See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259399277

A review on abrasive wear mechanisms of metallic materials

Conference Paper · January 2005

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4405.5522

CITATIONS READS

3 1,229

3 authors:

Giuseppe Pintaude Amilton Sinatora

Federal University of Technology - Paraná/Brazil (UTFPR) University of São Paulo
126 PUBLICATIONS   512 CITATIONS    145 PUBLICATIONS   1,766 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

E. Albertin
Instituto de Pesquisas Tecnológicas
33 PUBLICATIONS   260 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

tribology tests in lubricated environment View project

Development of a preventive rail grinding operation in a heavy haul railroad. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Giuseppe Pintaude on 03 January 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 A REVIEW ON ABRASIVE WEAR MECHANISMS OF
METALLIC MATERIALS

Giuseppe Pintaude1, Eduardo Albertin2 and Amilton Sinatora3

1
Federal Centre of Technological Education of Paraná State
Mechanical Academic Department, Brazil
e-mail: pintaude@cefetpr.br
2
Institute for Technological Research - IPT, Brazil
e-mail: albertin@ipt.br
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Sao Paulo, Brazil
e-mail: sinatora@usp.br

ABSTRACT
This paper presents a discussion of the abrasive wear mechanisms, from results obtained in
different test systems, especially for quenched and tempered bearing steel and high-chromium
white cast iron. The relationship between these mechanisms and the ratio of abrasive
hardness-to-metal hardness (HA/H) is discussed. Among the well-known mechanisms of
abrasion, a definite relationship exists between high levels of the HA/H ratio, cutting and
severe wear. On the other hand, microcracking can occur at different HA/H ratios, associated
to either mild or severe wear.

Keywords: Abrasive wear, Wear mechanisms, Wear regimes.

1. INTRODUCTION
The use of hardness as a material property to determine the wear resistance is well
established, and this relationship was consolidated with Archard [1] and Rabinowicz and co-
workers [2] models for wear rates. However, these models depend on three main hypotheses:
• The mechanical behavior of the worn material is assumed as rigid-plastic;
• The behavior of the abrasive particle is not considered, i.e., abrasive particles are
taken as rigid indenters, not subject to fracture, deformations or changes of properties
and geometry. This hypothesis is an oversimplification, which is not consistent with
the considerations on “system dependence” for tribology applications, as pointed out
by DIN 50320 [3].

167
 • Finally, a single mechanism, the cutting, causes the wear.

The understanding of the role of the cutting mechanism was greatly improved after Mulhearn
and Samuels work [4], which introduced the concept of the critical angle of attack. This
concept allows a more realistic evaluation of the contribution of cutting mechanism to the
wear. Since cutting becomes the operating mechanism only for abrasive angles of attack
higher than a critical angle, the effects of abrasive geometry and movements are taken into
account.
The contribution of abrasive properties to wear was accounted by means of the ratio between
abrasive hardness (HA) and worn material hardness (H). It is well established that this ratio
(HA/H) correlates in many instances with the abrasive wear regime, mild or severe [5, 6]. A
typical value of 1.2 is used to indicate the transition between these regimes. A theoretical
support for this number is obtained by considering the mechanical behavior of an abrasive
particle as rigid-plastic [7]. Though a simplification, since in many practical cases the
abrasive material exhibits elastic-plastic behavior [8] this model emphasizes that a definite
hardness differential is needed in order to initiate severe wear.
This paper presents a review on wear mechanisms, considering the established definitions of
abrasion regimes of metallic materials.

2. MILD AND SEVERE WEAR REGIMES

From the practical point of view, the classification of the wear as “mild” or “severe” generally
takes into account the rate of material removal. In addition, the aspect of the worn surfaces
and the size of the wear debris may also be considered criteria to evaluate the severity of a
wear system [9]. It is usual to find abrasive wear rates caused by sliding motion of abrasives
(“two-body” abrasion) one order of magnitude higher than those caused by rolling motion of
abrasives (“three-body” abrasion). Table 1 presents results obtained by Blickensderfer et al.
[10] that confirm this assertive.
However, it is much more frequent to find differences in the range from 4 to 10 times, thanks
to variations of the HA/H ratio [11], the abrasive particle size [12] or merely the abrasive
particle angularity [4]. Can all of these variations be classified as changes from a mild to a
severe wear system?. An important question is whether these characteristics are
systematically linked to specific mechanisms involved in the abrasion process.

