SHRI PILLAPPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

“EVALUATION OF MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF ALUMINUM BASED MMC”

Under the guidance of

Dr. CHANNABASAVARAJ( HOD, Mechanical department)

Seminar ByAbhimanyu Sah [ 1PL12ME001]Bishal Bhandari [1PL12ME012]

Harendra Kumar [1PL12ME043]Mahesh Kr. Chaudhary [1PL12ME016]

CONTENTS

Introduction Problem Definition Objectives Methodology Composition TableComparison Results & Discussion Advantages, Disadvantages and Applications Conclusion Scope of Future Work References

Composites material is the combination of two or more material having similar or dissimilar physical or chemical properties resulting the superior properties than individual material.

Metal matrix composites (MMCs) possess significantly improved properties. In MMCs, the reinforcement usually takes the form of particles, whiskers, short fibers, or continuous fibers.

INTRODUCTION

Classification of Composites

Com

posi

tes

Based on Matrix

Ceramic

Metal

Polymer

Thermosets

Thermoplastics

Based on Reinforcement

Fiber

Continuous

Undirectional Reinforcement

Bi-directional Reinforcement

DiscontinuousAligned

Randomly Oriented

Whisker

ParticleLarge Particle

Dispersion Strengthened

StructuralLaminates

Sandwiched

PROBLEM DEFINATION

Conventional monolithic materials have limitations in achieving good combination of strength, stiffness, toughness and density.

To overcome these shortcomings and to meet the ever increasing demand of modern day technology, composites are most promising materials of recent interest.

The problem being addressed for the proposed work is to evolve a development process for the best mix of the alloying elements for Al, Mg, Graphite and fly ash for deriving optimal mechanical properties.

The main objective of doing this project is to enhance the properties of Al 6061 composite by reinforcing Magnesium and graphite.

To form light weight composites. To improve stiffness. To improve solid lubrication. To improve cast ability. To improve Hardness value. To improve the toughness properties. To reduce the ductility value.

OBJECTIVES

S.N. BASE METAL BASE METAL %

MAGNESIUM %

FLY ASH %

GRAPHITE %

i Aluminium 92 5 3 -

ii Aluminium 89 5 6 -

iii Aluminium 89 5 3 3

iv Aluminium 86 5 6 3

V Aluminium 83 5 6 6

COMPOSITION TABLE

METHODOLOGY

Fabrication of MMCs

Preparation of test specimen according to ASTM standard.

Properties evaluation of test specimen

• Tensile properties• Hardness value• Wear rate• Impact strength

FABRICATION OF MMCs

MMC can be processed by following techniques :

i. Solid State processing

a) Diffusion Bonding Process

b) Powder metallurgy

ii. Liquid State Processing

a) Stir Casting Method

iii. Semi Solid State Method

iv. Vapor Deposition Method

v. In-SITU Fabrication Technique

Stir casting is the liquid state method of fabrication of MMC in which a dispersed phase is mixed with a molten matrix metal by means of mechanical stirring.

Stir Casting Method

COMPARISION TABLE

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.30

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

f(x) = 14988.8560280443 x − 332.764118151931

Series1 E

Linear (E) x

Linear (x)Proof Stress =1750 Mpa

S-S curve for 5% Mg + 3% Fly ash

0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.160

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

f(x) = 18567.6851736471 x − 328.054162339256

S-S curve of Mg=5%,fly ash = 6%

Series1ELinear (E)YPLinear (YP)

Strain

Stre

ss (

Mpa

)

Proof Stress = 1400 Mpa

Results and Discussion

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.160

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

f(x) = 17871.4268465849 x − 268.17102046269

S-S curve for Mg=5 %,Fly ash = 3%,Graphite = 3%

Series1ELinear (E)YPLinear (YP)

Strain

Stre

ss (

Mpa

)

Proof Stess = 1100 Mpa

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.180

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

f(x) = 20887.747682475 x − 366.859413157071

S-S curve of Mg=5%, Fly ash =6%, Graphite = 3%

Series1ELinear (E)YPLinear (YP)

Strain

Stre

ss (

Mpa

)

Proof Stress = 1450 Mpa

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.160

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

f(x) = 17871.4025264936 x − 268.170655525758

S-S curve of Mg=5%, Fly ash= 6%, Graphite = 6%

Series1

E

Linear (E)

YP

Linear (YP)

Strain

Stre

ss (

Mpa

)

Proof Stress= 1100 Mpa

S-S Curve Comparison for tensile test

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.30

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

m5f3

m5f3g3

m5f6

m5f6g3

m5f6g6

strain

stre

ss (

Mpa

)

A B C D E0.00E+00

2.00E-06

4.00E-06

6.00E-06

8.00E-06

1.00E-05

1.20E-05

1.40E-05

1.60E-05

F1=0.5 KgF2=1 KgF3 = 1.5 Kg

Composition

Wea

r ra

te (

gm/m

m)

