by the Bayer’s process. In both
26
researches,117,118 solid particle erosion experiments
were carried out by changing filler content of compos-
ites, and the results indicated that the erosion resistance
of the composites increased with the filler content.
Mamatha et al.119 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of Zn-Al alloy reinforced by SiC particles
(SiC/Zn-Al), and finite element simulations of erosion
characteristics of the composites to validate experimen-
tal results. It was observed that the SiC/Zn-Al compos-
ites exhibited the better erosion resistance than
unreinforced Zn-Al alloy. The finite element simula-
tions agreed well with the test data.
Paul et al.120 examined solid particle erosion charac-
teristics of Ni-based composite clad layer with WC par-
ticles deposited on austenitic stainless steel using a CO2
laser-based cladding system. The WC particle contents
were 5, 10, and 15 wt%. In the erosion experiments,
alumina particles with the size of 50 mm were used as
erodent. The impact angles and the particle velocities
were 30 , 60 , and 90 , and 30, 50, and 70 m/s, respect-
ively. The erosion resistance of the composites
increased with the increase in WC content. The erosion
resistance of the Ni-clad layer with WC was found to be
at least four times higher than that without WC par-
ticles. The observation of the eroded surface indicated
that the erosion was primarily governed by ductile ero-
sion of Ni matrix followed by the removal of WC par-
ticulates from the matrix.
Cermets
Cermet is named after combining a part of words cer-
amic (cer) and metal (met), and is defined as a compos-
ite material composed of ceramic and metallic
materials. Although cermet is classified into MMC,
the volume content of a metal in a cermet is usually
less than 20 vol%, and the metal is used as a binder
for a ceramic such as carbide, nitride, oxide, and
boride. Solid particle erosion characteristics of cermets
are reviewed here.
Ninham and Levy121 performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments of a number of alloys composed of
carbide particles in a ductile metal. They used the
alloys with carbide volume content less than 30 vol%
(spheroidized plain carbon steels and cast high carbon
alloys) and greater than 60 vol% (cermets). Erosion
experiments were carried out using 75–200 mm angular
quartz particles as erodent at the particle velocity of
60 m/s and impact angles of 30 , 60 , and 90 . For
low carbide content alloys, the carbides promoted the
erosion. This may be attributed to the loss of ductility
for small size carbides (1–2 mm). For larger carbides,
carbide fracture and void formation at carbides
resulted in increased erosion rate in addition to the
loss of ductility. On the other hand, high carbide
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
content cermets showed increasing erosion resistance
with the increase in carbide content. This may be
explained as follows. In the cermets, volume content
of carbide is so high compared with that of metal
that the erosion behavior is mainly dominated by the
ceramic phase (carbide). In general, a ceramic has much
higher erosion resistance than a metal used as binder of
cermet.
Anand and Conrad122 performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments of WC-6 wt%Co cermet to study the
effect of carbide grain size and influence of scaling
between the impact damage size and microstructure
on the erosion characteristics. Hereafter a cermet is
denoted by A-B, in which A and B represent a ceramic
phase and a metal binder, respectively. Experimental
conditions were changed as follows: WC grain
size ¼ 0.57–3.25 mm, Al2O3 erodent size ¼ 63–405 mm,
particle velocity ¼ 35–93 m/s and impact angle ¼ 20–
90 . The erosion data showed that the impact angle,
at which the maximum erosion rate occurred, decreased
from 90 as the erodent particle size and the particle
velocity increased and the WC grain size decreased.
SEM observations on the eroded surface revealed that
the erosion mode was of a brittle type when the impact
crater encompassed less than 10 WC grains, whereas
the erosion mode sifted to a ductile mode when it
encompassed more than 100 WC grains. So larger
WC grain size and smaller erodent size tended to
show a brittle erosion behavior and smaller WC grain
size and larger erodent size tended to show a ductile
one. The main material removal mechanism in the brit-
tle erosion mode was cracking and crushing of WC
grains, while that in the ductile erosion mode was plas-
tic deformation and fracture of metal binder phase, WC
grains remaining relatively intact, which resulted in
smaller erosion rate compared with the brittle erosion
mode.
Wang and Luer123 studied erosion-oxidation behav-
ior of a hypersonic velocity oxygen fuel (HVOF) Cr3C2-
NiCr cermet coating using elevated temperature service
environments including fluidized bed boiler, coal-fired
boiler, municipal waste incinerator, and so on. The
material used in the erosion experiments was HVOF
Cr3C2-NiCr cermet containing 75% Cr3C2 and 25%
NiCr as a binder coated on a mild steel. The erosion
behavior of HVOF Cr3C2-NiCr coating was compared
with those of 1018 steel and coatings produced by ther-
mal spray methods other than HVOF. The test tem-
perature was changed from 25 C to 750 C. Two
kinds of boiler bed ash with the sizes of 421 and
649 mm were used as erodent. The impact angle and
the particle velocity were changed from 15 to 90
and from 20 to 80 m/s, respectively. HVOF Cr3C2-
NiCr test specimens showed a brittle erosion-oxidation
behavior, in which the maximum thickness loss of the
Miyazaki
test specimens occurred at the impact angle of 90 . The
HVOF Cr3C2-NiC had better erosion-oxidation resist-
ance than 1018 steel and other coating produced by
thermal spray methods. This is because the HVOF
Cr3C2-NiC had low porosity, fine grain structure and
homogeneous distribution of hard carbides/oxides
which formed a skeletal network within a ductile and
corrosive-resistant metal binder. As for the temperature
dependence of erosion-oxidation resistance, it increased
from 25 to 300 C and then decreased from 300 to
750 C. Afterwards Wang and Verstak124 studied the
solid particle erosion behavior of HVOF Cr3C2/TiC-
NiCrMo cermet coating and compared the elevated
temperature erosion behavior of this coating with
those of 1018 low carbon steel and other thermal
spray coating such as HVOF Cr3C2-NiCr, HVOF
WC-Co cermet coatings and so on. The HVOF
Cr3C2/TiC-NiCrMo coating exhibited excellent erosion
resistance with 2–3 times less thickness loss due to ero-
sion than the HVOF Cr3C2-NiCr coating and the same
level of erosion resistance as the HVOF WC-Co coat-
ing. The temperature dependence of erosion resistance
for the HVOF Cr3C2/TiC-NiCrMo coating was similar
to that for the HVOF Cr3C2-NiCr. The erosion resist-
ance of the HVOF Cr3C2/TiC-NiCrMo coating was
higher than that of the HVOF Cr3C2-NiCr below
600 C, but vice versa over 600 C. Thus, the HVOF
Cr3C2/TiC-NiCrMo coating was not suitable for appli-
cation over 600 C during service. Wang and Shui125
studied the influence of powder type for spray coating
on the hot erosion behavior of HVOF chromium car-
bide-metal cermet coatings. Moreover, they performed
solid particle erosion experiments of HVOF WC-
17CrCo cermet coating in addition to HVOF chro-
mium carbide-metal cermet coatings tested in Ref.
125, and obtained the result that among the coatings
tested the HVOF WC-17CrCo coating exhibited the
highest erosion resistance.126
Reshetnyak and Kuybarsepp127 studied solid par-
ticle erosion behavior of the WC-Co cermets, the Co
content of which was 9–20 wt% and the TiC-based cer-
mets, the TiC content of which was 40–80 wt%. In the
TiC-based cermets, steels with considerably different
composition and structure were used as binders of cer-
mets. Erosion test conditions were as follows: the size
of abrasive quartz sand ¼ 0.2–0.3 mm, the particle vel-
ocity ¼ 80 m/s and the impact angle ¼ 30 . They found
from the erosion data that the erosion resistance of
cermets depended on the combined factor defined as
the product of hardness and compressive strength or
proof stress, and proposed an equation for evaluating
the erosion resistance as a function of modulus of elas-
ticity and 0.1% proof stress in compression.
D’Errico et al.128 studied the erosion characteristics
of cermets composed of TiCN as the primary ceramic
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
27
phase, TaC, NbC, WC, and Mo2C as the secondary
ceramic phase, and Ni and Co as a binder phase.
They found that hardness was the most important con-
trolling factor for solid particle erosion in addition to
toughness.
Hussainova et al. performed a series of researches on
the solid particle characteristics of cermets.129–137 In
Refs. 129 and 130, the solid particle erosion resistance
of cermets with different composition was investigated.
Completely the same erosion data were used in both
papers. The test specimens used were made of WC-Co
cermets, TiC-based cermets and Cr3C2-Ni cermets.
Solid particle erosion experiments were performed
using SiC and SiO2 abrasive particles with the size of
0.1–0.3 mm, and the particle velocity and the impact
angle were changed from 30 to 80 m/s and from 30
to 90 , respectively. According to the erosion data, all
tested materials showed a significantly lower erosion
rate when eroded by softer SiO2 particles than by
harder SiC particles. According to the erosion data
for three types of cermets, the maximum erosion rate
occurred at the impact angle  of 60 for the WC-Co
cermets, at  ¼ 75 for the TiC-based cermets and at
 ¼ 90 for the Cr3C2-Ni cermets. So the TiC-based
cermets showed a brittle erosion behavior, while the
WC-Co cermets showed rather a ductile erosion behav-
ior. Among the cermets tested, the WC-Co cermets had
the highest erosion resistance. It was also found that the
erosion resistance of the tested cermets mainly
depended on modulus of elasticity and fracture tough-
ness values, while the hardness seemed to be of minor
importance. In Ref. 131, the solid particle erosion char-
acteristics of TiC-based cermets, that is, TiC-NiMo and
TiC-FeNi, were studied by varying the weight content
of TiC phase from 50 to 80 wt%. The erosion resistance
of TiC-based cermets increased with decreasing binder
metal content. In the TiC-NiMo cermets, the erosion
resistance was improved by increasing Mo content.
Such improvement in erosion resistance is believed to
be mainly due to the increase in interphase bond
strength and the decrease in the number of microstruc-
tural flows, which are stress concentrators needed for
nucleation and propagation cracks resulting in material
removal. Hussainova concluded that microstructural
factors including binder chemistry, grain boundary
structures, and residual stresses created during sintering
process which were induced by thermal expansion mis-
match in different phases in cermets had a primarily
important effect on the erosion behavior of the Ti-
based cermets rather than the hardness and fracture
toughness. Afterwards Hussainova et al.132 performed
a residual stress analysis of TiC-NiMo cermets. They
used an analysis model composed of TiC core, Mo2C
rim and Ni matrix. Such a core-rim-matrix model was
based on the SEM images of TiC-NiMo cermets.
28
They found that the erosion rates of TiC-NiMo cermets
obtained from the erosion experiments were well corre-
lated with the radial residual stress at the rim-matrix
interface after cooling down from high sintering process
temperature to the room temperature. The effect of
mechanically mixed layer (MML) on the solid particle
erosion characteristics of cermets were examined in
Ref. 132. The MML is the mixture of metal phase, cer-
amic phase, wear debris, crushed abrasive, parts of oxi-
dation scales, etc., which can be observed on the surface
and subsurface regions. In Ref. 133, the measurements
of MML formed by solid particle erosion were pre-
sented for three kinds of cermets, WC-12vol%Co,
Cr3C2-12vol%Ni, and TiC-12vol%NiMo. The thick-
ness of MML layer was determined from the hardness
measurements along the depth direction from the
eroded surface. Experimental results showed that ero-
sion resistance depended on thickness and hardness of
MML as well as on applied test conditions such as
impact angle, particle velocity, erodent size, and so
on. Among the three kinds of cermets tested, the WC-
12vol%Co had the lowest erosion resistance and the
thickest MML consisted of oxides and damaged layer
of bulk material. The TiC-12vol%NiMo material
showed the highest erosion resistance and MML
formed on its surface was less pronounced as compared
with other cermets tested in this study. In Ref. 134 solid
particle erosion characteristics of Cr3C2-Ni cermets
with three different Ni binder content of 10, 20, and
30 wt% were investigated. The cermets were prepared
by two different methods, that is, conventional powder
metallurgy sintering and reactive carburizing sintering.