168
 Table 1 - K values for two alloys. [10].
Test A514 steel White cast iron

Pin 19 2.3

Dry Sand Rubber Wheel 0.60 0.05

3
(K=Volume removed / Force X sliding distance, [mm /N.m], where volume was determined experimentally).

An example of the difficulty in the application of the “mild-severe” classification for practical
systems was shown in a study using the jaw crusher test [13]. In this study, different wear
mechanisms and different wear rates were observed in a single test arrangement. The abrasive
used in the tests was granite with average particle diameter of 25 mm. Figure 1 shows the
worn surfaces obtained in the quenched cast steel (770 ± 30 HV0.1) jaws.

Fig.1 - Worn surfaces of quenched cast steel jaws (770 ± 30 HV0.1), showing the following aspects:
(A) cutting, in the fixed jaw and (B) multiple indentations, in the movable jaw [13].

Figure 1 shows that for the fixed jaw the observed mechanism was cutting, while for the
movable jaw the surface had multiple indentations. Accordingly, the fixed jaw worn four
times faster than the movable one. The same kind of occurrence was observed in a study by
Sare and Arnold [14]. Both works concluded that different relative movements between each
jaw and the abrasive particles should be the cause for the observed effects. It seems
appropriate to ascribe the classification of severe to the wear in one side of the crusher and
mild to the other, since relevant differences have been observed both in the wear rates and in
the mechanisms.
Bozzi and De Mello [15] studied the wear mechanism of WC-12%Co (1,200 ± 200 HV30)
thermal-sprayed coating, in a three-body test. These authors observed that increasing the

169
hardness of the abrasive caused a change in the wear mechanism from multiple indentation to
plastic deformation and cutting, as shown in Figure 2.

Fig.2 - (A) Initial surface of WC-12%Co thermal-sprayed coating (1,200 ± 200 HV30). (B) Same
coating worn by silica with grain size of 0.19 mm, in a three-body test. Note multiple indentations.
(C) The same coating worn by alumina with grain size of 0.26 mm. Note cutting and plastic
deformation. The grooves in figure (C) are wider than the carbides [15].

It is clear from the above examples that the classification of severe or mild wear may not
apply to the entire wear system or to a specific wear test apparatus in all conditions.
The approach of this paper is first to identify the operating mechanism in a series of systems,
and after to verify the possibility of associating the mechanism with the “mild-severe”
classification.

3. THE CUTTING AND PLOWING MECHANISMS

The cutting mechanism can be identified by the presence of metal chips removed during the
wear process.

(A) (B)
Fig.3 - (A) Surface of glass paper after wear tests performed with 20 N of load in a pin-on-disk
system. Note the chips removed from an AISI 1006 steel. (B) Worn surface of pin revealed in optical
microscope. Note cutting and microchips. Some indentations were made at the grooves [16].

Figure 3(A) is a SEM image of an abrasive paper composed by glass grains with average size
of 0.2 mm and hardness of 560 HV, used in a pin test. The tested material was AISI 1006

170
steel with 100 HV [16]. Figure (3B) shows its worn surface. The presence of metal chips
evidences the action of the cutting mechanism. The test condition in this study is expected to
be severe, considering the combined effect of the following variables:
• HA/H ratio > 1.2;
• Average grain size (according to Misra and Finnie [12] 0.2 mm is a size capable to
produce severe wear);
• Angularity of the abrasive higher than the critical attack angle (αC) of this material (αC =
85° for similar material [4]);
• Fixed abrasives (“two-body” abrasion).

Submitting the same low carbon steel to the rubber wheel test [17], using silica sand as
abrasive (1,350 HV and average size of 150 µm), resulted in a different aspect of the worn
surface, as observed in Figure 4 [17]. In this case, plowing was observed, instead of cutting. A
groove was formed by the abrasive, but most of the material was only dislodged.
In the studies cited above, some of the conditions capable of producing severe wear were
present in both cases: high ratio of hardness between abrasive and metal, size and morphology
of the abrasives. It becomes clear thus that the “severity” of a tribosystem cannot be asserted
with disregard to the kind of relative motion between abrasive particles and the metal surface.

Fig.4 - Worn surface of AISI 1006 steel after wear tests performed with 15 N of load in a dry sand
rubber wheel. Note plowing and plastic deformation [17].

171
4. THE MICROCRACKING MECHANISM
The microcracking mechanism is usually associated to high levels of wear rates in abrasion,
as shown by the classical study of Kruschov [18], comparing the wear resistance of pure
metals and ceramic materials, Figure 5. However, the occurrence and effects of this
mechanism in metallic materials are not clear enough yet.

