Jitendra M. Mistry and Piyush P. Gohil* Research review of

Sci Eng Compos Mater 2018; 25(4): 633–647

Jitendra M. Mistry and Piyush P. Gohil*

Research review of diversified reinforcement on aluminum metal matrix composites: fabrication processes and mechanical characterizationDOI 10.1515/secm-2016-0278Received September 22, 2016; accepted February 1, 2017; previously published online May 12, 2017

Abstract: This paper presents a research review on fabrica-tion processes and mechanical characterization of aluminum matrix composites (AMCs), which have found application in structural, electrical, thermal, tribological, and environmen-tal fields. A comprehensive literature review is carried out on various types of fabrication processes, the effects of indi-vidual reinforcement and multiple reinforcements, its per-centage, size, temperature, processing time, wettability, and heat treatment on the mechanical characterization of AMCs including different product applications. Various models and techniques proposed to express the mechanical char-acteristics of AMCs are stated here. The concluding remarks addresses the future work needed on AMCs.

Keywords: aluminum matrix composite; diversified rein-forcement; fabrication processes; mechanical characteri-zation; product applications.

AbbreviationsAl AluminumMMCs Metal matrix compositesAMCs Aluminum matrix compositesSiC Silicon carbideAl2O3 Aluminum oxideSC Stir castingPM Powder metallurgySQ Squeeze castingCC Compo castingCG Centrifugal castingEMS Electromagnetic stir casting

PI Pressureless infiltrationARB Accumulative roll bondingIC Investment castingISPM In situ powder metallurgyHT Heat treatmentp Particles

1 IntroductionComposite materials are receiving remarkable attention in structural, electrical, thermal, tribological, and envi-ronmental fields nowadays, as they have high specific strength, corrosion resistance, fatigue strength, good tri-bological properties, etc. [1, 2]. Composites are used for making components in the aircraft industry, in space vehi-cles, the electronic industry, in medical equipment, and in home appliances [3, 4].

Composite material is a combination of two or more constituents having different physical or chemical prop-erties that remain separate on a macroscopic level [5, 6]. The matrix as a continuous phase, controls the strength at different temperatures, while reinforcement provides better level of strength and stiffness to the composite [7].

A composite can be classified on the basis of the matrix material as follows:

– Metal matrix composites (MMCs), – Ceramic matrix composites (CMCs), – Polymer matrix composites (PMCs).

In MMCs, aluminum (Al), magnesium (Mg), titanium (Ti), and copper (Cu) are frequently used as matrix elements [8]. MMCs are classified on the basis of reinforcing ele-ments [9] as shown in Figure 1, such as:

– Particle-reinforced MMCs, – Short fiber or whisker-reinforced MMCs, – Continuous fiber or sheet-reinforced MMCs.

In this paper, an effort is made to review fabrication pro-cesses as well as the mechanical characterization of par-ticulate-reinforced aluminum matrix composites (AMCs) because it has been found to be an application for fabrica-tion of various components [5, 10, 11].

*Corresponding author: Piyush P. Gohil, Faculty of Technology and Engineering, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara 390 001, Gujarat, India, e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] M. Mistry: CHARUSAT, Changa 388 421, Gujarat, India; and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Institute of Technology, Vasad 388306, Gujarat, India

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

634 J.M. Mistry and P.P. Gohil: Diversified reinforcement on aluminum metal matrix composites

2 Aluminum matrix compositeAl has low density and good corrosion resistance; hence, it is useful in MMCs [12]. With the addition of appropriate rein-forcing particles like oxides, carbides, or nitrides in matri-ces, the mechanical property of AMCs can be enhanced [13]. Moreover, the addition of multiple reinforcement in the matrix tends to further improve the mechanical properties [14]. Regarding the size of particle, research is remarkably accelerated nowadays from macro- to nano-size particles [15]. Nano particles have higher specific surface areas and high surface energy; hence, mechanical performance improves compared to micro-size particle-reinforced AMCs [16]. Macro to nano particle-reinforced AMCs are fabricated using various processes as stated below.

3 Fabrication processesThe commonly used fabrication process for AMCs grouped as the solid state method and the liquid metallurgy route [9, 17] is briefly discussed in the following sections.

3.1 Solid state method

The solid state method includes: powder metallurgy (PM) process, diffusion bonding process, and physical vapor deposition for AMCs fabrication.

3.1.1 PM process

This process consists of four basic steps: (i) blending of gas-atomized matrix and reinforcement, (ii) compacting the homogeneous blend, (iii) degassing the preform to

remove volatile contaminants, and (iv) consolidation by vacuum hot pressing. Finally, hot pressed billets can be extruded as shown in Figure 2. In this method, the volume content of reinforcement can be easily controlled [9], and grain refinement during mixing improves the hardness and strength of the composites, while PM is not an ideal technology for mass production.

3.1.2 Diffusion bonding process

Foil-fiber-foil bonding processes, matrix alloy of foil or powder cloth, and fiber arrays are stacked together as illustrated in Figure 3. Stacked layers are hot pressed

Cold isostatic compression

Vacuum degassing

Pressure

Hot pressingExtrusionAluminum matrix composite

Blending of gasatomised powder

ReinforcingparticlesP/M Al

Figure 2: Schematic view of PM process for AMC fabrication.

Combine metalfoil and fiber Lay up for

desired piles

Vacuum encapsulate

Finished product

Heat to fabricationtemperature and apply pressure

Figure 3: Schematic view of foil-fiber-foil diffusion bonding process.

Metal matrix composite(MMCs)

Short fibers orwhiskers reinforced

MMCs

Short fibers or whiskers Continues fibers Sheet laminates

Continues fibers orsheet reinforced

MMCs

Particles reinforcedMMCs

Particles

Figure 1: Types of metal matrix composite.

J.M. Mistry and P.P. Gohil: Diversified reinforcement on aluminum metal matrix composites 635

through hot isostatic pressing; hence, diffusion bonding takes place between the materials. The main advantage of this method is fiber orientation, and fiber percent-age is closely controlled. On the other hand, it requires higher processing temperature and pressure. Expen-sive and limited shapes can be fabricated through this process [9, 17].

3.1.3 Physical vapor deposition process

In this process, the continuous passage of the fiber through a region of high partial pressure of the metal is deposited. MMCs are fabricated by assembling the matrix-coated fibers into a bundle, subsequently consolidated in a hot press. This technique can produce MMCs with uniform distribution up to 70%–80% vol. fraction. This process facilitates a wide range of nanolaminate struc-tures and controls the thickness of the individual layer with the interface [17].

3.2 Liquid metallurgy route

The most common liquid metallurgy processes are stir casting (SC), squeeze casting (SQ), spray co-deposition, and in situ processes.

3.2.1 Stir casting process

In SC process, reinforcement is added into the liquid matrix melt, and the MMCs then solidify. After melting of the matrix, it is stirred vigorously for a while to form a vortex in the melt; thereafter, reinforcing particles are added at the side of the vortex as shown in Figure 4. It is simple, economical, and applicable for mass production. Poor interfacial bonding, wettability [18–20], and non-uniform reinforcement distribution are observed to some extent.

3.2.2 SQ process

Molten metal is forced under pressure into particulate pre-form to produce MMCs. The matrix material with the required additives is melted in a crucible, and the reinforc-ing element is preheated separately. Finally, molten metal is poured on to the reinforcement, and simultaneously, pressure is applied through a ram as illustrated in Figure 5. The main benefits of this process are minimum interfa-cial reaction of matrix with reinforcement, low shrinkage, and ability to fabricate complex shapes [9].