The erosion experiments were performed using SiO2
particles with the size of 0.1–0.3 mm, and the particle
velocity and the impact angle were respectively changed
from 30 to 80 m/s and from 30 to 90 . The maximum
erosion rate occurred at the impact angle of 90 for the
Ni binder content of 10 and 20 wt%, while it occurred
at 75 for the Ni binder content of 30 wt%. Such a shift
of erosion peak to a lower impact angle for the Ni
binder content of 30 wt% may be due to the effect
of ductile metal binder. The erosion rate increased
with the increase in Ni binder content. Moreover,
the reactive carburizing sintered cermets had moder-
ately better erosion resistance than conventionally
produced ones. Hussainova and Schade135 examined
the correlation between erosion rate and energy
absorbed by a target material during particle-target
collision. They performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of WC-Co, Cr3C2-Ni, Cr3C2-NiMo, and Ti-
NiMo cermets to obtain erosion rate. They also cal-
culated the energy values absorbed by the respective
target materials using a formula derived by them-
selves. They found the common tendency of increase
in erosion rate with the increase in the amount of
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
energy absorbed by the target material. Hussainova
et al.136 performed solid particle erosion experiments
of Cr3C2-Ni cermets with different additives for Ni
binder, and examined the effect of the additives on
the erosion characteristic of Cr3C2-Ni cermets. Mo
and Cu were used as the additives. As a result, the
additive Mo improved the erosion resistance of the
Cr3C2-Ni cermets, but the additive Cu did not.
Addition of Mo in Cr3C2-Ni cermets resulted in low-
ering of residual stress and improving phase bonding,
which led to the increase in erosion resistance. In Ref.
137 the erosion resistance of WC-based and yttria-sta-
bilized zirconia doped (13 vol%) cermets with differ-
ent metal binders (Co, Ni, or Fe) were obtained by
solid particle erosion experiments using silica abrasive
particles with the size of 0.1–0.3 mm at the particle
velocity of 80 m/s and the impact angles of 30 and
90 . Generally, the WC-based and yttria-stabilized zir-
conia doped cermets with Co or Ni binder had better
erosion resistance than that with Ni and Fe binder
and the conventional WC-Co cermet. The erosion
resistance of the WC-based and yttria-stabilized zirco-
nia doped cermets with Co or Ni binder was highly
dependent on sintering conditions.
Alman et al.138 performed solid particle erosion
experiments for three kinds of cermets, that is,
TiB2(40vol%)-FeAl, TiC(80vol%)-FeAl, and
WC(80vol%)-FeAl cermets, and compared with the
erosion behavior of WC(90vol%)-Co. Alumina par-
ticles with the size of 50 mm were used as erodent, and
the particle velocity and the impact angle were 40 m/s
and 75 , respectively. The test temperature was changed
from the room temperature to 700 C. The ranking of
erosion resistance for the three-kinds of cermets
was as follows; WC(80vol%)-FeAl > TiB2(40vol%)-
FeAl > TiC(80vol%)-FeAl. Erosion resistance was
related to both cermet microstructure and material
removal mechanism. As for the erosion characteristics
at elevated temperatures, the erosion rates of the three
kinds of cermets tested in this study were roughly of the
same magnitude as the WC(90vol%)-Co at 700 C, even
though they had lower contents of hard ceramic phases
than the WC(90vol%)-Co cermet. The erosion resist-
ance was constant for the TiB2(40vol%)-FeAl or
increased for the WC(80vol%)-FeAl and
TiC(80vol%)-FeAl cermets with the increase in test
temperature, whereas it decreased with the increase in
test temperature for the WC(90vol%)-Co cermets. Such
erosion behavior was related to the oxidation resistance
of Co binder and FeAl binder. The FeAl binder of the
WC(80vol%)-FeAl and TiC(80vol%)-FeAl cermets
provided more oxidation protection than the Co
binder of the WC(90vol%)-Co cermets. During erosion
at elevated temperatures, the formation of oxide prod-
ucts on the surface could significantly affect erosion
Miyazaki
resistance. A brittle oxide coating was more easily
removed during erosion.
Rateick et al.139 conducted solid particle erosion
experiments of WC-Co cermet consisted of 90vol% of
submicrometer WC embedded in 10vol% Co binder
and hardened 440C stainless steel. Angular alumina
abrasive was used as the erodent. Experimental vari-
ables were as follows: impact angle ¼ 20 , 50 and
90 ; particle velocity ¼ 60 m/s and 120 m/s; erodent
nominal diameter ¼ 63 and 143 mm. Erosion data
showed that the cermet had better erosion resistance
than the stainless steel. The erosion mechanism of the
stainless steel was more classically ductile, whereas that
of the cermet was a combination of both ductile and
brittle fracture.
Lin et al.140 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of TiC-Fe cermets using SiO2 and Al2O3 particles
as erodent. The particle velocity was 60 m/s and the test
temperatures were the room temperature and 350 C.
The erosion rate was higher in the case of Al2O3 ero-
dent than in the case of SiO2 erodent, because the hard-
ness of Al2O3 was higher than that of SiO2. As for the
temperature effect on the erosion rate, the erosion rate
at 350 C was higher than that at the room temperature.
Sun et al.141 examined the erosion resistance of ultra-
fine grained WC-Co cermets containing different
amounts of ceria nanoparticles up to 0.6 wt% prepared
by spark plasma sintering. Addition of ceria nanopar-
ticles effectively suppressed the abnormal grain growth
of WC, leading to uniform and fine microstructures.
Such ultrafine grained WC-Co cermets improved both
hardness and fracture toughness and led to enhance-
ment of erosion resistance. When the content of ceria
nanoparticles was more than 1 wt%, Co pools started
to form, which resulted in lowering material density,
hardness and fracture toughness, and consequently
the erosion resistance.
Ceramic matrix composites
Honeycutt et al.142 performed a pioneering research on
solid particle erosion of CMCs. They examined the ero-
sion behavior of tantalum carbide composites contain-
ing excess free carbon and rhenium alloyed tungsten
fibers. Individual specimens containing 0–3 wt%
excess carbon and 0–5 wt% tungsten-rhenium fiber
were used in the erosion experiments. Alumina particles
were used as erodent. The test temperature was 1800 C.
It was shown that the tantalum carbide composites had
higher erosion resistance at a high temperature than
graphite and hafnia-tungusten composite.
Sykes et al.143 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of SiC fiber reinforced alumina ceramic
composites. The composites contained SiC fibers con-
tents of 5, 15, and 25 wt% (6.1, 17.7, and 28.8 vol%,
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
29
respectively). The SiC fibers were approximately 1 mm
in diameter and 30 mm in length. Alumina abrasive par-
ticles with the mean diameter of 37, 130, and 270 mm
were used as erodent, and the particle velocities were
75, 100, and 125 m/s. The impact angle was changed
from 15 to 90 . Addition of SiC fibers improved the
erosion resistance, compared with neat alumina cer-
amic, and the erosion resistance increased with increas-
ing fiber content. The erosion resistance of alumina
ceramic increased by a factor of five or more by the
addition of SiC fibers. Such improvement of erosion
resistance may be due to the reason that the fibers
offer resistance to crack propagation because of a clos-
ing-pressure effect.
Wada et al.144 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of Al2O3-based composites containing up
to 30 wt% SiC particle (SiCp/Al2O3) or whisker (SiCw/
Al2O3). Their erosion characteristics were examined
using SiC and Al2O3 abrasives with the average particle
diameter of 500 mm. The particle velocity was 250–
300 m/s. The erosion rates of the composites decreased
with the increase in SiC content regardless of abrasive.
Thus, the addition of SiC particle or whisker improved
the erosion resistance of Al2O3 ceramic. Especially, the
erosion rate of Al2O3 with 30 wt% SiC whisker was
four times smaller than that of monolithic Al2O3 cer-
amic. The decrease in erosion rate was related to the
increase of hardness and fracture toughness of compos-
ites due to SiC addition. The erosion rates of whisker
composites were smaller than those of particle compos-
ites, when the SiC content was the same. As for the
effect of abrasive on erosion rate, the erosion rates by
SiC abrasive were one order larger than those by Al2O3
abrasive. Similar results were obtained by Kamiya
et al.145 for tetragonal zirconia (t-ZrO2 with 3 mol%
Y2O3) toughened Al2O3 composites. The phenomenon
that erosion rate depends on the erodent can be
explained as follows. According to a diametral com-
pression test under quasi-static loading, the mean frac-
ture load of SiC erodent particles was 2.3 times higher
than for Al2O3 particles.145 Almost all Al2O3 erodent
particles broke at collision with target materials, but
SiC erodent particles were only slightly damaged.
Thus, the mean impact force due to Al2O3 erodent par-
ticles was smaller than that due to SiC erodent particles
and did not reach the threshold force for lateral crack
fracture of composites.
Liu et al.146 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of Cr3C2/Al2O3 ceramic composites with Cr3C2
particles ranging from 10 to 40 vol% using SiC erodent
particles with the size of 150 mm at the particle velocity
of 95 m/s. Experimental results showed that the erosion
rate of the composite was smaller than that of mono-
lithic Al2O3 ceramic and decreased with increasing
Cr3C2 content. That is, addition of Cr3C2 particles
30
into Al2O3 ceramic improved erosion resistance. Based
on the erosion data, they gave a formula for the mea-
sured erosion rate of the composite as a function of
hardness, fracture toughness, and microstructure par-
ameter representing the average spacing between Cr3C2
particles.
Gochnour et al.147 examined the erosion character-
istics of Al2OC/SiC ceramic composites with Al2OC
content varying from 5 to 75 wt% using alumina ero-
dent particles. The particle velocity and the impact
angle were 120 m/s and 90 , respectively. The erosion
rate of the ceramic composite increased with increasing
Al2OC content. According to the experimental results,
the Al2OC/SiC ceramic composites became harder with
decreasing Al2OC content, because the SiC phase was
harder than the Al2OC, and fracture toughness was
almost constant irrespective of Al2OC content. The ero-
sion experimental results showed that the volumetric
erosion rate of SiC/Al2OC ceramic composites was
well correlated with the hardness of the composite
ceramics.
Kim and Park148,149 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of SiC ceramic composite with TiB2 par-
ticles (TiB2/SiC). TiB2 particles were added to SiC to
enhance the fracture toughness. Al2O3 or Y2O3 was
added into monolithic SiC and TiB2/SiC as sintering
aid for hot-pressed sintered materials. In Ref. 148 the
monolithic SiC containing 5 vol% Al2O3 and the com-
posite TiB2/SiC with 5 vol% Al2O3 and 14 vol% TiB2
were used as erosion test specimens, while the monolithic
SiC containing 5 vol% Y2O3 and the composite TiB2/
SiC with 5 vol% Y2O3 and 14 vol% TiB2 were used in
Ref. 149. The erodent used was SiC with the average
sizes of 50, 100, and 150 mm. The particle velocities
were 40, 70, and 100 m/s. The impact angles were 30 ,
60 , and 90 . In Ref. 148 the authors concluded that the
erosion rate of the monolithic SiC was higher than that
of the composite TiB2/SiC in the case where Al2O3 was
used as sintering aid, but such a conclusion seems to be
incorrect. According to erosion rate versus impact angle
curves given in Ref. 148, the general trend may indicate
that the erosion rate of the monolithic SiC is higher than
the composite TiB2/SiC for a high impact velocity
(100 m/s), and vice versa for a low impact velocity
(40 m/s). On the other hand, the erosion rate was
higher for the composite TiB2/SiC than for the mono-
lithic SiC in the case where Y2O3 was used as sintering
aid.149 Kim and Park did not provide the definite reason
why the erosion rate was dependent on the kind of sin-
tering aid. The solid particle erosion behavior of the
same composite was studied by Colclough and
Yoemans.150 The test materials used were a pressureless
sintered monolithic SiC and the composite material with
16 vol% TiB2 particles, TiB2/SiC. The erosion experi-
ments were performed both at the room temperature
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
and at elevated temperatures from 400 to 1000 C. The
average sizes of SiC particles used as erodent were 105,
250, and 420 mm for the erosion experiments at the room
temperature, and 105 mm for the erosion experiments at
elevated temperatures. The impact angle was 90 .