Wear rate values at different loads

Where,A = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 3% Fly ashB = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 6% Fly ashC = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 3% Fly ash + 3% GraphiteD = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 6% Fly ash + 3% GraphiteE = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 6% Fly ash + 6% Graphite

A B C D E0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Series1

Energy absorbed for different composition

Where,A = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 3% Fly ashB = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 6% Fly ashC = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 3% Fly ash + 3% GraphiteD = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 6% Fly ash + 3% GraphiteE = Al 6061 + 5% Mg + 6% Fly ash + 6% Graphite

Hardness value for different composition of Al based MMC

mg5f3 mg5f6 mg5f3g3 mg5f6g3 mg5f6g634

35

36

37

38

39

40

41 Hardness Chart

mg = magnesiumf = fly ashg = graphite and numerical digit represents percentage.

Can cast any complex shape. High weldability. Can be rolled easily. High corrosion resistance. High machinability. High strength to density ratio. High stiffness. High toughness. High hardness. Good cast-ability. High reflectivity. High thermal conductivity. Less shrinkage.

ADVANTAGES

Casting defect may exist. High accuracy can’t be obtained. Skilled operator is required. High loss of material. Less flexibility to cast different materials. Parts have less chemical homogeneity then PM.

DISADVANTAGES

APPLICATIONS Bearing, bush and piston materials. Aircraft body. Automotive industry Marine industry. Beverage cans, hockey stick, fishing stick,

utensils. bicycle frame.

The following conclusion can be made from this project work.

For 3% addition of fly ash,• the modulus of elasticity is increased by 23.86%,• proof stress is decreased by 20 %, • wear rate is increased by 50%, • impact strength is increased by 25% and • hardness is increased by 2.778%.

For 3% increase in graphite, • the modulus of elasticity is increased by 19.2194%, • proof stress decreased by 37.14%, • wear rate is decreased by 50%, • impact strength is increased by 66.667% and• hardness is increased by5.556%.

CONCLUSION

For 3% addition of fly ash and 3% increase in graphite• the modulus of elasticity is increased by 39.34%,• proof stress decreased by 17%,• no change in the wear rate, • impact strength is increased by 108.33% and• hardness is increased by9.722%.

For 3% addition of fly ash and 6% increase in graphite • the modulus of elasticity is increased by 19.219%, • proof stress decreased by 37.142%,• wear rate is decreased by 50%, • impact strength is increased by 150% and • hardness is increased by 11.11%.

From the above data the stiffness of the material seems to increase for every 3% addition of fly ash and 3% addition of graphite, decrease in proof stress indicates that the plastic deformation can be done easily.

SCOPE OF FUTURE WORK • Investigations can be extended on different types of fibres and

matrix materials.

• Fatigue tests can be carried to evaluate the fatigue life and impact strength of the laminated composites.

• Vibration and modal analysis can be carried to evaluate vibration strength of the MMC Acoustic studies can be carried on the MMC.

• Radiography tests and chemical degradation test can be performed to analyse the resistance of the MMC for the environmental conditions.

• The MMC can be formed by powder metallurgy process for better properties.

REFERENCES

i. A. Anandha Moorthy, Dr. N. Natarajan, R. Sivakumar, M. Manojkumar, M. Suresh, 2012, Dry Sliding Wear and Mechanical Behavior of Aluminium/Fly ash/Graphite Hybrid Metal Matrix Composite Using Taguchi Method, International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (IJMER) Vol.2, Issue.3, pp-1224-1230.

ii. A. Manna, H.S. Bains, P.B. Mahapatra, 2011, Experimental study on fabrication of Al--Al2O3/Grp metal matrix composites, Journal of Composite Materials.

iii. A. R. K. Swamy, A. Ramesha, G.B. Veeresh Kumar, J. N. Prakash, 2011, Effect of Particulate Reinforcements on the Mechanical Properties of Al6061-WC and Al6061-Gr MMCs, Journal of Minerals & Materials Characterization & Engineering, Vol. 10, No.12, pp.1141-1152 .

iv. Abdalla Alrashdan, Ahmad T. Mayyas, Adel Mahamood Hassan, Mohammed T. Hayajneh, 2011, Drilling of Al--Mg--Cu alloys and Al--Mg-Cu/SiC composites, Journal of Composite Materials.

v. Adel Mahmood Hassan, Ghassan Mousa Tashtoush, Jafar Ahmed Al-Khalil, 2007, Effect of Graphite and/or Silicon Carbide Particles Addition on the Hardness and Surface Roughness of Al-4 wt% Mg Alloy, Journal of Composite Materials.

vi. J Babu Rao, Venkata Rao, I Narasimha Murthy, NRMR Bhargava, 2012, Mechanical properties and corrosion behaviour of fly ash particles reinforced AA 2024 composites, Journal of Composite Materials .

THANK YOU