3.2.3 Spray co-deposition process

Melted metal and liquid stream are atomized; a fine solid powder is formed due to the rapid solidification of the metal. The stated technique is modified by co-deposit-ing the reinforcing element with the matrix as shown in Figure 6. Higher production rate and lower solidification

Motor

Stirrer

Reinforcingparticles

Screwdriver

Furnance

Crucible

Molten metal

Figure 4: Schematic view of SC process.

Ram

Molten metal

Particulatepre-form

Figure 5: Schematic view of SQ technique.


time promotes a minimum reaction of matrix with reinforce-ment [9]. Particle distribution in the composite depends upon the size and percentage of the reinforcement.

3.2.4 In situ process

There are two major types of in situ process: (i) reactive and (ii) non-reactive.

The reactive type process consists of two elements, which react exothermically for the production of the rein-forcing phase. For example, TiB2 particles are formed as:

22B Ti Al TiB Al+ + → + (1)

In the non-reactive type process, monotectic and eutectic phases of alloys are used to form the reinforcement and matrix. Unidirectional solidification is controlled in the in situ process to produce MMCs, and a schematic view of the in situ process is shown in Figure 7. A crucible with a eutectic alloy moves downward from the top, and alterna-tively, the induction coil moves vice versa, when heating the alloy. This movement results in further melting fol-lowed by re-solidification of the composite under con-trolled cooling conditions. This process eliminates the wettability problem, so a clean and strong interface is formed between the matrix and the reinforcement [9].

Moreover, there is continuous development in the fabrication processes for the enrichment of the mechani-cal properties of AMCs.

In the gravity casting method, the cooling rate is low; and hence, a tendency of non-homogeneous reinforcing particle distribution in the matrix and porosity formation is observed. The porosity level is decreased by applying

pressure during the SQ process. The compocasting method has a low agglomeration of Al2O3p, better wettability, and more uniform distribution, which proves that it has better mechanical properties than SC [21].

Rajan et al. [22] compared SC, compocasting, and SQ for 5% fly ash (FAp)-reinforced AMCs. They observed that the SQ method had better FAp distribution than compo-casting and SC. The major elements of FA are SiO2, alu-minum oxide (Al2O3) and Fe2O3, which react with Al and Mg alloys:

(l) (l) 2(s) 2 4(s) (s)2Al Mg 2SiO MgAl O 2Si+→+ + (2)

(l) 2 3(s) 2 4(s) (l)3Mg 4Al O 3MgAl O 2Al+ → + (3)

(l) (2) (s) 2 3(s)3 32Al SiO Si Al O2 2

+ → + (4)

(l) 2 3(s) (s) 2 3(s)2Al 3Fe O 2Fe Al O+ → + (5)

The MgAl2O4 spinels presents at interface or are distrib-uted in the matrix, which leads to an increase in the undesirable particle-matrix debonding. In the case of the compocasting technique, the Si content in the matrix can minimize the kinetics of the reaction shown in equation (2). On the other hand, eutectic Si and Fe intermetallic are formed with a higher amount in the SC process as shown in equations (4) and (5). Hence, the compocasting process gives a better AMC quality than SC.

Induction heatedliquid metal

Nitrogen gas

Atomizer nozzle

Aluminum particles

Round, spray-deposited billet

Exhaust

Rollers

Spray chamber

Reinforcingparticles

Figure 6: Schematic view of spray co-deposition technique.

Alloy insolid state

Moltenmatrixalloy

UnidirectionallysolidifiedMMCs

Staticinduction

coil

Figure 7: Schematic view of in situ process.


Conventional fabrication processes produce agglom-erated arrangement of matrix and reinforcement, which lead to lower mechanical properties of AMCs. Barekar et al. [23] focused on distributive and dispersive mixing of composition under shearing action during the fabrica-tion of AMCs. They have proposed the melt conditioned high-pressure die casting (MC-HPDC) method for AMC fabrication. The MC-HPDC process has improved parti-cle distribution in the matrix with a strong interfacial bonding. Hence, better ultimate tensile strength (UTS) and tensile elongation have been reported compared with the conventional process.

In mechanical SC, the stirrer is used to rotate molten metal in a crucible. But in mechanical stirring, the stirrer erodes frequently during the stirring process, and eroded particles are mixed with the composite. Moreover, in some cases, the reinforcing particles are broken during stirring. Hence, the quality of the composite deteriorates [24]. These problems can be overcomed using the novel technique of electromagnetic stir casting (EMS). When AC power is supplied to the motor’s stator, an electromag-netic field is created [25]. Hence, the fluid (molten metal) inside the stator will rotate to achieve effective and reli-able stirring [26] as shown in Figure 8. A vortex can draw reinforcement into the melt, so continuous dispersement is achieved [24, 27, 28].

Dwivedi et al. [29] investigated the mechanical per-formance of SiCp (5%, 10%, 15%) reinforced in A356,

fabricated using the EMS process. They have reported enhancement in tensile strength, hardness, and tough-ness by the addition of SiCp in A356.

Clustering of particles is observed in AMCs, when fab-ricated through the conventional stirring process. Also, porosity is observed due to gas entrapment, hydrogen formation, and shrinkage during solidification. Conse-quently, it degrades the mechanical properties of AMCs [30–32]. This can be overcomed by applying ultrasonic treatment (UST) in AMC fabrication. Figure 9 shows the ultrasonic vibration-assisted technique for AMC fabri-cation. UST creates strong non-linear transient cavita-tion and acoustic streaming in the molten Al [33]. UST is capable of producing sufficient energy for breaking particle clusters and removes unwanted surface gases, thus, resulting in the improvement of wetting character-istic with molten Al. Moreover, oscillating and collapsing cavities generate better dispersion; hence, a homogene-ous AMC microstructure is achieved [34, 35]. The poros-ity observed is 6.54% for AMC samples without ultrasonic treatment, and by the application of 12 min of ultrasonic vibration, it is reduced considerably to 0.86% [36].

Kai et al. [37] carried out an ultrasonic process by breaking the agglomerated clusters of nano ZrB2 parti-cle, which resulted in improved tensile property of AMCs. Mohanty et al. [38] have fabricated Al2O3p-reinforced nanocomposites using ultrasonic cavitation and reported enhancement of mechanical property with uniform

Addition ofreinforcement

CrucibleVacuumbox

Temp. recorder

Temp. recorder

Powersupply and

controlpannel

Inductionfurnace

Melt ofAl

3 Phase ACsupply

SinglephaseAC

Vacuumpump

Ceramic wool 15 HP, 3 Phase inductionmotor stator

Motor winding

Coolantpump

MMCs

N2 gascylinder

Singlephase AC

supplyVariable

frequencydrive

Figure 8: Schematic view of EMS process setup.


distribution of nanoparticles in the matrix. Harichandran and Selvakumar [39] successfully fabricated micro and nano B4Cp-reinforced AMCs using an ultrasonic cavita-tion-assisted fabrication process. First, mechanical stir-ring was employed for 10 min as a primary distribution of particles in the molten Al. Subsequently ultrasonic cavita-tion was achieved by dipping a probe into the molten Al to break the particle clusters. The nanocomposite has higher ductility, strength, impact energy, and hardness than the micro B4Cp-reinforced AMCs.

Liu et al. [40] combined an in situ technique with ultrasonic vibration treatment for Ti and Gr-reinforced AMCs. The following exothermic reactions have been observed:

3Ti 3Al Al Ti+ = (6)

3Al Ti C TiC 3Al+ = + (7)

In the meantime, for the in situ technique, an ultrasonic generator of 1.5 kW and 20 kHz frequency was used to create vibration into the molten aluminum. Hence, because of ultrasonic degassing, the porosity level was decreased remarkably. Moreover, the particle clusters were broken, and oxide inclusions were eliminated effectively.