Although the particle velocity was not measured, the
gas stream was 200 m/s for the erosion experiments at
the room temperature, and 70 m/s for the erosion experi-
ments at the elevated temperatures. The composite TiB2/
SiC showed a higher erosion rate than the monolithic
SiC due to the enhancement of lateral cracking for small
scale contact events (low velocities/small particle sizes),
and vice versa for large scale impact events and at ele-
vated temperatures. Increase in erosion rate with tem-
perature was due to the reason that the materials became
softer, leading to larger plastic zone sizes and thus
increased residual stresses to drive lateral crack
propagation.
Sharma et al.151 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of SiC ceramic with 0, 10, 30, and
50 wt% WC particle (WC/SiC). Erodent particles used
were Al2O3 and SiC particles with the size of 40–70 mm.
The particles velocity was 47 m/s, and the impact angles
were 30 , 60 , and 90 . As for the influence of the ero-
dent particle, the erosion rate using Al2O3 erodent par-
ticles was two orders of magnitude smaller than that
using SiC erodent particles because Al2O3 erodent par-
ticles were softer than SiC erodent particles. According
to the erosion experiments using SiC erodent particles,
the composites WC/SiC with 10 and 30 wt% WC par-
ticle showed reduced erosion rates compared with the
monolithic SiC ceramic. The composites WC/SiC with
30 wt% WC particle had the minimum erosion rate,
and the erosion rate increased, when WC particles
increased from 30 to 50 wt%.
Wang and Levy152 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of SiC fiber reinforced SiC ceramic com-
posite (SiC/SiC). The test specimens were fabricated by
chemical vapor deposition (CVD) infiltration of a fiber
material. Angular SiO2 particles of average diameter
130 mm were used as erodent. The particle velocity
was 30 m/s, and the impact angles were 30 , 60 , and
90 . The erosion rate of the composite was determined
at 25 and 850 C. The erosion rate of the composite at
850 C was an order of magnitude lower than that at
25 C due to the increased ductility of the composite.
Shu et al.153,154 also performed solid particle erosion
studies of SiC/SiC composite. The composites were fab-
ricated by the nanopowder infiltration and transient
eutectoid (NITE) process, a highly optimized liquid
phase sintering (LPS) process. Based on the experimen-
tal results, they pointed out that erosion resistance
increased with decreasing the porosity of the composite.
Park et al.155 conducted solid particle erosion experi-
ments of sialon-based ceramic composite materials
Miyazaki
containing 0–20 wt% Si3N4 whiskers. Erosion experi-
ments were performed at the room temperature and
773 K using SiC particles with the average diameter of
90–130 mm. The particle velocity and the impact angle
were 40 m/s and 90 , respectively. Si3N4 whiskers acted
as seeds for grain growth and caused formation of large
elongated grains in the microstructure. Thus, the com-
posite materials with higher content of Si3N4 whiskers
showed higher fracture toughness. SEM observations
of eroded surfaces revealed that the erosion mechanism
was not brittle fracture but grain pullout and plastic
deformation. The higher erosion rate was observed
for higher temperature and more inclusion of Si3N4
whiskers. Liu et al.156 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of dual-phase sialon composites composed
of different ratios of - and -phase. In the composites,
the content of -phase was changed from 0 to 40 wt%.
SiC particles with the average size of 150 mm were used
as erodent, and the particle velocity and the impact
angle were 80 m/s and 90 , respectively. They obtained
the experimental data indicating that the erosion rate
decreased with increasing hardness (H) and fracture
toughness (Kc), which were varied with ratio of
- and -phase, and proposed the expression for the
erosion rate of the dual-phase sialon composite as a
function of H and Kc.
Ham et al.157,158 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of calcium almino-silicate (CAS) glass
reinforced with unidirectional SiC fibers (SiC/CAS)
with the average fiber diameter of 15 mm. The fiber
volume content was 34 vol%. The erodent used was
silica sand with the size of 100–150 mm. The particle
velocity was 24 m/s. The test temperature was changed
from 20 to 726 C. The eroded surface was perpendicu-
lar to fiber direction and the impact angle was 90 . The
erosion rate shown in Ref. 157 increased significantly in
the range of test temperature from the room tempera-
ture to 400 C, but decreased slightly or remains roughly
constant above the temperature of 400 C. In the SiC/
CAS composites, residual tensile stress was induced in
the matrix due to CTE (coefficient of thermal expan-
sion) mismatch of fibers and matrix. Lateral cracking
was the main mechanism of material removal in the
erosion of the SiC/CAS composite. Residual tensile
stress in the matrix was a driving force for lateral crack-
ing. Relaxation of such residual stress occurred when
the test temperature increased, and it suppressed the
material removal due to erosion. That is why the ero-
sion rate of the SiC/CAS composite decreased above
the temperature of 400 C. On the other hand, the
reason for the increase in erosion rate from the room
temperature to 400 C was given in Ref. 158. The ero-
sion experiments in Ref. 157 were performed at the
constant flow rate irrespective of test temperatures.
As shown in Ref. 158, air and particle velocity increases
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
31
with temperature under a constant flow rate. To obtain
the relation between erosion rate and temperature
under a constant particle velocity, the effect of increas-
ing particle velocity caused by increasing test tempera-
ture should be removed from the original erosion rate.
As a result of such consideration, the erosion rate of the
SiC/CAS composite was shown to decrease from room
temperature to 300–400 C under a constant particle
velocity as shown in Ref. 158, which was consistent
with the decrease in the driving force for lateral crack-
ing as a result of the relaxation of residual tensile stress
in the matrix.
Alman et al.159 studied solid particle characteristics
of MoSi2/Si3N4 composite at the room temperature and
elevated temperatures, 180, 500, 700, and 900 C. The
MoSi2/Si3N4 composite was fabricated from Si3N4 and
50 vol% MoSi2 powders using a combination of hot-
pressing and hot-isostatic pressing. The erosion charac-
teristics of the composite were compared with those of
a monolithic -Si3N4, WC-6%Co, 304 SS, IN-800 (Ni-
Fe-Cr alloy), and Stellite-6B (Co-Cr-W-Mo alloy).
About 50 mm angular Al2O3 particles were used as ero-
dent. The particle velocity was 40 m/s and the impact
angles were 60 , 75 , and 90 . The erosion rate of the
MoSi2/Si3N4 composite was lower than those of
-Si3N4, 304 SS, IN-800, and Stellite-6B at the tempera-
tures below 700 C, but higher than that of WC-6%Co.
As for the influence of temperature on the erosion rate
of the Si3N4-MoSi2 composite, the erosion rate
remained relatively constants from room temperature
to 700 C, and decreases at 900 C. This decrease may be
a result of softening of the MoSi2/Si3N4 composite,
especially of the MoSi2 phase at 900 C. Iizuka
et al.160 performed solid particle erosion experiments
of Si3N4 matrix composites including 1.5–8.1 wt%
Mo5Si3 particles (Mo5Si3/Si3N4). Silica sand with the
average diameter of 600 mm was used as erodent. The
particle velocity and the impact angle were 70 m/s and
45 , respectively. The composites containing Mo5Si3
particles less than 2 wt% showed better erosion resist-
ance compared with the monolithic Si3N4 ceramic,
whereas the composites containing Mo5Si3 particles
more than 2 wt% had lower erosion resistance than
the monolithic Si3N4 ceramic and the erosion resistance
decreased with increasing Mo5Si3 content. Such a
reduction in erosion resistance of the composites was
due to the lower values of both fracture toughness and
hardness of the composites.
Sato and Kamiya161 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of pressureless sintered Al2O3 CMCs
including TiC particles of 10, 20, 25, and 30 wt%
(TiC/Al2O3). SiC and Al2O3 particles were used as ero-
dent. The impact angle and the particle velocity were
changed from 30 to 80 and from 70 to 240 m/s,
respectively. The erosion rate of composite slightly
32
decreased up to 30 wt% of the TiC particles for the SiC
erodent, while it greatly decreased with increasing TiC
content for Al2O3 erodent. The SiC erodent induced
higher erosion rate of the composite than the Al2O3
erodent. The impact force produced by the SiC erodent
was much larger than that of the Al2O3 erodent,
because the SiC particles had larger fracture strength
than the Al2O3 particles. This is why the erosion rate
yielded by the SiC particles was larger than that of the
Al2O3 particles. Afterwards Sato et al.162 compared the
erosion behavior of pressureless sintered TiC/Al2O3
composite including 30 wt% TiC particles with those
of various commercial pressurized sintered ceramic
composites, ZnO2, SiC, Si3N4, Al2O3 monolithic cer-
amics and WC-Co cermet. For the Al2O3 erodent, the
pressureless sintered TiC/Al2O3 composite has the
highest erosion resistance compared with other mater-
ials. On the other hand, for the SiC erodent, the WC-
Co cermet had the highest erosion resistance, and the
pressureless sintered TiC/Al2O3 composite showed
almost the same erosion resistance as commercial pres-
surized sintered ceramic composites, ZnO2 and Al2O3.
Saewong and Rawlings163 performed solid particle
erosion experiments of borosilicate glass laminated
composites containing 33 vol% CF (CF/Glass). For
comparison, the erosion experiment of monolithic
borosilicate glass was also performed. Both tough and
brittle test specimens containing different types of CFs
were prepared for the erosion experiments. Sand par-
ticles of 150–212 mm were used as erodent. The particle
velocity was 15.1 m/s. The impact angles were 45 , 60 ,
and 90 . The tough composite, brittle composite, and
monolithic glass behaved a typical brittle erosion
behavior in that the erosion rate reached the maximum
at the impact angle of 90 . The ranking of erosion
resistance was as follows: monolithic glass > brittle
composite > tough composite. The hardness of mono-
lithic glass was 2–3 times higher than those of the com-
posites. That is why the monolithic glass had higher
erosion resistance than the composites. The fiber pull-
out length was greater for the tough composite than for
the brittle composite. This fact indicates that the brittle
composite had stronger bonding between fibers and
matrix material. Thus, the erosion resistance of the brit-
tle composite was higher than that of the tough
composite.
Yamada et al.164 fabricated monolithic B4C and
B4C-20 mol%CrB2 (CrB2/B4C) ceramic composites by
hot-pressing at 1900 and 2050 C, and performed solid
particle erosion experiments of these materials in add-
ition to a commercial B4C ceramic. Erodent particle
used was Al2O3, and the impact angle was 90 . A
lower erosion rate was obtained for the monolithic
B4C and B4C/CrB2 composite compared with that of
a commercial B4C ceramic. The B4C/CrB2 composite
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
hot-pressed at 1900 C had lower erosion rate than the
composite hot-pressed at 2050 C, and almost the same
erosion rate as the monolithic B4C. The erosion char-
acteristics of these materials were discussed from the
viewpoint of microstructures and fracture toughness.
Liu and Sun165 examined the erosion characteristics
of B4C-based ceramic composites made from B4C and
TiO2 particles by uniaxial hot pressing and pure B4C
ceramic. Three kinds of composites were prepared for
erosion experiments. They were NT1, NT2, and NT3
composed of B4C phase, TiB2 phase, and C phase. The
composition of each composite was as follows:
(a) NT1: B4C phase ¼ 95.7 wt%, TiB2 phase ¼
3.5 wt%, C phase ¼ 0.8 wt%
(b) NT2: B4C phase ¼ 91.8 wt%, TiB2 phase ¼
5.2 wt%, C phase ¼ 3.0 wt%
(c) NT3: B4C phase ¼ 87.4 wt%, TiB2 phase ¼
7.0 wt%, C phase ¼ 5.6 wt%
SiC particles with the size of 150–180 mm were used
as erodent. The impact angle was changed from 15 to
90 . The particle velocity was changed from 30 to 75 m/s.
The composites had higher erosion resistance than the
pure B4C ceramic and the ranking of erosion resistance
was as follows; NT2 > NT1 > NT3 > pure B4C. This
ranking was related with the hardness and fracture
toughness of materials. That is, the composite NT2
had highest hardness and fracture toughness and the
pure B4C ceramic had lowest hardness and fracture
toughness.
Ouyang et al.166 performed solid particle erosion
experiments of WC ceramic including 4.3 wt% MgO
particle (MgO/WC). They examined erosion character-
istics of MgO/WC composites with and without grain-
growth inhibitor using silica sand with the size of
200 mm as erodent. The particle velocity was 85 m/s.