Fig.5 - Relative wear resistance as a function of hardness of pure metals (plastic deformation
mechanisms) and of minerals (microcracking mechanisms) [18].

Figure 6 presents an image of the worn surface of quenched and tempered bearing steel with
460 HV, after tests with 0.2 mm glass paper [16].

Fig.6 - Worn surface of bearing steel, quenched and tempered at 500 °C by 90 min, after tests with 0.2
mm glass paper. Note microcracks ahead and beside the grooves [16].

172
In Figure 6, small cracks are observed ahead and beside the grooves. Larssen-Basse [19]
associated the occurrence of this mechanism in abrasive systems with the transition from mild
to severe regime. In this situation, the abrasive hardness seems to be sufficient to promote the
penetration on the worn surface, but the combination of shape (attack angle) and force is not
adequate to initiate the cutting mechanism and, therefore, the material removal. In the upper
part of Figure 6, there is some accumulated material in front of the groove, an evidence of the
mechanism of “wedge formation” characteristic of this transition zone [20].
In this test condition, the HA/H ratio was about 1.2, possibly locating the wear system in the
transition from mild to severe. On the other hand, the surface aspect and the debris analysis
do not indicate material removal by cutting action. As to the wear rate, the value obtained for
the dimensional wear coefficient was 0.001 mm3/N.m. This value can be compared to the
results presented in Table 1, classifying the system in the mild region. All considered, the
results must be classified as mild wear, notwithstanding the presence of microcracks.
This kind of mechanism was also identified by Xu and Kennon [21] for martensitic steel
tested in pin-on-disk, but using hard particle abrasive, SiC, instead of glass.
Many wear resistant materials present hard second phases, such as carbides. The importance
of the ratio of abrasive hardness-to-carbide hardness (HA/HC), Figure 7 [22], and the ratio of
hard phase size-to-abrasive size [23] are well known.

Fig.7 - Wear rates of high-chromium cast iron as a function of the ratio of abrasive hardness-to-
carbide hardness [22].

173
However, the contribution of a hard and brittle second phase to increase the abrasion
resistance depends also on the relationship between abrasive hardness (HA) and metallic
matrix hardness (HM) and on the plastic deformation of the matrix [24]. For situations where
HA is higher than HM and at same time the ductility of the matrix is limited, cutting of metallic
matrix is favored. Therefore, there is a possible sequence of events, giving rise to
microcracking of carbides, due to the lack of mechanical support by the matrix. Figure 8 (A)
presents the proposed sequence of events for this situation and Figure 8 (B) presents the
microcracking of M7C3 carbide due to a scratch made with a quartz particle on martensitic
high-chromium cast iron [24].
On the other hand, for the HA/HM ratio higher than 1 and low strength matrices another
damage mechanism is possible, the subsurface carbide cracking [14, 24]. In this situation, as
the carbides are cracked even before they appear in the surface, they are not able to protect
against the abrasive action and the wear rate may increase as the carbide volume fraction
increases.

(A)
(B)
Fig.8 - (A) Schematic illustration of events that result in microcracking of carbides. (B) Surface of
martensitic high-chromium cast iron scratched by quartz [24].

The result obtained in Figure 9 can be explained because in some mechanical configurations
the maximum stress occurs below the worn surface. A high level of plastic deformation in the
ductile matrix, gives rise to microcracking of carbides, because of the brittle behavior of this
constituent.

174
Fig.9 - Cross-section of worn surface of austenitic high-chromium cast iron after quartz grinding [24].

5. SUMMARY
This paper presented the main abrasion mechanisms and the operational conditions associated
with them. The “severity” of the systems is a result of a set of parameters comprising the
angularity and particle size of the abrasive, how the particles move and the ratio between
abrasive hardness and worn surface hardness.
Considering this latter aspect, it appears that the published evidences support the idea that
high HA/H ratios are required, though not sufficient, to produce cutting and, consequently,
high wear rates. Therefore, the joint occurrence of high HA/H ratios and evidences of cutting
in the worn surface definitely characterizes the system as severe.
At low values of HA/H, low wear rates have been observed in metallic materials in spite of the
occurrence of microcracking. On the other hand, cracking and removal of hard second phases
is an important mechanism of wear of some widely used wear resistant materials. In this case,
the supporting matrix plays a fundamental role in avoiding cracking of the hard phases. A
balanced microstructure is required to keep the wear in the mild region.