An innovative approach using electroceramic and ceramic particle as reinforcements, electroceramic rein-forcements of pyroelectric lead barium niobate (PBNp) and piezoelectric lead lanthanum zirconate titanate (PLZTp) along with ceramic particle SiCp for AMC fabri-cation, was carried out by Montalba et al. [41]. Multiple

particle-reinforced AMCs were fabricated by applying ultrasonic treatment; hence, superior particle dispersion and remarkable wettability were observed.

Accumulative roll bonding (ARB) is a remarkable technique applied for AMC fabrication. Roll bonding is carried out with imposing reinforcement into the matrix. An ultra-fine grain structure is achieved, consequently strengthening the fabricated rolled sheet [42, 43]. Rezayat et al. [44] investigated the effect of ARB cycles on AMCs. Tensile strength increased with ARB cycles and maximum 256 MPa reported for eight cycles with only 2 vol.% Al2O3p, which is five times higher than Al.

The functionally graded composite material (FGCM) is a relatively advanced composite, in which microstructure and material composition are diverse in controlling the physical and mechanical properties. The FGCM has been successfully fabricated through SC followed by the cen-trifugal casting (CG) method [45–47]. Savaş et al. [48] fab-ricated the SiCp-reinforced AMCs through the CG method, and at the outer region, maximum percentage of particles were observed; hence, a higher hardness value has been reported.

Abdizadeh et al. [49] fabricated the MgOp-reinforced AMCs using SC and PM. Temperature values selected for SC were 800°C, 850°C, and 950°C, while 575°C, 600°C, and 625°C were selected for PM. Better homogeneous distribution and less porosity level in SC were observed, thus better properties were achieved than PM, within the decided range of temperatures. Temperatures of 625°C for PM and 850°C for SC were optimum for the best value of mechanical properties.

The indigenously developed enhanced SC process, consisting of two steps of stirring method, was used for AMCs fabrication. Better reinforcement distribution was observed. The addition of 1% Mg during the stir-ring improved wettability, and the addition of argon gas avoided unnecessary reaction of molten aluminum with the atmosphere. As a result, AMC performance has been improved remarkably through this process [50]. Mg addi-tion reduces the surface energy of Al, which decreases the contact angle between the molten matrix and the rein-forcement, consequently promoting wettability [51]. In in situ powder metallurgy (ISPM), Akhlaghi and Zare-Bidaki [52] combined the SC and PM processes and obtained an enhancement in the AMC properties.

By using any of above suitable, economical, or feasible fabrication processes, it is necessary to evaluate the tribological, mechanical, electrical, and corrosion per-formance of AMCs. The tribological aspects of diversified reinforcement on AMCs have been already reviewed [53]. In the present article, an attempt is made to review the

Ultrasonictransducer

Probe

Particle

Meltaluminum

FurnaceCrucible

Ultrasonicpower

Aircooling

Figure 9: Schematic view of the ultrasonic vibration-assisted tech-nique for AMCs fabrication.


effect of diversified reinforcement on mechanical charac-terization in AMCs.

4 Mechanical characterizationThe mechanical properties are very important for any material with the application of load, which determine the usefulness of a material in a specific product application [54]. Tensile and compressive strengths are the maximum stresses attained before fracture under tensile and com-pressive loading, respectively. Resistance against defor-mation is the modulus (elastic modulus), while flexural strength can be calculated from the maximum load before fracture under flexural loading. The hardness is known as the resistance to plastic deformation, generally by inden-tation, cutting, or abrasion [55, 56]. The mechanical prop-erties of AMCs are extensively governed by the properties of matrix, reinforcement, and reinforcement/metal inter-face [57].

The effect of various reinforcements, its percentage, size, temperature, processing time, wettability, fabrica-tion process, and heat treatment (HT) are significant to derive the mechanical properties of AMCs. The present review is to deal with the mechanical characterization of Al-based composite with individual reinforcement and multiple reinforcements.

4.1 Aluminum matrix composite for individual reinforcement

The overall mechanical properties of AMCs increase when high strength ceramic particles are added to ductile alu-minum. When only ceramic particles are reinforced with aluminum, it produces an individual reinforced AMC. The mechanical characterizations of the individual particu-late-reinforced AMCs are listed in Table 1. By increasing the reinforcement percentage in AMCs, the deformation of the matrix material is restricted. Hence, the mechanical property except impact strength has been improved with increasing vol./wt.% of the reinforcements [58, 79].

The effect of the matrix particle size (Al), vol. fraction, and particle size (SiCp) on the hardness of the AMCs was studied using the central composite design (CCD) method. A smaller Al particle size and a bigger SiCp size increase the hardness of the AMCs [59]. Kok [60] fabricated the AMCs through a vortex method and the subsequently applied pressure. The tensile strength and the hardness of the AMCs increased with decreasing Al2O3p size. The

coarser particles were more uniformly dispersed, while fine Al2O3p agglomerated in the matrix material.

Vedani et al. [61] evaluated the tensile strength of SiCp and Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs at a temperature range of 300°C–500°C. They observed that 20% of SiCp with 2618 Al has a higher tensile strength than 20% of Al2O3p with 2618 Al. Ductility has been improved remarkably at high temperatures, especially with fine particle reinforce-ment, and 20% of Al2O3p with 2618 Al has a higher tensile strength than 20% of Al2O3p with 6061 Al within 300°C–350°C, which indicates that selection of the matrix alloy plays a crucial role for the enhancement of the mechanical property.

Ceschini et al. [62] have found tensile properties of Al2O3p reinforced on 6061 and 7005 Al at ambient tempera-tures, 100°C, 150°C, and 250°C. The temperature up to 100°C did not have a noteworthy effect on tensile strength and ductility. The tensile strength decreased and the duc-tility increased notably at 250°C. The MgAl2O4 spinels present in composites may promote void nucleation at the interface. Hence, it resulted in interfacial decohesion at the interface and, furthermore, failure of the composite. At higher temperature, the matrix becames softer, which results easily pulling out of reinforcement from matrix.

Nano Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs have been fabricated via the SC method by altering the stirring time. It was observed that 4 min of stirring was better compared to 8, 12, and 16 min. Moreover, Cu and Al metallic powders were milled independently with nano Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs. Cu addition was found to be better than Al addition because Cu provided a better strengthening effect as well as better Al2O3p distribution in the AMCs [63].

Zebarjad and Sajjadi [64] studied the effect of milling times, varying from 20, 30, 75, 150, 270, 330, 450, 600 to 900 min on the Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs. The milled AMCs was found to be harder compared to the AMCs without milling. However, the hardness decreased with tempera-ture in both the types. MoSi2p-reinforced AMCs was pro-duced by Corrochano et al. [65] using PM. Ball milling has reduced the MoSi2p size and matrix grain size, which led to enhanced UTS with milling time without losing the ductil-ity of the AMCs.

Wettability is the ability of the liquid to spread on a solid surface [9]. The wettability of the reinforcement in the melt is reduced with reinforcement size; consequently, the AMC quality is deteriorated. Mazaheri et al. [80] have improved the wettability by giving HT to B4Cp by heating at 800°C for 1 h and also added Na3AlF6 flux into the melt.

Lai and Chung [81] reported that SiCp reacts with Al at an elevated temperature as shown in equation (8). The brittle aluminum carbide formed has a tendency to


Tabl

e 1:

Mec

hani

cal c

hara

cter

izat

ion

of in

divi

dual

par

ticul

ate

rein

forc

ed A

MCs

.

Sr. n

o.

Fabr

icat

ion

proc

ess

Ty

pe o

f Al

Re

info

rcin

g el

emen

t

Heat

trea

tmen

t (HT

)

Outc

omes

Re

f.

Type

%

Pa

rtic

le s

ize

(μm

)

1

SC, C

C an

d SQ

A3

56

FAp

5,

15

wt.