The inhibitors reduced both grain size and MgO par-
ticle size, and increased both hardness and fracture
toughness. Thus, the MgO/WC composite with grain-
growth inhibitor had higher erosion resistance than
that without the inhibitor.
Amirthan et al.167 examined the solid particle ero-
sion characteristics of SiC composites fabricated using
natural materials. They used four different kinds of SiC
composites as erosion test specimens. Test materials
used were cotton fabric-based Si/SiC with and without
chemical vapor infiltration (CVI), fine teak wood
powder based Si/SiC, and coarse teak wood powder
based Si/SiC. These composites composed of SiC, Si,
and C phases. They showed the ranking of erosion
resistance for these composites.
Li et al.168 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of mullite (alminium silicate)–SiC composite
refractories including Si powder from 0 to 12 wt%.
Miyazaki
The main phase of mullite-SiC composite refractories by
nitriding reaction sintering was mullite, -SiC, and -
sialon. SiC particles with the size of 325–830 mm were
used as erodent. The particle velocity and the impact
angle were 50 m/s and 90 , respectively. Test tempera-
ture was varied from 25 to 1400 C. The erosion resist-
ance of mullite-SiC composite refractories increased
with the increase in Si powder addition and test tempera-
ture. The content of -sialon increased with the increase
in Si powder addition, and -sialon enhanced the ero-
sion resistance of mullite-SiC composite refractories.
Carbon is not classified into ceramic, but the erosion
characteristics of CF reinforced carbon (C/C) compos-
ites are shown here. Baxter et al.169,170 performed solid
particle erosion experiments of carbon-bonded CF
(CBCF), which consisted of CF network bonded
together at the intersections of the fibers by discrete
regions of carbon matrix. Hence, the vast majority of
the volume (70–90%) consisted of interconnected
pores. The CBCF is a class of highly porous carbon-
carbon composites with low density, and utilized as
thermal insulation in vacuum or inert gas furnaces at
the temperatures up to 2800 C. The CFs used in the
CBCF were virgin fibers less than 2 mm in length and
recycled fibrous material classified through either a
2 mm or 50 mm sieve. In Ref. 169 the CBCF materials
used in the erosion experiments were fabricated by
varying the relative proportion of the virgin fibers
and the recycled fibrous material, and the relationship
between the erosion rate and the proportion of recycled
fibrous material was examined. In Ref. 170 CBCF with
66% recycled fibrous material and 33% virgin fibers
was densified by CVI. Erosion experiments were
performed using 230 mm angular silica as erodent. The
particle velocity and the impact angle were 6 m/s and
90 , respectively. The erosion rate decreased exponen-
tially with increase in the bulk density of CBCF.
Sarkar et al.171 examined the erosion characteristics
of two and four dimensionally reinforced carbon/
carbon (C/C) composites as well as that of CF rein-
forced phenolic composite (C/P). The two and four
dimensionally reinforced C/C are respectively, denoted
as C-2D/C and C-4D/C. The volume content of
reinforcement was 50 vol% for C-2D/C, 40 vol% C-
4D/C, and 50 vol% for C/P. Silica sand with the aver-
age size of 200 mm was used as erodent. Erosion experi-
ments were performed for two different impact angles,
30 and 90 , and for two different particle velocities, 45
and 60 m/s. The ranking of erosion resistance was as
follows; C/P > > C-2D/C > C-4D/C. According to
SEM observations of eroded surfaces, the C/P compos-
ite had stronger bonding between the CF and the
matrix than the C-2D/C and C-4D/C composites, and
thus, the erosion resistance of the C/P composite was
higher than those of the C-2D/C and C-4D/C
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
33
composites. The erosion rate data at the impact
angles of 30 and 90 indicated that all the composites
used in the erosion experiments showed a semi-ductile
erosion response. They calculated the erosion efficiency
defined by equation (3). The erosion efficiencies of these
composites vary in the range of 23–143 and 40–206%
for particle velocities of 45 and 60 m/s, respectively.
This fact suggests that the mechanism of erosion
involved microploughing as well as microcutting for
lower erosion efficiencies and cracking followed by
spallation for higher erosion efficiencies.
Erosion-resistant coatings
Composite materials, especially PMCs, are usually infer-
ior to the corresponding monolithic materials in erosion
resistance. Therefore, composite materials often need
erosion-resistant coatings when they are used in erosive
environments. Various kinds of MMCs and CMCs are
used as erosion-resistant coatings, some of which are
described in the chapters ‘‘Metal Matrix Composites’’
and ‘‘Ceramics Matrix Composites’’.
First of all, the papers on the erosion-resistant coat-
ings for PMCs are reviewed. Alonso et al.172 dealt with
plasma-splayed erosion-resistant coatings on CF rein-
forced EP composites (CF/EP). They showed that the
spraying of alumina-glass mixture onto CF/EP com-
posite as a bondcoat prior to forming erosion protec-
tion coatings of WC-12Co and Al2O3 as topcoats was
effective for avoiding degradation of composite sub-
strate because of heat sensitivity of polymeric substrate.
Solid particle erosion experiments were carried out for
the WC-12Co and Al2O3 coatings deposited onto CF/
EP composite using silica particle and corundum.
According to the erosion data, the Al2O3 coating
showed a brittle erosion behavior with the maximum
erosion rate at the impact angle of 90 , while the WC-
12Co coating presented some degree of a ductile ero-
sion behavior. They did not provide the results on the
degree of enhancing the erosion resistance due to the
WC-12Co and Al2O3 coatings, compared with
uncoated CF/EP composite.
Sutter et al.173 and Miyoshi et al.174 studied solid
particle erosion characteristics of coated and uncoated
carbon-Kevlar fiber reinforced EP composite. Such a
composite was used fan bypass vane in jet engine (AE
3700). The erosion characteristics of two erosion-
resistant coating systems were examined in these
studies. These coatings systems included a bondcoat
and a hard erosion-resistant topcoat. For both coating
systems, WC-Co is a primary topcoat constituent.
The difference between the two systems was that one
coating system contained a bondcoat with no polymer
and the other contained a bondcoat with a polymer to
improve adhesion to the PMC substrate. Erosion
34
experiments were performed using Arizona road dust as
erodent at the temperatures of 294 and 366 K. The
impact angles were 20 , 60 , and 90 , and the particle
velocity was 229 m/s. The coatings with a bondcoat and
a WC-Co topcoat enhanced erosion resistance and
reduced the volumetric erosion loss by a factor of
nearly two. The coating with a bondcoat containing
polymer had better erosion resistance than the coating
with a bondcoat containing no polymer.
Ivosevic et al.175 studied solid particle erosion char-
acteristics of thermally sprayed functionally graded
material (FGM) coatings based on PI matrix filled
with varying volume contents of WC–Co to improve
the erosion and oxidation resistance of PMC. The
PMC substrate used was PI matrix (PMR-15) reinforced
by a carbon-fiber weave. An FGM coating used in this
work had a graded composition going from pure PMR-
II PI similar to the PMC substrate matrix material to a
100% wear resistant WC–Co outer layer. Such an FGM
coating was useful to prevent thermomechanical fatigue
failure caused by large differences in coefficient of ther-
mal expansion between the substrate and coating mater-
ials. The erosion experiments were performed for two
kinds of coating systems and an uncoated PMC as a
control sample. Coating system I was composed of an
FGM layer grading from pure PMR-II PI to a 100%
erosion resistant WC–Co outer layer. In this system, an
FGM layer and a WC–Co outer layer were respectively
formed using high velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF) combus-
tion spray process and flame arc process. Coating
system II included a metallic Zn binding layer between
an FGM layer and a WC-Co topcoat layer. In this
system, a metallic Zn layer and a WC-Co topcoat layer
were respectively formed using wire-arc process and
HVOF process. Angular alumina particles with the
nominal diameter of 50 mm were used as erodent. The
particle velocity was 100 m/s and the impact angles were
20 and 90 . The test temperatures were the room tem-
perature and 250 C. The Coating system I provided only
a small amount of additional erosion protection to the
uncoated PMC due to the porous and poorly cohesive
WC-Co topcoat layer formed by flame arc process. On
the other hand, the Coating system II had very good
erosion resistance both at the room temperature and
250 C, compared with the Coating system I and the
uncoated PMC.
Liu et al.176 performed solid particle erosion experi-
ments of coated PMC. The PMC substrate was a CF
reinforced thermosetting PI. A cored wire composed of
steel skin and Ni–Cr–B–Si as a filler material was used
as a coating material, and an erosion-resistant coating
was produced on the PMC substrate by arc spray.
Erosion experiments were carried out using corundum
as erodent at the impact angle of 90 . The erosive
weight loss of the coated PMC was half of that of the
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
uncoated one, and the arc-sprayed coatings can provide
good protection of the PMC from erosion.
Maurer and Schulz177 examined solid particle erosion
characteristics of Ti-based coatings deposited on CF
reinforced EP (CF/EP) or PEEK resin (CF/PEEK).
Three kinds of Ti-based coatings, that is, pure Ti,
TiN, and Ti-TiN multilayer, were prepared for the ero-
sion experiments. A Ti coating had ductility, moderate
hardness and a rather low elastic modulus mismatch
compared with a substrate PMC. A TiN coating was
expected to offer excellent erosion protection due to its
high hardness. A Ti-TiN multilayer coating combined
hardness with ductility in one coating system. Erosion
experiments were performed by varying coating thick-
ness using alumina particle as erodent at the particle
velocity of 65 m/s and the impact angle of 90 . These
coatings were produced by physical vapor deposition
(PVD) using magnetron sputtering, which is suitable
for polymeric substrate because of low process tempera-
ture. Coatings with a thickness of 10 mm or less were not
able to improve erosion behavior of PMCs. For the
coated CF/EP, the 5 mm thin TiN coating did not
improve the erosion behavior, while the 30 mm thick Ti
coating was able to reduce erosive weight loss by a
factor of 5 in comparison with the bare substrate, and
the 30 mm thick Ti-TiN multilayer coating by a factor of
4, respectively. On the other hand, for coated CF/
PEEK, no reduction of erosive weight loss was observed
because PEEK had a high erosion resistance at normal
impact angle, but improvement in erosion resistance of
around 30% was attained when considering the volu-
metric erosion rate. Conclusively, pure Ti with a thick-
ness of 30 mm was the most promising coating system for
both CF/EP and CF/PEEK substrates for reduction of
the erosive wear under normal impact.
Keegan et al.178 published a review paper on erosion
issues associated with the leading edge of wind turbine
blades. Most of the wind turbine blades are made of
thermosetting PMCs such as epoxy or UP reinforced
with GF or CF. Wind turbines are used in erosive
environment such as rain, hailstone, sand, dust, and
so forth. Erosion resistant coatings for the leading
edge of wind turbine fan-blades are one of important
problems. Keegan et al. dealt with this problem in their
review paper.
Baxter and Rawlings179 performed solid particle ero-
sion experiments of candidate coatings (colloidal
graphite paints) and claddings (dense carbon-carbon
composites and graphite foil) employed to protect
highly porous CF reinforced carbon (C/C) composites
known as carbon-bonded CF (CBCF) compos-
ites.169,170 The erosion experiments were performed
using angular silica sand as erodent with the average
diameter of 150–300 mm at the particle velocity of 6 m/s.
The impact angle was varied from 30 to 90 .
Miyazaki
The materials used for coatings and claddings on
porous CBCF substrate showed a significantly greater
erosion resistance than the bared substrate. In general,
the coating and cladding materials showed a brittle ero-
sion behavior with the maximum erosion rate at the
impact angle of 90 except for the graphite foil, which
had the maximum erosion rate at the impact angle of
60 . Smeacetto et al.180 also studied erosion protective
coatings for highly porous CBCF composite. Three
coatings were investigated, that is, SiC, TiC, and a
glass-ceramic. All coatings were deposited on CVI den-
sified CBCF composite by a low-cost slurry based tech-
nique. Although all the coatings exhibited much better
erosion resistance than the bared CBCF composite, the
glass-ceramic coating had best erosion resistance.