6. REFERENCES

1. ARCHARD, J.F. Contact and rubbing of flat surfaces, J. Appl. Phys. 24, 1953, p. 981–988.

2. RABINOWICZ, E.; DUNN, L. A.; RUSSELL, P. G. A study of abrasive wear under three-
body conditions, Wear 4, 1961, p. 345–355.

3. DIN 50320-79, Wear: Terms, Systematic Analysis of Wear Processes, Classification of

Wear Phenomena. Deutsches Institut für Normen, Berlin (1979) (transl. H.G. Freeman,
Fachtechnisches Ubersetzungs-Institut, Dusseldorf).

4. MULHEARN, T. O.; SAMUELS, L. E. The abrasion of metals: a model of the process,

Wear 5, 1962, p. 478-498.

175
5. RICHARDSON, R. C. D. The wear of metals by hard abrasives, Wear 10, 1967, p. 291-
309.

6. RICHARDSON, R. C. D. The wear of metals by relatively soft abrasives, Wear 11, 1968,
p. 245-345.

7. TORRANCE, A. A. An explanation of the hardness differential needed for abrasion, Wear

68, 1981, p. 263-266.

8. EVANS, A. G.; WILSHAW, T. R. Quasi-static solid particle damage in brittle solids - I.

Observations, analysis and implications, Acta Metallurgica 24, 1976, p. 939-956.

9. QUINN, T. F. J. The classification, laws, mechanisms and theories of wear, In:

CONFERENCE ON FUNDAMENTALS OF TRIBOLOGY, Massachusetts, 1978. Suh,
N. P.; Saka, N. eds., 1983, p. 477-492.

10. BLICKENSEDERFER, R.; MADSEN, B.W.; TYLZAC, J.H. Comparison of several

types of abrasive wear tests, In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WEAR OF
MATERIALS, ASME, 1985, p. 313-323.

11. MISRA, A.; FINNIE, I. On the size effect in abrasive and erosive wear, Wear 65, 1981, p.
359-373.

12. MISRA, A.; FINNIE, I. An experimental study of three-body abrasive wear, Wear 85,
1983, p. 57-68.

13. PINTAÚDE, G. A study of abrasive wear transient regime - Tests on jaw crusher,
Dissertation (in Portuguese), 126 p. University of São Paulo, 1998.

14. SARE, I. R.; ARNOLD, B. K. Gouging abrasion of wear-resistant alloy white cast irons,
Wear 131, 1989, p. 15-38.

15. BOZZI, A.C.; De MELLO, J. D.B. Wear resistance and wear mechanisms of WC-12%CO
thermal sprayed coatings in three-body abrasion, Wear 233-235, 1999, p. 575-587.

16. PINTAÚDE, G. Analysis of mild and severe abrasive wear regimes using instrumented
tests of hardness, Thesis (in Portuguese), 200 p. University of São Paulo, 2002.

17. RAMOS, L. V. Construction and instrumentation of dry sand rubber wheel test for a study
of the tribological behavior of steels, Dissertation (in Portuguese), 82 p. University of
São Paulo, 2005.

18. KRUSCHOV, M. M. Principles of abrasive wear, Wear 28, 1974, p. 69-88.

19. LARSSEN-BASSE, J. Abrasion mechanism – delamination to machining. In:

CONFERENCE ON FUNDAMENTALS OF TRIBOLOGY, Massachusetts, 1978. Suh,
N. P.; Saka, N., eds., 1983, p. 679-689.

176
20. KAYABA, T.; HOKKIRIGAWA, K.; KATO, K. Analysis of the abrasive wear
mechanism by successive observations of wear processes in a scanning electron
microscope, Wear 110, 1986, p. 419-430.
21. XU, L.; KENNON, N. F. A study of the abrasive wear of carbon steels, Wear 148, 1991,
p. 101-112.

22. ZUM GAHR, K. H. Microstructure and Wear of Materials (Tribology Series v. 10),
Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1987.

23. De MELLO, J. D. B.; DURAND-CHARRE, M.; MATHIA, T. A sclerometric study of

unidirectionally solidified Cr-Mo white cast irons, Wear 111, 1986, p. 203-215.

24. ALBERTIN, E.; SINATORA, A. Effect of carbide fraction and matrix microstructure on
the wear of cast ion balls tested in a laboratory ball mill, Wear 250, 2001, p. 492-501.

177
 178

View publication stats