13

T6

Co

mpr

essi

on s

treng

th o

f AM

Cs p

roce

ssed

by S

Q w

as b

ette

r tha

n th

e m

atrix

[2

2]

2

EMS

A3

59

Al2O 3p

2,

4, 6

, 8 w

t.

30

–

For 8

wt.%

Al 2O 3p

-rein

forc

ed A

MCs

, ten

sile

stre

ngth

was

45%

hi

gher

, and

har

dnes

s w

as 5

8% h

ighe

r tha

n Al

[2

7]

3

ARB

Al

105

0

Al2O 3p

1,

2, 3

vol.

0.

47

–

Tens

ile s

treng

ths

of A

MCs

incr

ease

d w

ith A

RB cy

cles

[4

4]4

SC

and

PM

A3

56

MgO

p

1.5,

2.5,

5 vo

l.

70 n

m (n

ano

size

)

–

SC-p

roce

ssed

AM

Cs h

ave

bette

r enh

ance

men

t of h

ardn

ess

and

com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

than

the

PM m

etho

d

[49]

5

Enha

nced

SC

Al

606

1

TiC p

3,

4, 5

, 6, 7

vol.

–

–

UT

S im

prov

ed co

nsid

erab

ly w

ith m

aint

aini

ng p

erce

ntag

e el

onga

tion

[5

0]

6

SC

Al 6

061

Si

C p

2, 4

, 6 w

t.

150

–

UT

S an

d ha

rdne

ss o

f AM

Cs w

ere

incr

ease

d w

ith S

iCp

perc

enta

ge, b

ut d

uctil

ity d

ecre

ased

[5

8]

7

PM

Al

SiC p

4.

09, 7

.5,

12.5

,17.

5,

20.9

1 vo

l.

68

, 86,

112

, 138

, 15

6

–

Vol.

fract

ion

was

mos

t dom

inat

ing

fact

or fo

r AM

C ha

rdne

ss

[59]

8

SC

Al 2

024

Al

2O 3p

10,2

0,30

wt.

16

, 32,

66

–

Am

ong

all o

f AM

Cs, t

he 1

6-μm

Al 2O 3p

has

max

imum

har

dnes

s an

d te

nsile

stre

ngth

[6

0]

9

SC

Al 6

061a

nd

Al 2

618

Si

C p

and

Al2O 3p

20

%

11 fo

r SiC

p an

d21

for A

l 2O 3p

T6

20

% A

l 2O 3P w

ith 2

618

Al h

as b

ette

r ten

sile

stre

ngth

than

20%

of

Al2O 3P

with

606

1 Al

at 3

00°C

–350

°C te

mpe

ratu

re

[61]

10

CC

Al 7

005,

Al

6061

Al

2O 3p

10, 2

0 vo

l.

–

T6

Tens

ile s

treng

th d

ecre

ased

, and

duc

tility

incr

ease

d si

gnifi

cant

ly

at 2

50°C

[6

2]

11

SC

A 35

6

Al2O 3p

1.

5 vo

l.

20 n

m

T6

4 m

in s

tirrin

g of

fere

d m

axim

um h

ardn

ess

and

com

pres

sive

st

reng

th th

an 8

, 12,

and

16

min

[6

3]

12

PM

Al

Al2O 3p

5

wt.

16

5

–

Mic

ro h

ardn

ess

incr

ease

d w

ith m

illin

g tim

e

[64]

13

PM

Al 6

061

M

oSi 2

15

vol.

<3

and

10–

45

Solu

tion

heat

trea

ted

UT

S im

prov

ed w

ith m

illin

g tim

e w

ithou

t los

ing

duct

ility

[6

5]14

Pr

essu

rele

ss

sint

erin

g

Al 6

061

Si

C p

10 w

t.

23 o

r 7

Solu

tion

treat

ed, q

uenc

hed,

an

d ag

ed

7 μm

SiC

p-rein

forc

ed A

MCs

hav

e be

tter s

treng

th th

an 2

3 μm

siz

e [6

6]

15

SC

AlSi

5

SiC p

9,

13,

17,

22,

26

vol.

15

–30

–

Ex

trusi

on p

roce

ss im

prov

ed yi

eld

stre

ngth

and

tens

ile s

treng

th

appr

oxim

atel

y 40

%

[67]

16

Hot i

sost

a.

Pres

s.

Al 2

124

Si

C p

26 vo

l.

3

T4

T4 tr

eatm

ent,

perfo

rmed

afte

r for

ging

, was

sui

tabl

e fo

r pro

pert

y en

hanc

emen

t

[68]

17

Mol

ten

met

al

proc

ess

AA

261

8

Al2O 3p

20

vol.

–

T6

Fo

rgin

g im

prov

ed u

ltim

ate

stre

ngth

and

har

dnes

s of

AM

Cs a

t ro

om a

s w

ell a

s at

hig

h te

mpe

ratu

re

[69]

18

PM

7034

Si

C p

15 vo

l.

–

Solu

tion

treat

ed, q

uenc

hed,

an

d ag

ed

Mod

ulus

and

stre

ngth

of A

MCs

dec

reas

ed w

ith in

crea

sing

te

stin

g te

mpe

ratu

re

[70]

19

SC

Al 6

061

Si

C p

15 vo

l.

23

Solu

tion

treat

ed, q

uenc

hed,

an

d ag

ed

Inte

ract

ion

of h

eat t

reat

men

t par

amet

er h

as h

ighe

r inf

luen

ce

than

indi

vidu

al p

aram

eter

effe

ct

[71]

20

SC

LM6

Si

O 2p

5, 1

0, 1

5, 2

0,

25, 3

0 vo

l.

65

–

Com

pres

sive

stre

ngth

of S

iO2p

was

mor

e ef

fect

ive

than

tens

ile

stre

ngth

of A

MCs

[7

2]


Sr. n

o.

Fabr

icat

ion

proc

ess

Ty

pe o

f Al

Re

info

rcin

g el

emen

t

Heat

trea

tmen

t (HT

)

Outc

omes

Re

f.

Type

%

Pa

rtic

le s

ize

( μm

)

21

SC

7075

B 4C p

5,

10,

15,

20

vol.

16

–20

T6

Ul

timat

e te

nsile

, com

pres

sion

, har

dnes

s, a

nd fl

exur

al s

treng

th

incr

ease

d w

ith B

4C p

[7

3]

22

PM

Al

Si3N 4p

5,

10,

15

wt.

0.

1–0.

3

–

10%

wt.

Si3N 4p

enh

ance

d be

tter t

rans

vers

e ru

ptur

e st

reng

th,

dens

ity, a

nd h

ardn

ess

than

5%

and

15%

wt.

[7

4]

23

PI

Al-4

.5%

Mg

BN

p

5, 7

.5 vo

l.

8

Solu

tion

treat

.

Tens

ile s

treng

th in

crea

sed

due

to fo

rmat

ion

of A

lN a

nd g

rain

re

finem

ent

[7

5]

24

SC

AA 2

024

B 4C p

3,

5, 7

, 10

vol.

29

, 71

–

Co

arse

r B4C p d

ispe

rsed

mor

e un

iform

ly th

an fi

ner B

4C p

[76]

25

Mol

ten

met

al

proc

ess

Al

606

1

Al2O 3p

10

, 20

vol.

–

T6

El

onga

tion

incr

ease

d an

d te

nsile

stre

ngth

dec

reas

ed w

hen

tem

pera

ture

was

rais

ed fr

om 2

0°C

to 2

50°C

[7

7]

26

SC

AlSi

10M

g

RHA p

3,

6, 9

, 12

wt.

50

–75

–

Te

nsile

, com

pres

sion

stre

ngth

, and

har

dnes

s of

AM

Cs e

nhan

ced

with

RHA

p

[7

8]

Tabl

e 1

(con

tinue

d)

weaken the interfacial bond between the matrix and the reinforcement. Thus, a small amount of SiCp is consumed due to the described reaction, which reduces the actual quantity of added SiCp. Moreover, silicon leads to non-homogeneous distribution of reinforcement in the matrix. Hence, the AMC quality deteriorates.