Various types of composite coatings are used to pro-
tect substrate materials from erosive wear. Yan et al.181
examined the solid particle erosion characteristics of
polymer-ceramic composite coatings manufactured
from calcium carbonate and ethylene-methacrylic acid
copolymer (EMAA), which was deposited on substrate
materials via a thermal spray process employing differ-
ent CaCO3 filler sizes, 2.8, 9, and 36 mm, and loading
levels from 2.5 to 7 wt%. Solid particle erosion experi-
ments were performed both for pure EMAA coating
and for CaCO3/EMAA composite coatings including
different contents of CaCO3 filler. The erodent used
was garnet with the size of 200 to 600 mm. The particle
velocity was 20 m/s and the impact angle was changed
from 0 to 90 . The erosion experimental data showed
that the erosion resistance decreased with the increase
in filler content. It was also found that the erosion
resistance of CaCO3/EMAA composite coating con-
taining above 5 wt% CaCO3 filler was lower than that
of the pure EMMA coating.
Liu et al.182 investigated the effect of the content of
Ni on solid particle erosion behavior of the TiC-xNi
coating at elevated temperatures. The TiC-xNi compos-
ite coatings were in-situ synthesized on nickel-based
alloy substrate by the electro-thermal explosion ultra-
high speed spraying (EEUSS) device. The Ni content x
was varied as 0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%. Solid quartz
particles with the average diameter of 250 mm were
used as erodent. The erosion experiments were per-
formed under the temperature of 650 C, the particle
velocity of 62 m/s and the impact angle of 90 . The
erosion resistance of the TiC-xNi coatings increased
first and decreased afterwards with the increase in the
content of Ni. The coating with 10 wt% Ni addition
had the highest erosion resistance, which was about
two times higher than that with 20 wt% Ni addition.
It was found from the SEM observations of eroded
surfaces that the pure TiC coating showed a brittle ero-
sion behavior, whereas the addition of the binder phase
of Ni had the effect of mitigating a brittle behavior of
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
35
TiC, which resulted in improving the erosion resistance
compared with the pure TiC coating.
Sharma et al.183 studied solid particle erosion
characteristics of a coating made from high-velocity
oxy-fuel (HVOF) composite powder (MEC 1031C)
modified by adding 0.4 wt% La2O3 in the composite
powder. Solid particle erosion experiments were per-
formed for both modified and unmodified (without
La2O3) HVOF-sprayed coatings on a carbon steel sub-
strate. Flyash was used as erodent at the particle velo-
cities of 30, 45, and 60 m/s and the impact angles of 30 ,
60 , and 90 . Test temperatures were 150, 300, and
450 C. The modified HVOF-sprayed coating showed
high erosive resistance compared with unmodified coat-
ing. This is due to the increase in hardness of the mod-
ified coating. Sharma et al. developed an empirical
equation for predicting the erosive wear of coatings in
terms of particle velocity, impact angle, test tempera-
ture, and erodent feed rate using the response surface
methodology based on erosion tests data.
Keller et al.184 conducted a study on self-healing per-
formance of a coating subjected to erosion damage.
They used two self-healing coating systems. One was
an elastomeric material with a two-part poly (dimethyl
siloxane) healing chemistry, and the other was an epoxy
coating with a one-part isocyanate-based healing chem-
istry. Coatings were microcapsule-based self-healing
materials. Both coating systems were evaluated by
solid particle erosion experiments. It was found from
the erosion experiments that the elastomeric coating
system did not successfully self-heal because of a com-
bination of high viscosity and slow reaction kinetics,
while the isocyanate-based system successfully self-
healed compared with a nonhealing control. Weight
loss due to erosion was reduced by almost 300% for
this material when compared with a microcapsule-filled
nonhealing coating.
Pasha and Kaleemulla185 published a review paper
on solid particle erosion studies of coated MMCs.
Concluding remarks
Solid particle erosion studies on composite materials
are critically reviewed in the present article. This
review article covers PMCs, MMCs, CMCs, and ero-
sion-resistant coatings from 1960s up to the present.
Brief summaries are presented here for each item.
Polymer matrix composites
General characteristics of erosion for PMCs are sum-
marized as follows:
(a) Most PMCs, especially PMCs with brittle or inor-
ganic fillers, show larger erosion rates than the
36
corresponding neat resins, and the increase in filler
content of a composite causes the increase in ero-
sion rate. Possible exceptions are the PMCs with
organic or ductile fillers, which enhance the ero-
sion resistance of PMCs compared with the corres-
ponding neat resins.
(b) In most PMCs with brittle or inorganic fillers, the
location where the maximum erosion rate takes
place shifts to a higher impact angle compared
with that of the corresponding neat resin.
(c) Stronger adhesion between fillers and a matrix
material shows better erosion resistance or smaller
erosion rate. Therefore, the surface treatments of
filler surfaces to improve adhesion between fillers
and a matrix material are effective to enhance ero-
sion resistance of PMCs.
(d) CF and GF are typical fillers for PMCs. In the case
of short CF and GF, a CF composite shows higher
volumetric erosion rate20 or higher weight erosion
rate38,42 than a GF composite, if the same matrix
resin and the same fiber weight content are used in
both composites. The results of Refs. 38 and 42
indicate the same result as that of Ref. 20, because
a CF composite has smaller density than a GF
composite under the condition of the same
matrix material and the same fiber weight content.
Conclusively, a GF composite has better volumet-
ric erosion resistance than a CF composite, if the
same matrix resin and the same fiber weight con-
tent are used in both composites. Moreover, the
volumetric erosion rate of a composite with short
fibers seems to be dominated only by the volume
content of short fibers irrespective of kind of fiber,
CF or GF, if the same matrix material is used in
both composites.20 In the case of continuous long
CF and GF, a GF composite tends to show a
larger weight erosion rate than a CF composite,
if the same matrix resin and the same fiber
volume content are used in both composites.37,41
Considering that the density of a composite with
continuous long GFs is larger than that of a com-
posite with continuous long CFs, it cannot be
denied that the erosion volume loss of a composite
with continuous long fibers may be dominated
only by the volumetric content of fibers irrespect-
ive of kind of fibers, as in the case of composites
with short fibers. A further study is needed to val-
idate this presumption.
(e) In the case of unidirectional fiber reinforced plas-
tics, the erosion resistance of parallel impact, in
which the fiber orientation is parallel to the ero-
dent flow direction, tends to be higher than that of
perpendicular impact, in which the fiber orienta-
tion is perpendicular to the erodent flow direction.
In elevated temperatures or in the case of the
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
composites with thermoplastic resins, the parallel
impact has sometimes lower erosion resistance
than the perpendicular impact.
Almost all the general characteristics of erosion for
PMCs described above were already obtained in the
researches performed before 2000, especially by Pool
et al., Mathias et al., Miyazaki et al., and Saputra
et al. A lot of papers were published on the erosion
characteristics of various PMCs after 2000, but many
of them reconfirmed the general characteristics of ero-
sion described above for various PMCs including new
kinds of PMCs such as natural filler reinforced resins
and nanofiller reinforced resins. One of the features of
the erosion studies after 2000 is to deal with hybrid
PMCs including two or more reinforcements. In
hybrid PMCs, a low weight content of fillers are usually
added to conventional PMCs as modification of a
matrix resin in order to enhance erosion resistance of
conventional PMCs in addition to high weight content
of fillers as reinforcement. Inorganic fillers, organic fil-
lers and metal fillers are used to modify matrix resins of
hybrid PMCs. The erosion characteristics of hybrid
PMCs are summarized as follows:
(a) Most hybrid PMCs have better erosion resistance
than the conventional PMCs without fillers to
modify matrix resins.
(b) In most hybrid PMCs, there exists trade-off
between the erosion performance and the tensile
strength, one of the most important mechanical
properties for structural materials. That is,
enhancement of erosion resistance by adding fillers
to modify a matrix resin may lead to the reduction
in tensile strength of a hybrid PMC.
Metal matrix composites
FRMs and PRMs. General characteristics of erosion for
FRMs and PRMs are summarized as follows:
(a) The erosion rates of most FRMs and PRMs are
larger than those of the corresponding matrix
materials and the erosion rate increases with the
increase in fiber or particle volume content. Hence,
the erosion resistance decreases with the inclusion
of fibers or particles.
(b) In the case where the sizes of reinforcement fibers
or particles are much smaller than those of the
particles impacted, almost all the fibers or particles
removed from a MMC are included in a matrix
metal removed by the impact of particles. In this
case, the difference in erosion rate is small between
the MMC and the corresponding matrix metal. On
Miyazaki
the other hand, in the case where the reinforcement
fibers are included in the form of unidirectionally
long fiber or cloths, fiber-rich parts are selectively
eroded and a lot of fibers are removed from an
eroded surface of the FRM. In such a case, the
MMC has much larger erosion rate than the cor-
responding matrix metal.
(c) The inclusion of brittle fillers in a FRP or a PRM
induces shift of the location where the maximum
erosion occurs to a higher impact angle compared
with the neat matrix metal.
(d) In the case of unidirectional FRM, the erosion
resistance of parallel impact, in which the fiber
orientation is parallel to the erodent flow direction,
tends to be higher than that of perpendicular
impact, in which the fiber orientation is perpen-
dicular to the erodent flow direction.
(e) If the bond between fibers or particles and a matrix
metal is strengthen, erosion resistance of a FRM
or a PRM is enhanced. Heat-treatment may be
effective to strengthen the bond between fibers or
particles and a matrix metal.
The general characteristics of erosion for FRMs and
PRMs mentioned above are common to those of
PMCs.
Cermets. General characteristics of erosion for cer-
mets are shown hereafter.
(a) In the cermets, volume fraction of ceramic is so
high compared with that of metal that the erosion
behavior is mainly dominated by the ceramic phase
and a ceramic has much higher erosion resistance
than a metal used as binder of cermet. Thus, cer-
mets generally show high erosion resistance.
(b) The erosion resistance of most cermets increases
with decreasing binder metal content.
(c) Microstructural factors including binder chemis-
try, grain boundary structures, and residual stres-
ses created by sintering process which are induced
by thermal expansion mismatch in different phases
in cermets have an important effect on the erosion
behavior of cermets.
Ceramic matrix composites
General characteristics of erosion for CMCs are sum-
marized as follows:
(a) Some CMCs have higher erosion resistance than
monolithic ceramics, and some CMCs have lower
erosion resistance than monolithic ceramics. If the
hardness and fracture toughness increases by the
addition of fillers, CMCs tends to have larger
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
37
erosion resistance than monolithic ceramics. In
general, the fracture toughness of a CMC tends
to be larger than that of a monolithic ceramic
because fillers in a CMC offer resistance to crack
propagation. Thus, the hardness would be primar-
ily important for the erosion resistance of a CMC,
and the addition of fillers harder than a matrix
ceramic would improve the erosion resistance com-
pared with a monolithic ceramic.
(b) The erosion rate yielded by harder erodent such as
SiC is larger than that of softer one such as Al2O3.
This is because the harder erodent has larger frac-
ture strength than the softer one, and the impact
force produced by the harder erodent is much
larger than that of the softer one.
Erosion-resistant coatings
Most PMCs are usually inferior to the corresponding
neat resins in erosion resistance. Therefore, composite
materials often need erosion-resistant coatings when
they are used in erosive environments. The formation
of bondcoat prior to forming erosion protection coat-
ings is effective for avoiding degradation of a PMC
substrate because of heat sensitivity of a polymeric
material, for improving adhesion to a PMC substrate,
and for preventing thermomechanical fatigue failure
caused by large differences in coefficient of thermal
expansion between the substrate and coating material.