4 34Al SiC Al C 3Si+ → + (8)

Ramesh et al. [82] performed electroless Ni-P coating on SiCp, which eliminates the above unwanted inter-facial reaction. The metallic coating on the ceramic particles increases the surface energy of the ceramic particles, which improves the wettability by making a better contacting interface to metal with metal despite the metal being mixed with a ceramic [31]. Davidson and Regener [66] studied the tensile strength of Cu coated and uncoated SiCp with Al matrix. They observed a decohesion between the particulates and the matrix in the case of the uncoated particle-reinforced composite. Li et al. [83] observed an enhancement in the ultimate tensile strength for Bi2O3 coated on the aluminum borate whisker-reinforced AMCs. TiB2p-coated B4Cp-reinforced AMCs exhibited better tensile strength and hardness than uncoated AMCs [84].

Electroless Ni-P-coated Si3N4p-reinforced AMCs were fabricated by Ramesh et al. [85] through SC. They reported that interfacial region was free from any reaction during the fabrication of AMCs. Hence, a good interfacial bonding between matrix and reinforcement was observed. The UTS value was increased to 99% for 10 wt.% Ni-P-coated Si3N4p-reinforced AMCs compared with that of the matrix.

The secondary process like extrusion, rolling, and forging are also carried out on AMCs to improve the mechanical properties. Extrusion processes reduces the reinforcing particle size. Also, by reducing plastic defor-mation and pull out tendency of reinforcement from the matrix, composite properties can be enhanced [82]. Cöcen and Önel reported that extruded specimens have superior strength and ductility compared to cast specimens. In casted samples, the tensile strength of the AMCs increases up to 17 vol.% SiCp, and after that, upon further addition, it decreases, while tensile strength of the AMCs increase up to 26 vol.% SiCp for the extruded AMCs. The significant finding in this paper is that the extrusion process is more fruitful in the matrix with a higher reinforcement percent-age for property enhancement [67].

The rolling process closes the pores and, thus, results in improved hardness and UTS of AMCs [86]. It also has been reported that hot rolled Al2O3p or carbon particle-reinforced AMCs have better tensile properties than cold rolled ones [87].


Badini et al. [68] reported that neither breaking of SiCp nor void formation occurs at interfaces during tensile testing at 300°C for forged AMCs. AlxFeNi intermetal-lic compounds have been observed in forged specimens, which promoted dynamic recrystallization of the matrix during the forging. Hence, dislocation motion was inhib-ited, which leads to enhanced stability of the matrix at a high temperature [69].

HT is a heating and cooling process used on metal for further enhancement of the mechanical properties and is successfully applied on the AMCs. Srivatsan and Al-Hajri [70] concluded that UTS at 27°C of peak-aged was lower than under-aged specimens, but at 120°C, UTS was nearly similar for both heat-treated samples. Mahadevan et al. [71] success-fully modeled Brinell hardness (Y) as expressed in equation (9), with HT parameter like aging time (At), solutionizing time (St), and aging temperature (AT). The correlation coef-ficient (R) was 0.82, which indicates that the developed model has good correlation with the experimental data.

95.72 7.906 St 10.78 AT 7.78 At7.63 St AT 3.63 AT At 2.081 St AT At

Y = + ∗ + ∗ + ∗− ∗ ∗ − ∗ ∗ + ∗ ∗ (9)

It has been reported that extrusion with T6 HT showed better tensile properties and hardness compared to grav-ity-casted SiCp-reinforced AMCs, due to better equiaxed structure and homogeneous particle distribution in the matrix [88].

Sulaiman et al. [72] investigated the SiO2p-reinforced AMCs using the CO2 sand molding method. Tensile strength and modulus decreased with an increase in SiO2p. Because of the compressive nature of SiO2p, compressive strength has better influence than tensile strength. For 5 wt.% CNT-reinforced AMCs, improvement up to 50% in tensile strength as well as 23% in stiffness compared with those of pure Al has been observed [89].

Baradeswaran and Elaya Perumal [73] observed that the addition of K2TiF6 eliminates oxide formation, which encourages wettability. Ceramic reinforcement resists dislocation motion, which offers resistance against frac-ture. B4Cp provides more restriction on plastic flow during deformation and tends to improve compressive strength.

Arik [74] observed more homogenous Si3N4p dispersion in mechanical alloying processes than in conventional mixing in the Al matrix and reported significant improve-ment in AMC properties. A large amount of Si3N4p in the matrix resulted in cold welding as well as easy fracturing. In this investigation, 10% of the Si3N4p-reinforced AMCs have demonstrated better transverse rupture strength, density, and hardness compared with 5% and 15% of the Si3N4p-reinforced AMCs.

Lee et al. [75] studied the pressureless infiltration (PI) method using 5% and 7.5% vol. BNp-reinforced AMCs. Aluminum nitride formed due to the reaction between Al and BNp increases the UTS as shown in the equation:

(s) (l) (s) 2(s)BN Al AlN B(inAl) AlB+ → + + (10)

SiCp-reinforced AMCs have exhibited better ultimate tensile strength, hardness, and compressive strength compared with Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs and cenosphere-reinforced AMCs. Another important finding was that 8% of SiCp-reinforced AMCs have exhibited better ultimate tensile strength and compressive strength compared with 12% and 16% SiCp-reinforced AMCs, while the hardness of 16% SiCp-reinforced AMCs was better than the 8% and 12% SiCp-reinforced AMCs [90].

Abdizadeh et al. [91] investigated the mechanical properties of AMCs by comparing ZrSiO4p and TiB2p rein-forcement. They also evaluated the effect of the pro-cessing temperature of AMCs, fabricated through the SC process. TiB2p has better wettability than ZrSiO4p, so TiB2p-reinforced AMCs have better performance. TiB2p

has a lower heat expansion coefficient than of that of ZrSiO4p; hence, TiB2p-reinforced AMCs have been found to be better at 850°C and ZrSiO4p-reinforced AMCs at 750°C.

Fly ash is industrial waste, low in cost and success-fully used as reinforcement for fabrication of AMCs [92]. The UTS and hardness increased with the addition of FAp [93], while the impact strength and ductility of AMCs decreased [94].

Rice husk is a commonly available agricultural element, successfully used as reinforcement for AMC fab-rication [95, 96]. Tensile strength, compressive strength, and hardness of AMCs have been enhanced, while ductil-ity decreased with increasing RHAp. The RHAp act as barri-ers and harden the Al matrix [78].

Particle swarm optimization, multiple linear regres-sion and genetic algorithm, etc., techniques are frequently used for modeling and optimization of the mechanical properties. Shabani and Mazahery [86] have proposed the hybrid PSO-GA-based novel method, which predicts the mechanical properties of the Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs with better accuracy and reliability than the single optimiza-tion method.

Lee et al. [97] have modeled the particle clustering effect of the ceramic particle-reinforced AMCs. The model was compared with the TiCp-reinforced AMCs fabricated through PM. The representative volume element based on the tetrakaidecahedral grain boundary structure was reconstructed for 5 vol.% TiCp-reinforced AMCs through modified random sequential adsorption. The clustered


particle arrangement model has a better agreement than the random particle arrangement model with experimen-tal results.

4.2 Aluminum matrix composite based on multiple reinforcements

When at least two reinforcements are present in the matrix, they form as multiple-reinforced AMCs. By coop-erative effects of various reinforcement combinations, the AMCs tend to further enrich the mechanical properties. Table 2 shows the mechanical characterization of the mul-tiple particulate-reinforced AMCs.

SiCp ceramic and FAp industrial by-products have been used for the enhancement of the tensile strength of the AMCs from 173 MPa to 213 MPa. Also, the hardness value increased from 69.53 HV to 78.8 HV [98]. Mahendra and Radhakrishna [103] also observed that the tensile strength, compressive strength and impact strength increased with SiCp and FAp % in the AMCs.

The strength of the AMCs has been increased by the addition of the hard ceramic Al2O3p in the matrix. The com-pressive strength of the 8-wt.% Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs was 10% higher than that of the matrix, while the flex-ural strength of the 8-wt.% Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs was increased up to 23% compared with that of the Al 7075. The Grp addition in the AMCs tends to form a thin layer on the tribo surface, which reduces wear, even though hardness is reduced [99]. Baradeswaran et al. [104] have studied the effect of 10 wt.% of B4Cp and 5 wt.% of Grp in AA 6061 and AA 7075 matrix. It has been observed that hybrid-reinforced AA 7075 has found better tensile strength and hardness than hybrid-reinforced AA 6061.

Kumar et al. [105] have investigated the wear per-formance of the 4-wt.% Grp and the 1 to 4 wt.% of the WCp-reinforced AMCs. The AMCs became more brittle by increasing WCp percentage; another important finding was that Al6061 with 3 wt.% WCp has higher hardness than that of the 4-wt.% WCp composite.

Thermomagnetic treatment was applied by Li et al. on aluminum borate (Al18B4O33) and iron oxide (Fe3O4)-reinforced AMCs. The specimens were subjected to ther-momagnetic treatment at 100°C for 1 h with a pulsed magnetic field of 400 kA/m. A higher tensile strength has been reported after thermomagnetic treatment [106].

A neural network is capable of identifying trends from the given data; thus, it is frequently used for prediction. The neural network result has good agreement with the experimental data, for tensile strength, bending strength, and hardness for the 2-, 4-, 8-, 10-, 16-, 20-, 27-, 38-, 45-, Ta

ble

2: M

echa

nica

l cha

ract

eriz

atio

n of

mul

tiple

par

ticul

ate-

rein

forc

ed A

MCs

.

Sr. n

o.

Fabr

icat

ion

proc

ess

Ty

pe o

f Al

Re

info

rcin

g el

emen

t

Heat

trea

tmen

t (H

T)

Outc

omes

Re

f.

Type

%

Pa

rtic

le s

ize

(μm

)

1

SC a

nd C

C3

Al 6

061

Si

C p and

FAp

Si

C p 7.5

, 10

and

FAp

7.5

wt.

–

–

En

hanc

emen

t of t

ensi

le s

treng

th a

nd h

ardn

ess

with

ad

ding

of S

iCp a

nd FA

p

[9

8]

2

SC

Al 7

075

Al

2O 3p an

d Gr

p

2, 4

, 6, 8

wt.

of

Al2O 3p

and

5 w

t. Gr

p 16

T6

Ad

ditio

n of

Al 2O 3p

incr

ease

s th

e te

nsile

stre

ngth

, co

mpr

essi

on s

treng

th, f

lexu

ral s

treng

th, a

nd h

ardn

ess

[99]

3

SC

A332

Al

2O 3p an

d Si

C p

10 vo

l.

2 to

87

–

Be

ndin

g st

reng

th a

nd h

ardn

ess

resi

stan

ce d

ecre

ased

w

ith in

crea

sing

par

ticle

siz

e

[100

]

4

SC

A332

Al

2O 3p an

d Si

C p

10 vo

l.

2 to

87

–

Te

nsile

stre

ngth

incr

ease

d w

ith d

ecre

asin

g pa

rtic

le

size

[1

01]

5

CC

Al w

ith 1

, 2, 3

, 4,

5 C

u w

t.%

SiC p

5,

10

vol.

20

0 m

esh

size

–

Po

rosi

ty in

crea

sed

with

SiC

p an

d ha

rdne

ss in

crea

sed

with

SiC

p an

d Cu

add

ition

[1

02]


49-, 53-, 60-, 67-, 75-, and 87-μm particle size-reinforced AMCs [100, 101]. Comparison of the different algorithms like Levenberg-Marquardt, quasi-Newton, resilient back propagation and variable learning rate back propa-gation for the prediction of the bending strength and hardness carried out using the Al2O3p/SiCp-reinforced AMCs by changing the size of the particle was done. The Levenberg-Marquardt was found to be the fastest converg-ing algorithm along with the highest accuracy among all the algorithms [107].

5 Product application of AMCsThe AMCs are found to have excellent mechanical proper-ties; hence, they are used for product development. The product applications of the AMCs with its mechanical per-formance are mentioned in Table 3.

In the automobile, the piston of the compressor used in the air conditioner was fabricated successfully with SiCp and Sip-reinforced AMCs through PM, followed by extrusion (500°C with 8:1 extrusion ratio) and the forging process. Grain size decreased from 47 to 19 μm due to extrusion. Wear resistance, tensile strength and hardness of the AMCs were enhanced with the addition of SiCp [108].

SiCp (20–30 wt.%)-reinforced AMCs have been fab-ricated through the SC and PM methods. The hardness, radial crushing load, and wear resistance of SiCp-rein-forced AMCs was found to be better than cast iron; hence, it was found to be a possible replacement for CI as a poppet valve guide [109].

An electronic package for a remote power control-ler were fabricated using SiCp-reinforced AMCs, which gave high thermal conductivity, controllable coefficient of thermal expansion, and low density [114, 115]; hence, this is used in communication satellites [116]. The SiCp-reinforced AMCs have found utility in microprocessor and optoelectronic packaging applications [9]. Al2O3 fiber-reinforced AMCs have better strength and stiffness; hence, they are suitable for power transmission cables [9, 117].

A high-gain antenna boom for the Hubble space telescope was fabricated using the Gr fibre-reinforced AMCs through the diffusion bonding method. The AMCs provide better stiffness, low coefficient of thermal expan-sion, and better electrical conductivity; hence, they are useful in space applications [116]. The SiCp-reinforced AMCs have been used as a fan-exit guide vane of the Pratt and Whitney engine for the Boeing 777 [9]. Flight control hydraulic manifolds have been fabricated by 40 vol.% SiCp-reinforced AMCs and are a successful utility in aero-space applications [17]. Ta

ble

3: P

rodu

ct a

pplic

atio

ns o

f AM

Cs.

Sr. n

o.

Type

of A

l

Fabr

icat

ion

proc

ess

Re

info

rcin

g pa

rtic

le

Prod

uct a

pplic

atio

n

Ref.

no.

Type

%

Si

ze (μ

m)

1

Al

PM

Sip a

nd S

iCp

Si

p (10,

12

wt.)

and

Si

C p (5, 1

0 w

t.)

–

Air c

ondi

tione

r com

pres

sor p

isto

n [1

08]

2

Al

PM a

s w

ell a

s SC

Si

C p

5, 1

0, 1

5, 2

0, 2

5,

30 w

t.

–

Popp

et va

lve

guid

e

[109

]

3

A359

In

vest

men

t cas

ting

(IC)

Si

C p and

B4C p

20

SiC p a

nd 7

.5 B

4C p

35–3

8 μm

for b

oth

SiC p a

nd B

4C p

Pick

-hol

der

[1

10]

4

A 35

6 FG

CM

SC a

nd C

G

SiC p

20

wt.

23

Br

ake

disc

[1

11]

5

Al-S

i allo

y

SQ

Al2O 3p

and

Nip

2,

3 w

t. of

Al 2O 3p

and

5, 1

0, 1

5 w

t. of

Ni

60

nm

for A

l 2O 3p a

nd 6

μm

for N

i p

Pist

on

[112

]

6

AA 2

124

PM

Si

C p, B4C p, A

l 2O 3p

10, 2

0, 3

0 vo

l.