Comments on solid particle erosion studies
Both erosion weight loss and erosion volume loss of a
target material have been used to represent the erosion
characteristics of a target material. As for erosion rate
of a target material, both weight erosion rate and volu-
metric erosion rate have been used so far. The erosion
volume loss and the volumetric erosion rate can be
respectively calculated from the erosion weight loss
and the weight erosion rate using the density of a
target material. Let us consider the comparison
between the erosion characteristics of two composites,
which have the same erosion weight loss or the same
weight erosion rate but different densities. In such a
case, the erosion weight loss or the weight erosion
rate is not suitable to represent the erosion characteris-
tics of composites, because the erosion volume loss or
the volumetric erosion rate of a composite with smaller
density are lager than that of a composite with larger
density, even though both composites have the same
erosion weight loss or weight erosion rate. In other
words, the erosion weight loss or the weight erosion
rate is not equivalent to the erosion volume loss or
the volumetric erosion rate when target materials
38
have the different densities, and it can be concluded
that a target material with smaller erosion volume
loss or the volumetric erosion rate has better erosion
characteristics than that with larger erosion volume loss
or the volumetric erosion rate. Although the erosion
weight loss or the weight erosion rate was used in a
lot of papers on erosion studies of composites, that is
why the present author exclusively used the volumetric
erosion rate in his papers.15,16,20,21,23,109
It should be noted that reducing the erosion effi-
ciency  of a composite material does not always
mean the decrease in erosion rate or improvement of
erosion resistance of a composite materials. Removal of
reinforcement fibers caused by the damage between the
matrix and reinforcement fillers during erosion process
has an important effect on the erosion characteristics of
composite materials. The erosion efficiency does not
take account of such a physical phenomenon. So the
erosion efficiency  cannot be always used as an indi-
cator of erosion resistance for composite materials.
Suggestions on future studies
The followings remain for future studies:
(a) Most PMCs have the combination of a soft matrix
material and a hard filler material. On the other
hand, a combination of a soft matrix material and
a hard filler material and its reverse combination
are possible in MMCs and CMCs. It has not been
clarified how such combinations of a matrix mater-
ial and a filler material affect the erosion charac-
teristics of MMCs and CMCs.
(b) There has been no solid particle erosion data on
newly developed advanced composite materials
such as carbon based nano-reinforcements,
CNTs, graphenes, and so on.
(c) Simulations studies on solid particle erosion of
composites have been not yet enough done.87, 119,
186–188
Further studies will be needed to quantita-
tive simulations.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
References
1. Reynolds O. On the action of a blast of sand in cutting
hard materials. Philos Mag 1873; 46: 337–343.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
2. Rayleigh JWS. The sand blast. Nature 1912; 93: 188.
3. Tilly GP. Sand erosion of metals and plastics: a brief
review. Wear 1969; 14: 241–248.
4. Finnie I. Some reflections on the past and future of ero-
sion. Wear 1995; 186–187: 1–10.
5. Tilly GP. Erosion caused by airborne particles. Wear
1969; 14: 63–79.
6. Barkoula NM and Karger-Kocsis J. Review: processes
and influencing parameters of the solid particle erosion
of polymers and their composites. J Mater Sci 2002; 37:
3807–3820.
7. Patnaik A, Satapathy A, Chand N, et al. Solid particle
erosion wear characteristics of fiber and particulate filled
polymer composites: a review. Wear 2010; 268: 249–263.
8. Biswas S, Satapathy A and Patnaik A. Erosion wear
behavior of polymer composites: a review. J Reinf Plast
Compos 2010; 29: 2898–2924.
9. Kaundal R. Role of process variables on the solid particle
erosion of polymer composites: a critical review. Silicon
2014; 6: 5–20.
10. Ruff AW and Ives KL. Measurement of solid particle
velocity in erosive wear. Wear 1975; 35: 195–199.
11. Tilly GP and Sage W. The interaction of particle and
material behavior in erosion processes. Wear 1970; 16:
447–465.
12. Williams JH Jr and Lau EK. Solid particle erosion of
graphite-epoxy composites. Wear 1974; 29: 219–230.
13. Zahavi J and Schmitt GF Jr. Solid particle erosion of
reinforced composite materials. Wear 1981; 71: 179–190.
14. Pool KV, Dharan CKH and Finnie I. Erosion wear of
composite materials. Wear 1986; 107: 1–12.
15. Miyazaki N and Takeda N. Solid particle erosion of fiber
reinforced plastics. J Compos Mater 1993; 27: 21–31.
16. Miyazaki N and Hamao T. Effect of interfacial strength
on erosion behavior of FRPs. J Compos Mater 1996; 30:
35–50.
17. Mathias PJ, Wu W, Goretta KC, et al. Solid particle
erosion of a graphite-fiber-reinforced bismaleimide poly-
mer composite. Wear 1989; 135: 161–169.
18. Karasek KR, Goretta KC, Helberg DA, et al. Erosion in
bismaleimide polymers and bismaleimide-polymer com-
posites. J Mater Sci Lett 1992; 11: 1143–1144.
19. Ballout YA, Hovis SK and Talia JE. Erosion in glass-
fiber reinforced epoxy composite. Scripta Metall Mater
1990; 24: 195–200.
20. Miyazaki N and Hamao T. Solid particle erosion of
thermoplastic resins reinforced by short fibers.
J Compos Mater 1994; 28: 871–883.
21. Miyazaki N and Funakura S. Solid particle erosion
behavior of FRP degraded by hot water. J Compos
Mater 1998; 32: 1295–1305.
22. Miyazaki N. Effect of crystallization of thermoplastic
polyimide resin on erosion rate. J Mater Sci Lett 1996;
15: 1422–1423.
23. Miyazaki N. Solid particle erosion behavior of FRPs with
prior impact damage. J Compos Mater 2007; 41: 703–712.
24. Roy M, Vishwanathan B and Sundararajan G. The solid
particle erosion of polymer matrix composites. Wear
1994; 171: 149–161.
Miyazaki
25. Sundararajan G, Roy M and Venkataraman B. Erosion
efficiency – a new parameter to characterize the dominant
erosion micromechanism. Wear 1990; 140: 369–381.
26. Arjula Suresh and Harsha AP. Study of erosion efficiency
of polymers and polymer composites. Polym Test 2006;
25: 188–196.
27. Saputra AH, Hasrin A, Kubouchi M, et al. Effect of
surface treatment on sand erosion behavior of glass
beads-filled epoxy resin. Compos Interface 1999; 6:
531–541.
28. Bijwe J, Indumathi J, Rajesh JJ, et al. Friction and wear
behavior of polyetherimide composites in various wear
modes. Wear 2001; 249: 715–726.
29. Huang Z, Li ZZ and Yuan X. The effect of reinforcing
particles on the erosive wear behavior of particles rein-
forced silicone matrix composite coating. Wear 2001; 249:
1046–1050.
30. Barkoula NM and Karger-Kocsis J. Solid particle ero-
sion of unidirectional GF reinforced EP composites
with different fiber/matrix adhesion. J Reinf Plast
Compos 2002; 21: 1377–1388.
31. Barkoula NM and Karger-Kocsis J. Effects of fibre con-
tent and relative fibre-orientation on the solid particle
erosion of GF/PP composites. Wear 2002; 252: 80–87.
32. Barkoula NM, Papanicolaou G and Karger-Kocsis J.
Prediction of the residual tensile strengths of carbon-
fiber/epoxy laminates with and without interleaves after
solid particle erosion. Compos Sci Technol 2002; 62:
121–130.
33. Tewari US, Harsha AP, Häger AM, et al. Solid particle
erosion of unidirectional carbon fibre reinforced poly-
etheretherketone composites. Wear 2002; 252: 992–1000.
34. Drensky G, Hamed A, Tabakoff W, et al. Experimental
investigation of polymer matrix reinforced composite
erosion characteristics. Wear 2011; 270: 146–151.
35. Pei X and Friedrich K. Erosive wear properties of uni-
directional carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composites.
Tribol Int 2012; 25: 949–963.
36. Friedrich K, Pei X and Almajid AA. Specific erosive wear
rate of neat polymer films and various polymer compos-
ites. J Reinf Plast Compos 2013; 32: 631–643.
37. Tewari US, Harsha AP, Häger AM, et al. Solid particle
erosion of carbon fibre- and glass fibre-epoxy composites.
Compos Sci Technol 2003; 63: 549–557.
38. Harsha AP, Tewari US and Venkatraman B. Solid par-
ticle erosion behavior of various polyaryletherketone
composites. Wear 2003; 254: 693–712.
39. Harsha AP and Thakre AA. Investigation on solid par-
ticle erosion behaviour of polyetherimide and its compos-
ites. Wear 2007; 262: 807–818.
40. Arjula Suresh, Harsha AP and Ghosh MK. Erosive wear
of unidirectional carbon fibre reinforced polyetherimide
composite. Mater Lett 2008; 6: 3246–3249.
41. Arjula Suresh, Harsha AP and Ghosh MK. Solid particle
erosion of unidirectional fibre reinforced thermoplastic
composites. Wear 2009; 267: 1516–1524.
42. Sari NY, Sinmazcelik T and Yilmaz T. Erosive wear stu-
dies of glass fiber- and carbon fiber-reinforced polyether-
etherketone composites at low particle speed.
J Thermoplast Compos Mater 2011; 24: 333–350.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
39
43. Arjula Suresh, Harsha AP and Ghosh MK. Solid particle
erosion studies on polyphenylene sulfide composites and
prediction on erosion data using artificial neural net-
works. Wear 2009; 266: 184–193.
44. Zhang Z, Barkoula NM, Karger-Kocsis J, et al. Artificial
neural network predictions on erosive wear of polymers.
Wear 2003; 255: 708–713.
45. Arjula Suresh, Harsha AP and Ghosh MK. Erosion stu-
dies of short glass fiber-reinforced thermoplastic compos-
ites and prediction of erosion rate using ANNs. J Reinf
Plast Compos 2010; 29: 1641–1652.
46. Rattan R and Bijwe J. Carbon fabric reinforced poly-
etherimide composites: influence of weave of fabric and
processing parameters on performance properties and
erosive wear. Mater Sci Eng A 2006; 420: 342–350.
47. Rattan R and Bijw J. Influence of impingement angle on
solid particle erosion of carbon fabric reinforced poly-
etherimide composite. Wear 2007; 262: 568–574.
48. Bijwe J, Rattan R, Fahim M, et al. Erosive wear of
carbon fabric reinforced polyetherimide composites:
role of amount of fabric and processing technique.
Polym Compos 2008; 29: 337–344.
49. Sari N and Sinmazcelik T. Erosive wear behaviour of
carbon fibre/polyetherimide composites under low par-
ticle speed. Mater Des 2007; 28: 351–355.
50. Sinmazcelik T and Taskiran I. Erosive wear behaviour of
polyphenylenesulphide (PPS) composites. Mater Des
2007; 28: 2471–2477.
51. Sari NY. Influence of erodent particle types on solid par-
ticle erosion of polyphenylene sulphide composite under
low particle speed. Polym Compos 2009; 30: 1442–1449.
52. Sinmazcelik T and Sari NY. Erodent size effect on the
erosion of polyphenylene sulfide composite. Polym
Compos 2010; 31: 985–994.
53. Sinmazcelik T, Fidan S and Gunnay V. Residual mech-
anical properties of carbon/polyphenylenesulphide com-
posites after solid particle erosion. Mater Des 2008; 29:
1419–1426.
54. Yilmaz T. Influence of annealing duration on the erosive
wear behavior of polyphenylenesulphide composites.
J Mater Sci 2010; 45: 2381–2389.
55. Ahmed TJ, Nino GF, Bersee HEN, et al. Improving ero-
sion resistance of polymer reinforced composites.
J Thermoplast Compos Mater 2009; 22: 703–725.
56. Avcu E, Fiden S, Bora MO, et al. Solid particle erosive
wear behavior of glass mat reinforced PPS composites:
influence of erodent particle size, pressure, particle
impingement angle, and velocity. Adv Polym Technol
2013; 32: E387–E398.
57. Tsuda K, Kubouchi M, Sakai T, et al. General method
for predicting the sand erosion rate of GFRP. Wear 2006;
260: 1045–1052.
58. Kim A and Kim I. Solid particle erosion of CFRP com-
posite with different laminate orientations. Wear 2009;
267: 1922–1926.
59. Biswas S, Deo B, Patnaik A, et al. Effect of fiber loading
and orientation on mechanical and erosion wear behav-
iors of glass–epoxy composites. Polym Compos 2011; 32:
665–674.
40
60. Mahapatra SS, Patnaik A and Satapathy A. Taguchi
method applied to parametric appraisal of erosion behav-
ior of GF-reinforced polyester composites. Wear 2008;
265: 214–222.