SiC p (2

, 20,

53,

167

), B 4C

(1–7

), Al

2O 3, (1,

20–

50)

Au

tom

obile

cam

mat

eria

l

[113

]


The IC process has been successfully deployed to fab-ricate the pick-holder, a part used in the textile sector. The AMCs have better microhardness and wear resistance than the matrix alloy, and also, it was observed that the parti-cles were uniformly distributed in the pick-holder [110].

A brake disc using FGCM was manufactured via the SC and CG methods. Because of the action of the cen-trifugal force, the distribution of the reinforcement was varied in different zones of the brake disc. The minimum reinforcement distribution at the inner periphery and the maximum reinforcement distribution at the outer periph-ery were observed; hence, more hardness was observed at the outer periphery of the brake disc [111].

El-Labban et al. [112] studied the effect of nano Al2O3p and micro Nip-reinforced Al-Si-based piston alloy on mechanical behavior. They reported the highest UTS for 5 wt.% Ni and 2 wt.% nano Al2O3p-reinforced AMCs. Moreover, ductility improved due to Al2O3p and Nip addition in matrix.

An automobile cam was fabricated by Karamış et al. [113], and the hardness of the GGG40 cam material was compared with those of SiCp, Al2O3p, and B4Cp-reinforced AA2124. The hardness of the 20-μm-size SiCp 30% vol. was approximately 90% compared to the induction-hardened GGG40 material. The AMCs reinforced with B4Cp or SiCp were reported to be superior in specific wear resistance compared with GGG40; hence, the product application for the automobile cam profiles was found.

6 Concluding remarksThe objective of the present paper was to highlight the current research on the fabrication processes and the mechanical characterization of the AMCs, including product application. The following concluding remarks are drawn from the present work:

– The most commonly used fabrication techniques for the production of AMCs are briefly discussed in the present article. Among all of them, SC and PM are more frequently used. Secondary fabrication pro-cesses like extrusion, rolling and forging are suc-cessfully implemented for the further enrichment of mechanical properties. Development of re-cycling technology for the AMCs is still an open-ended area in which a lot of exclusive research can be done.

– The mechanical properties of the AMCs depend upon the types of matrix, reinforcements (individual, mul-tiple, percentage, size, distribution in matrix), wet-tability and reaction during the fabrication process. Industrial and agricultural waste used as a reinforcing

element minimized the overall cost of the AMCs. Less work has been reported on the nano particle-rein-forced composite, which requires more investigation for the fabrication process and mechanical property enhancement of nano composites.

– Several modeling and simulation techniques have been developed for the prediction of mechanical properties. Integration of multiple modeling tech-niques predicts the response with higher accuracy and reliability than the individual method. How-ever, the various fabrication processes involve multi-input parameters, which makes difficult to predict he mechanical properties exactly. Thus, comprehensive modeling and simulation for fabrication processes and mechanical characterization covering phenom-enological interactions are yet to be fully explored.

– AMCs have found successful use in space technology, aircraft industry, automobile component, electrical and electronic field, and other product applications. It is also concluded that exclusive research is required to explore the use of AMCs at efficient as well as economical scale.

Acknowledgments: This work is part of a research project supported by Gujarat Council on Science and Technology, Gujarat, India (GUJCOST) (GUJCOST/MRP/16-17/273). The authors express their gratitude toward the GUJCOST for providing financial support.

References[1] Rao RN, Das S. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, 1200–1207.[2] Song JI, Bong HD, Han KS. Scr. Metall. Mater. 1995, 33, 1307–1313.[3] Park HC. Scr. Metall. Mater. 1992, 27, 465–470.[4] Huda Z, Edi P. Mater. Des. 2013, 46, 552–560.[5] Kaw AK. Mechanics of Composite Materials, CRC Press: Boca

Raton, FL, 2005.[6] Clyne TW, Withers PJ. An Introduction to Metal Matrix Compos-

ites, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1995.[7] Chung DDL. Composite Materials: Science and Applications,

Springer: London, 2010.[8] Davim J, Ed. Machining of Metal Matrix Composites, Springer-

Verlag: Berlin, 2012.[9] Chawla N, Chawla KK. Metal Matrix Composites, Springer:

Berlin, 2006.[10] Gultekin D, Uysal M, Aslan S, Alaf M, Guler MO, Akbulut H.

Wear 2010, 270, 73–82.[11] Zhang S, Wang F. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2007, 182,

122–127.[12] Ashby MF, Jones DRH. Engineering Materials 2: An Introduction

to Microstructures, Processing and Design, Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, 2014.

[13] Baradeswaran A, Perumal AE, Davim J. J. Balkan Tribol. Assoc. 2014, 19, 230–239.


[14] Basavarajappa S, Chandramohan G, Paulo Davim J. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 1393–1398.

[15] Shah MA. Nanotechnology Applications for Improvements in Energy Efficiency and Environmental Management, IGI Global: Hershey, PA, 2014.

[16] Davim JP. Tribology of Nanocomposites, Springer: Berlin, 2013.[17] Surappa MK. Sadhana 2003, 28, 319–334.[18] Leon CA, Drew RAL. J. Mater. Sci. 2000, 35, 4763–4768.[19] Asthana R. J. Mater. Sci. 1998, 33, 1959–1980.[20] Koli DK, Agnihotri G, Purohit R. Procedia Mater. Sci. 2014, 6,

567–589.[21] Sajjadi SA, Ezatpour HR, Torabi Parizi M. Mater. Des. 2012, 34,

106–111.[22] Rajan TPD, Pillai RM, Pai BC, Satyanarayana KG, Rohatgi PK.

Compos. Sci. Technol. 2007, 67, 3369–3377.[23] Barekar N, Tzamtzis S, Dhindaw BK, Patel J, Hari Babu N, Fan Z.

J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2009, 18, 1230–1240.[24] Dwivedi SP, Kumar S, Kumar A. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2012, 26,

3973–3979.[25] Moffatt HK. Phys. Fluids A 1991, 3, 1336–1343.[26] Yu H, Zhu M. Acta Metall. Sin. (Engl. Lett.) 2009, 22, 461–467.[27] Kumar A, Lal S, Kumar S. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2013, 2,

250–254.[28] Dwivedi SP, Sharma S, Mishra RK. J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.

2015, 37, 57–67.[29] Dwivedi SP, Sharma S, Mishra RK. Procedia Mater. Sci. 2014, 6,

1524–1532.[30] Hong S-J, Kim H-M, Huh D, Suryanarayana C, Chun BS. Mater.

Sci. Eng. A 2003, 347, 198–204.[31] Hashim J, Looney L, Hashmi MSJ. J. Mater. Process. Technol.

1999, 92–93, 1–7.[32] Hashim J, Looney L, Hashmi MSJ. J. Mater. Process. Technol.

2002, 123, 251–257.[33] Wu TY, Guo N, Teh CY, Hay JXW. Theory and Fundamentals of

Ultrasound, Advances in Ultrasound Technology for Environ-mental Remediation, Springer: Netherlands, 2013, pp 5–12.

[34] Eskin GI, Eskin DG. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2003, 10, 297–301.[35] Puga H, Teixeira JC, Barbosa J, Seabra E, Ribeiro S, Prokic M.

Mater. Lett. 2009, 63, 2089–2092.[36] Liu Z, Han Q, Li J, Huang W. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2012,

212, 365–371.[37] Kai X, Tian K, Wang C, Jiao L, Chen G, Zhao Y. J. Alloys Compd.

2016, 668, 121–127.[38] Mohanty P, Mishra Dilip K, Varma S, Mishra K, Padhi P. Sci. Eng.