61. Patnaik A, Satapathy A, Mahapatra SS, et al. A model-
ing approach for prediction of erosion behavior of glass
fiber-polyester composites. J Polym Res 2008; 15:
147–160.
62. Patnaik A, Satapathy A, Mahapatra SS, et al. A Taguchi
approach for investigation of erosion of glass fiber-polye-
ster composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 2008; 27: 871–888.
63. Qian D, Bao L, Takatera M, et al. Fiber-reinforced poly-
mer composite materials with high specific strength and
excellent solid particle erosion resistance. Wear 2010; 268:
637–642.
64. Kumar S, Satapathy BK and Patnaik A. Viscoelastic
interpretations of erosion performance of short aramid
fibre reinforced vinyl ester resin composites. J Mater
Sci 2011; 46: 7489–7500.
65. Tejyan S, Patnaik A, Rawal A, et al. Structural and
mechanical properties of needle-punched nonwoven rein-
forced composites in erosive environment. J Appl Polym
Sci 2012; 123: 1698–1707.
66. Patnaik A and Tejyan S. A Taguchi approach for inves-
tigation of solid particle erosion response of needle-
punched nonwoven reinforced polymer composites: part
II. J Ind Text 2014; 43: 458–480.
67. Kumar S, Satapathy BK and Patnaik A. Thermo-
mechanical correlations to erosion performance of short
carbon fibre reinforced vinyl ester resin composites.
Mater Des 2011; 32: 2260–2268.
68. Deo Chittaranjan and Acharya SK. Solid particle erosion
of lantana camara fiber-reinforced polymer matrix com-
posite. Polym-Plast Technol Eng 2009; 48: 1084–1087.
69. Mishra P and Acharya SK. Solid particle erosion of
bagasse fiber reinforced epoxy composite. Int J Phys
Sci 2010; 5: Article No. 5A0E50822834.
70. Gupta A, Kumar A, Patnaik A, et al. Effect of different
parameters on mechanical and erosion wear behavior of
bamboo fiber reinforced epoxy composites. Int J Polym
Sci 2011; 2011: Article ID 592906.
71. Satapathy A, Patnaik A and Pradhan MK. A study on
processing, characterization and erosion behavior of fish
(labeo-rohita) scale filled epoxy matrix composites.
Mater Des 2009; 30: 2359–2371.
72. Qian D, Xu A, Bao L, et al. Improvement of erosion
behavior and mechanical strength of UP resin composites
filled with VGCF. Appl Mech Mater 2011; 43: 712–716.
73. Zhou L, Zhang H, Pei X, et al. Erosive wear of transpar-
ent nanocomposite coatings. Tribol Int 2013; 61: 62–69.
74. Zhang N, Yang F, Shen C, et al. Particle erosion on
carbon nanofiber paper coated carbon fiber/epoxy com-
posites. Compos B 2013; 54: 209–214.
75. Zhang N, Yang F, Guerra D, et al. Enhancing particle
erosion resistance of glass-reinforced polymeric compos-
ites using carbon nanofiber-based nanopaper coatings.
J Appl Polym Sci 2013; 129: 1875–1881.
76. Chen J, Hutchings IM, Deng T, et al. The effect of
carbon nanotube orientation on erosive wear resistance
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
of CNT-epoxy based composites. Carbon 2014; 73:
421–431.
77. Srivastava VK and Pawar AG. Solid particle erosion of
glass fibre reinforced flyash filled epoxy resin composites.
Compos Sci Technol 2006; 66: 3021–3028.
78. Patnaik A, Satapathy A, Mahapatra SS, et al. Modeling
and prediction of erosion response of glass reinforced
polyester-flyash composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 2009;
28: 513–536.
79. Bishoyee N, Dash A, Mishra A, et al. A grey-based
Taguchi approach for characterization of erosive wear
phenomenon of glass-polyester fly ash filled composites.
J Polym Environ 2010; 18: 177–187.
80. Patnaik A, Satapathy A, Mahapatra SS, et al. Parametric
optimization erosion wear of polyester-GF-alumina
hybrid composites using the Taguchi method. J Reinf
Plast Compos 2008; 27: 1039–1058.
81. Patnaik A, Satapathy A, Mahapatra SS, et al.
Implementation of Taguchi design for erosion of fiber-
reinforced polyester composite systems with SiC filler.
J Reinf Plast Compos 2008; 27: 1093–1111.
82. Patnaik A, Satapathy A and Mahapatra SS. Study on
erosion response of hybrid composites using Taguchi
experimental design. J Eng Mater Technol 2009; 131:
Paper No. 031011.
83. Mahapatra SS and Patnaik A. Study on mechanical and
erosion wear behavior of hybrid composites using
Taguchi experimental design. Mater Des 2009; 30:
2791–2801.
84. Yilmaz MG, Unal H and Mimaroglu A. Study of the
strength and erosive behavior of CaCO3/glass fiber rein-
forced polyester composite. eXPRESS Polym Lett 2008;
2: 890–895.
85. Karsli NG, Yilmaz T, Aytac A, et al. Investigation of
erosive wear behavior and physical properties of SGF
and/or calcite reinforced ABS/PA6 composites. Compos
B 2013; 44: 385–393.
86. Biswas S and Satapathy A. Use of copper slag in glass-
epoxy composites for improved wear resistance. Waste
Manage Res 2010; 28: 615–625.
87. Patnaik A, Kaundal R, Satapathy A, et al. Solid particle
erosion of particulate filled short glass fiber reinforced
polyester resin composites. Adv Mater Res 2010; 123–
125: 213–216.
88. Mahapatra SS. Modelling and analysis of erosion wear
behaviour of hybrid composites using Taguchi experi-
mental design. Proc Inst Mech Eng J, J Eng Tribol
2010; 224: 157–167.
89. Biswas S and Satapathy A. A study on tribological
behavior of alumina-filled glass-epoxy composites using
Taguchi experimental design. Tribol Trans 2010; 53:
520–532.
90. Jha AK, Mantry S, Satapathy A, et al. Erosive wear per-
formance analysis of jute-epoxy-SiC hybrid composites.
J Compos Mater 2010; 44: 1623–1641.
91. Bagci M and Imrek H. Solid particle erosion behaviour of
glass fibre reinforced boric acid filled epoxy resin com-
posites. Tribol Int 2011; 44: 1704–1710.
92. Bagci M and Imrek H. Application of Taguchi method
on optimization of testing parameters for erosion of glass
Miyazaki
fiber reinforced epoxy composite materials. Mater Des
2013; 46: 706–712.
93. Kumar S, Satapathy BK and Patnaik A. Thermo-
mechanical correlations to erosion performance of
short glass/carbon fiber reinforced vinyl ester resin
hybrid composites. Comput Mater Sci 2012; 60:
250–260.
94. Rout A, Satapathy A, Mantry S, et al. Erosion wear
performance analysis of polyester-GF-granite hybrid
composites using Taguchi method. Procedia Eng 2012;
38: 1863–1882.
95. Ismail M, Suresha B, Ananthaiah A, et al.
Parametric appraisal of erosion behaviour of organo-
modified montmorillonite-filled epoxy hybrid compos-
ites by Taguchi approach. J Reinf Plast Compos 2013;
32: 1586–1602.
96. Mohan N, Mahesha CR and Rajaprakash BM. Erosive
wear behaviour of WC filled glass epoxy composites.
Procedia Eng 2013; 68: 694–702.
97. Padhi PK and Satapathy A. Solid particle erosion
behavior of BFS-filled epoxy–SGF composites using
Taguchi’s experimental design and ANN. Tribol Trans
2014; 57: 396–407.
98. Panda P, Mantry S, Mohapatra S, et al. A study on
erosive wear analysis of glass fiber-epoxy-AlN hybrid
composites. J Compos Mater 2014; 48: 107–118.
99. Aktas A. Solid particle erosion of glass epoxy composite
strengthened by metal powder. J Thermoplast Compos
Mater 2012; 25: 949–963.
100. Mohan N, Natarajan S, Kumaresh Babu SP, et al. Solid
particle erosion of UHMWPE filled aramid fabric-
epoxy hybrid composites. Adv Mater Res 2010; 123–
125: 1051–1054.
101. Mohan N, Natarajan S, Kumaresh Babu SP, et al.
Studies on erosive wear behavior of UHMWPE-filled
aramid-epoxy hybrid composites. Mater Manuf
Process 2012; 27: 430–435.
102. Srinivasan Sreeran, Scattergood RO and Warren R.
Erosion of fiber reinforced Al-4pc Cu composites.
Metal Trans A 1988; 19A: 1785–1793.
103. Morita Y, Kawashima H and Seguchi M. Erosion of
ceramic particle products for pipe transportation.
Tetsu-to-Hagane 1989; 75: 297–304.
104. Hovis SK, Talia J and Scattergood RO. Erosion in
multiphase systems. Wear 1986; 108: 139–155.
105. Morrison CT, Routbort JL, Scattergood RO, et al.
Erosion of an alumina-stainless steel composite. Wear
1993; 160: 345–350.
106. Wu W, Goretta KC and Routbort JL. Erosion of 2014
Al reinforced with SiC or Al2O3 particles. Mater Sci Eng
1992; A151: 85–95.
107. Saravanan RA, Surappa MK and Pramila Bai BN.
Erosion of A356 Al-SiCp composites due to multiple
particle impact. Wear 1997; 202: 154–164.
108. Alahelisten A, Bergman F, Olsson M, et al. On the wear
of aluminium and magnesium metal matrix composites.
Wear 1993; 165: 221–226.
109. Miyazaki N and Funakura S. Solid particle erosion
behavior of metal matrix composites. J Compos Mater
1996; 30: 1670–1682.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
41
110. Tu JP, Pan J, Matsumura M, et al. The solid particle
erosion behavior of Al18B4O33 whisker-reinforced
AC4C Al alloy matrix composites. Wear 1998; 223:
22–30.
111. Tu JP and Matsumura M. Interfacial reaction effects on
erosion of aluminium matrix composites. Scr Mater
1999; 40: 645–656.
112. Levin BF, DuPont JN and Marder AR. The effect of
second phase volume fraction on the erosion resistance
of metal-matrix composites. Wear 2000; 238: 160–167.
113. Gui M, Wang D, Wu J, et al. Erosion of in-situ TiC
particle reinforced Al–5Cu composite. Mater Res Bull
2001; 36: 1573–1585.
114. Das S, Mondal DP and Sawla S. Solid particle erosion
of Al alloy and Al-alloy composites: effect of heat treat-
ment and angle of impingement. Metal Mater Trans A
2004; 35A: 1369–1379.
115. Kumar S, Subramanya Sarma V and Murty BS. A stat-
istical analysis on erosion wear behaviour of A356 alloy
reinforced with in situ formed TiB2 particles. Mater Sci
Eng A 2008; 476: 333–340.
116. Mitra R, Chiou WA, Fine ME, et al. Interface in as-
extruded XD Al/TiC and Al/TiB2 metal matrix compos-
ites. J Mater Res 1993; 8: 2380–2392.
117. Acharya SK, Dikshit V and Mishra P. Erosive wear
behaviour of redmud filled metal matrix composite.
J Reinf Plast Compos 2008; 27: 145–152.
118. MacMillin BE, Roll CD and Funkenbusch P. Erosion
and surface structure development of metal-diamond
particulate composites. Wear 2010; 269: 875–883.
119. Mamatha TG, Patnaik A, Biswas S, et al. Finite element
modelling and development of SiC-filled ZA-27 alloy
composites in erosive wear environment: a comparative
analysis. Proc Inst Mech Eng J, J Eng Tribol 2011; 225:
1106–1120.
120. Paul CP, Mishra SK, Tiwari P, et al. Solid-particle ero-
sion behaviour of WC/Ni composite clad layers with
different contents of WC particles. Opt Laser Technol
2013; 50: 155–162.
121. Ninham AJ and Levy AV. The erosion of carbide-metal
composites. Wear 1988; 121: 347–361.
122. Anand A and Conrad H. Local impact damage and ero-
sion mechanisms in WC-6wt.%Co alloys. Mater Sci Eng
1988; A105/106: 411–421.
123. Wang BQ and Luer K. The erosion-oxidation behavior
of HVOF Cr3C2-NiCr cermet coating. Wear 1994; 174:
177–185.
124. Wang BQ and Verstak A. Elevated temperature erosion
of HVOF Cr2C3/TiC-NiCrMo cermet. Wear 1999; 233–
235: 342–351.
125. Wang BQ and Shui ZR. The hot erosion behavior of
HVOF chromium carbide-metal cermet coatings
sprayed with different powders. Wear 2002; 253:
550–557.
126. Wang BQ and Shui ZR. Hot erosion behavior of car-
bide-metal composite coatings. J Mater Process Technol
2003; 143–144: 87–92.
127. Reshetnyak H and Kuybarsepp J. Mechanical proper-
ties of hard metals and their erosive wear resistance.
Wear 1994; 177: 185–193.
42
128. D’Errico GE, Bugliosi S, Cuppiui D, et al. A study of
cermets’ wear behavior. Wear 1997; 203–204: 242–246.
129. Hussainova I, Kubarsepp J and Pirso J. Mechanical
properties and features of erosion of cermets. Wear
2001; 250: 818–825.
130. Hussainova I. Some aspects of solid particle erosion of
cermets. Tribol Int 2001; 34: 89–93.
131. Hussainova I. Effect of microsturucture on the erosive
wear of titanium carbide-based cermets. Wear 2003; 255:
121–128.
132. Hussainova I, Kolesnikova A, Hussainov M, et al.
Effect of thermo-elastic residual stresses on erosive per-
formance of cermets with core-rim structured ceramic
grains. Wear 2009; 267: 177–185.
133. Antonov M, Hussainova I, Pirso J, et al. Assessment of
mechanically mixed layer developed during high tem-
perature erosion of cermets. Wear 2007; 263: 878–886.
134. Hussainova I, Pirso J, Antonov M, et al. Erosion and
abrasion of chromium carbide based cermets produced
by different methods. Wear 2007; 263: 905–911.
135. Hussainova I and Schade KP. Correlation between solid
particle erosion of cermets and particle impact dynam-
ics. Tribol Int 2008; 41: 323–330.
136. Hussainova I, Jasiuk I, Sardela M, et al.
Micromechanical properties and erosive wear perform-
ance of chromium carbide based cermets. Wear 2009;
267: 152–159.
137. Hussainova I, Antonov M and Zikin A. Erosive wear of
advanced composites based on WC. Tribol Int 2012; 46:
254–260.
138. Alman DE, Tylczak JH, Hawk JA, et al. An assessment
of the erosion resistance of iron-aluminide cermets at
room and elevated temperatures. Mater Sci Eng A
2002; 329–331: 602–609.
139. Rateick RG Jr, Karasek KR, Cunningham AJ, et al.
Solid-particle erosion of tungsten carbide/cobalt
cermet and hardened 440C stainless steel – a compari-
son. Wear 2006; 261: 773–778.
140. Lin B, Liu Z, Chen Y, et al. Erosion resistance of TiC/
Fe composite at high temperatures. Adv Mater Res 2009;
79–82: 1087–1090.
141. Sun X, Wang Y and Li DY. Mechanical properties and
erosion resistance of ceria nano-particle-doped ultrafine
WC-12Co composite prepared by spark plasma sinter-
ing. Wear 2013; 301: 406–414.
142. Honeycutt L III, Jennings WH and Manning CR Jr.
High temperature erosion of tantalum carbide compos-
ites. Wear 1976; 37: 209–216.
143. Sykes MT, Scattergood RO and Routbort JL. Erosion
of SiC–reinforced alumina ceramic composites.
Composites 1987; 18: 153–163.
144. Wada S, Watanabe N and Tani T. Solid particle erosion
of brittle materials (Part 6) –the erosive wear of Al2O3-
SiC composites–. J Ceram Soc Jpn 1988; 96: 111–118.
145. Kamiya H, Sakakibara M, Sakurai Y, et al. Erosion
wear properties of tetragonal ZrO2(Y2O3)-toughened
Al2O3 composites. J Am Ceram Soc 1994; 77: 666–672.
146. Liu DM, Fu CT and Lin JT. Erosion wear in Al2O3-
Cr3C2 composites. Ceram Int 1996; 22: 415–420.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)
147. Gochnour S, Bright JD, Shetty DK, et al. Solid particle
erosion of SiC-Al2OC ceramics. J Mater Sci Lett 1990;
25: 3229–3235.
148. Kim JJ and Park SK. Solid-particle erosion of hot-
pressed silicon carbide and SiC-TiB2 composite.
J Mater Sci Lett 1997; 16: 821–823.
149. Kim JJ and Park SK. Solid particle erosion of SiC and
SiC-TiB2 composite hot-pressed with Y2O3. Wear 1998;
222: 114–119.
150. Colclough AF and Yoemans JA. Hard particle erosion
of silicon carbide and silicon carbide-titanium deboride
from room temperature to 1000 C. Wear 1997; 209:
229–236.
151. Sharma SK, Manoj Kumar BV, et al. Erosion behavior
of SiC-WC composites. Ceram Int 2014; l40: 6829–6839.
152. Wang BQ and Levy AV. Erosion behavior of SiC fiber-
SiC matrix composites. Wear 1990; 138: 125–136.
153. Suh MS and Kohyama A. Effect of porosity on particle
erosion wear behavior of lab. scale SiCF/SiC compos-
ites. Int J Mod Phys B 2010; 24: 2934–2939.
154. Suh MS, Hinoki T and Kohyama A. Erosive wear
mechanism of new SiC/SiC composites by solid par-
ticles. Tribol Lett 2011; 41: 503–513.
155. Park DS, Han BD, Lim DS, et al. A study on erosion
wear and erosion of sialon-Si3N4 whisker ceramic com-
posites. Wear 1997; 203–204: 284–290.
156. Liu DM, Lin JT and Lee RR. Erosive wear behaviour in
duophase SiAlON composites. Ceram Int 1998; 24:
217–221.
157. Ham AL, Yoemans JA and Watts JF. Elevated tempera-
ture solid particle erosion of silicon carbide continuous
fibre reinforced calcium aluminosilicate glass-ceramic
matrix composite. Wear 1997; 203–204: 387–392.
158. Ham AL, Yeomans JA and Watts JF. Effect of tempera-
ture and particle velocity on the erosion of a silicon
carbide continuous fibre reinforced calcium aluminosili-
cate. Wear 1999; 233–235: 237–245.
159. Alman DE, Tylczak JH, Hawk JA, et al. Solid particle
erosion behavior of an Si3N4-MoSi2 composite at room
and elevated temperatures. Mater Sci Eng A 1999; 261:
245–251.
160. Iizuka T, Kita H, Hirai T, et al. Sliding wear and solid
particle erosion behaviors of Mo5Si3-Si3N4 composites.
J Ceram Soc Jpn 2003; 111: 919–923.
161. Sato K and Kamiya H. Erosion wear properties of TiC-
Al2O3 composites. J Ceram Soc Jpn 2003; 111: 485–490.
162. Sato K, Tsukada M and Kamiya H. Erosion wear prop-
erties of pressureless sintered TiC/Al2O3 composites –
comparison between pressureless sintered commercial
cutting tool materials–. J Ceram Soc Jpn 2004; 112:
117–120.
163. Saewong P and Rawlings RD. Erosion of carbon fiber
reinforced glass matrix composites. J Mater Sci Lett
1999; 18: 1915–1919.
164. Yamada S, Sakaguchi S, Hirao K, et al. Effect of micro-
structure on mechanical properties and erosion wear of
B4C and B4C-CrB2 composites. J Ceram Soc Jpn 2003;
111: 53–58.
165. Liu C and Sun J. Erosion behaviour of B4C-based cer-
amic composites. Ceram Int 2010; 36: 1297–1302.
Miyazaki
166. Ouyang C, Zhu S and Li DY. Experimental and simu-
lation studies on the solid-particle erosion of WC-MgO
composites. Tribol Lett 2013; 52: 501–510.
167. Amirthan G, Udayakumar A, Bhanu Prasad VV, et al.
Solid particle erosion studies on biomorphic Si/SiC cer-
amic composites. Wear 2010; 268: 145–152.
168. Li X, Chen S, Huang Z, et al. Effect of silicon addition
on high-temperature solid particle erosion-wear behav-
iour of mullite-SiC composite refractories prepared by
nitriding reactive. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2014; 2014: Article
ID 943542.
169. Baxter RI and Rawlings RD. Sold particle erosion of
highly porous carbon-carbon composites. Mater Sci
Technol 1998; 14: 161–169.
170. Baxter RI, Rawlings RD, Iwashita N, et al. Effect of
chemical vapor infiltration on erosion and thermal
properties of porous carbon/carbon composite thermal
insulation. Carbon 2000; 38: 441–449.
171. Sarkar S, Sekharan VG, Mitra R, et al. The solid par-
ticle erosion behavior of carbon/carbon and carbon/
phenolic composite used in re-entry vehicles. Tribol
Trans 2009; 52: 777–787.
172. Alonso F, Fagoaga I and Oregui P. Erosion protection
of carbon-epoxy composites by plasma-sprayed coat-
ings. Surf Coat Technol 1991; 49: 482–488.
173. Sutter JK, Miyoshi K, Bowman C, et al. Erosion coat-
ings for polymer matrix composites in propulsion appli-
cations. High Perform Polym 2003; 15: 421–440.
174. Miyoshi K, Sutter JK, Horan RA, et al. Assessment of
erosion resistance of coated polymer matrix composites
for propulsion applications. Tribol Lett 2004; 17:
377–387.
175. Ivosevic M, Knight R, Kalidindi SR, et al. Solid particle
erosion resistance of thermally sprayed functionally
graded coatings for polymer matrix composites. Surf
Coat Technol 2006; 200: 5145–5151.
176. Liu A, Guo M, Zhao M, et al. Arc sprayed erosion-
resistant coating for carbon fiber reinforced polymer
matrix composite substrates. Surf Coat Technol 2006;
200: 3073–3077.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on December 31, 2015
43
177. Maurer C and Schulz U. Erosion resistant titanium
based PVD coatings on CFRP. Wear 2013; 302:
937–945.
178. Keegan MH, Nash DH and Stack MM. On erosion
issues associated with the leading edge of wind turbine
blades. J Phys D, Appl Phys 2013; 46: Paper No. 383001.
179. Baxter RI and Rawlings RD. Microstructure and
solid particle erosion of carbon based materials used
for the protection of highly porous carbon-carbon com-
posite thermal insulation. J Mater Sci 1997; 32:
4485–4492.
180. Smeacetto F, Salvo M, Ferraris M, et al. Erosion pro-
tective coatings for low density, highly porous carbon/
carbon composites. Carbon 2009; 47: 1511–1519.
181. Yan FY, Gross KA, Simon GP, et al. Mechanical and
erosion properties of CaCO3-EMAA thermal spray
coatings. Polym Eng Sci 2004; 44: 1448–1459.
182. Liu J, Liu Z and Zhao L. Erosion behavior of TiC-xNi
composite coatings in-situ synthesized by electro-ther-
mal explosion ultra-high speed spraying. Adv Mater
Res 2008; 33–37: 1277–1282.
183. Sharma S, Dwivedi DK and Jain PK. Study and model
development of erosive wear by RSM. Proc Inst Mech
Eng J, J Eng Tribol 2012; 226: 57–70.
184. Keller MW, Hampton K and McLaury B. Self-healing
of erosion damage in a polymer coating. Wear 2013;
307: 218–225.
185. Pasha M and Kaleemulla M. Erosive wear behavior of
sprayed metal matrix composites: an overview. Proc Inst
Mech Eng J, J Eng Tribol 2013; 227: 1063–1075.
186. Chen Q and Li DY. Computer simulation of solid-par-
ticle erosion composite materials. Wear 2003; 255:
78–84.
187. Chen Q and Li DY. Is porosity always detrimental to
the wear resistance of materials? – A computational
study on the effect of porosity on erosive wear of TiC/
Cu composites. Wear 2009; 267: 1153–1159.
188. Li DY, Chen Q and Cook B. A further simulation study
on the dual role of porosity in solid-particle erosion of
materials. Wear 2011; 271: 1325–1330.