Compos. Mater. 2016, 23, 481.[39] Harichandran R, Selvakumar N. Arch. Civil Mech. Eng. 2016, 16,

147–158.[40] Liu Z, Han Q, Li J. Compos B: Eng. 2011, 42, 2080–2084.[41] Montalba C, Eskin DG, Miranda A, Rojas D, Ramam K. Mater.

Des. 2015, 84, 110–117.[42] Kitazono K, Sato E, Kuribayashi K. Scr. Mater. 2004, 50,

495–498.[43] Alizadeh M, Paydar MH. J. Alloys Compd. 2010, 492, 231–235.[44] Rezayat M, Akbarzadeh A, Owhadi A. Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci.

Manuf. 2012, 43, 261–267.[45] Rajan TPD, Pai BC. Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 2010, 62, 383–389.[46] Duque NB, Melgarejo ZH, Suárez OM. Mater. Charact. 2005, 55,

167–171.[47] Karun AS, Rajan T, Pillai U, Pai B, Rajeev V, Farook A. J. Compos.

Mater. 2016, 50, 2255–2269.

[48] Savaş Ö, Kayıkcı R, Fiçici F, Çolak M, Deniz G, Varol F. Sci. Eng. Compos. Mater. 2016, 23, 155–159.

[49] Abdizadeh H, Ebrahimifard R, Baghchesara MA. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2014, 56, 217–221.

[50] Gopalakrishnan S, Murugan N. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2012, 43, 302–308.

[51] Hashim J, Looney L, Hashmi MSJ. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2001, 119, 324–328.

[52] Akhlaghi F, Zare-Bidaki A. Wear 2009, 266, 37–45.[53] Mistry JM, Gohil PP. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part J J. Eng. Tribol.

2017, 231, 399–421.[54] Chung DD, Composite Materials: Science and

Applications, Springer Science & Business Media: New York, NY, 2010.

[55] Dowling NE. Mechanical Behavior of Materials: Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and Fatigue, Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1993.

[56] Ashby MF, Jones DRH, Engineering Materials 1: An Introduction to Their Properties and Applications, Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, 1996.

[57] Taheri-Nassaj E, Kobashi M, Choh T. Scr. Metall. Mater. 1995, 32, 1923–1929.

[58] Veeresh Kumar GB, Rao CSP, Selvaraj N. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2012, 43, 1185–1191.

[59] Diler EA, Ipek R. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2013, 50, 371–380.[60] Kok M. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2005, 161, 381–387.[61] Vedani M, D’Errico F, Gariboldi E. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2006,

66, 343–349.[62] Ceschini L, Minak G, Morri A. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2006, 66,

333–342.[63] Karbalaei Akbari M, Baharvandi HR, Mirzaee O. Compos. Part

B: Eng. 2013, 52, 262–268.[64] Zebarjad SM, Sajjadi SA. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 2113–2120.[65] Corrochano J, Lieblich M, Ibáñez J. Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci.

Manuf. 2011, 42, 1093–1099.[66] Davidson AM, Regener D. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2000, 60,

865–869.[67] Cöcen Ü, Önel K. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2002, 62, 275–282.[68] Badini C, La Vecchia GM, Fino P, Valente T. J. Mater. Process.

Technol. 2001, 116, 289–297.[69] Ceschini L, Minak G, Morri A. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2009, 69,

1783–1789.[70] Srivatsan TS, Al-Hajri M. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2002, 33,

391–404.[71] Mahadevan K, Raghukandan K, Senthilvelan T, Pai BC, Pillai

UTS. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2006, 171, 314–318.[72] Sulaiman S, Sayuti M, Samin R. J. Mater. Process. Technol.

2008, 201, 731–735.[73] Baradeswaran A, Elaya Perumal A. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2013,

54, 146–152.[74] Arik H. Mater. Des. 2008, 29, 1856–1861.[75] Lee KB, Sim HS, Heo SW, Yoo HR, Cho SY, Kwon H. Compos. Part

A: Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2002, 33, 709–715.[76] Canakci A, Arslan F, Varol T. Sci. Eng. Compos. Mater. 2014, 21,

505–515.[77] Gariboldi E, Lo Conte A. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2008, 68,

260–267.[78] Saravanan SD, Kumar MS. Procedia Eng. 2013, 64, 1505–1513.[79] Lakshmipathy J, Kulendran B. Sci. Eng. Compos. Mater. 2015,

22, 573–582.


[80] Mazaheri Y, Meratian M, Emadi R, Najarian AR. Mater. Sci. Eng.: A. 2013, 560, 278–287.

[81] Lai S-W, Chung DDL. J. Mater. Chem. 1996, 6, 469–477.[82] Ramesh CS, Keshavamurthy R, Naveen GJ. Wear 2011, 271,

1868–1877.[83] Li ZJ, Wang LD, Yue HY, Fei WD. J. Mater. Sci. 2007, 42,

9355–9358.[84] Mazahery A, Shabani MO. Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 2013, 66,

171–176.[85] Ramesh CS, Keshavamurthy R, Channabasappa BH, Ahmed A.

Mater. Sci. Eng.: A. 2009, 502, 99–106.[86] Shabani MO, Mazahery A. Eng. Comput. 2014, 30, 559–568.[87] Daoud A, El-Bitar T, El-Azim AA. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2003,

12, 390–397.[88] Sahin I, Akdogan Eker A. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2011, 20,

1090–1096.[89] Esawi AMK, Morsi K, Sayed A, Taher M, Lanka S. Compos. Sci.

Technol. 2010, 70, 2237–2241.[90] Ekka KK, Chauhan S, Varun. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part J: J. Eng.

Tribol. 2014, 228, 682–691.[91] Abdizadeh H, Baharvandi HR, Moghaddam KS. Mater. Sci. Eng.:

A. 2008, 498, 53–58.[92] Rohatgi PK. JOM. 1994, 46, 55–59.[93] Ramachandra M, Radhakrishna K. J. Mater. Sci. 2005, 40,

5989–5997.[94] Kumar KR, Mohanasundaram KM, Subramanian R, Anandavel

B. Sci. Eng. Compos. Mater. 2014, 21, 181–189.[95] Majeed K, Hassan A, Bakar AA, Jawaid M. J. Thermoplast. Com-

pos. Mater. 2016, 29, 1003–1019.[96] Alaneme KK, Adewale TM, Olubambi PA. J. Mater. Res. Technol.

2014, 3, 9–16.[97] Lee WJ, Kim YJ, Kang NH, Park IM, Park YH. Mech. Compos.

Mater. 2011, 46, 639–648.

[98] David Raja Selvam J, Robinson Smart DS, Dinaharan I. Energy Procedia 2013, 34, 637–646.

[99] Baradeswaran A, Elaya Perumal A. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2014, 56, 464–471.

[100] Altinkok N, Koker R. Mater. Des. 2004, 25, 595–602.[101] Altinkok N, Koker R. Mater. Des. 2006, 27, 625–631.[102] Hassan AM, Alrashdan A, Hayajneh MT, Mayyas AT. J. Mater.

Process. Technol. 2009, 209, 894–899.[103] Mahendra KV, Radhakrishna K. J. Compos. Mater. 2010, 44,

989–1005.[104] Baradeswaran A, Vettivel SC, Elaya Perumal A, Selvakumar N,

Franklin Issac R. Mater. Des. 2014, 63, 620–632.[105] Kumar GV, Swamy A, Ramesha A. J. Compos. Mater. 2012, 46,

2111–2122.[106] Li G, Fei WD, Li Y. J. Mater. Sci. 2005, 40, 511–514.[107] Koker R, Altinkok N, Demir A. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 616–627.[108] Lee HS, Yeo JS, Hong SH, Yoon DJ, Na KH. J. Mater. Process.

Technol. 2001, 113, 202–208.[109] Purohit R, Sagar R. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2010, 51, 685–698.[110] Previtali B, Pocci D, Taccardo C. Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci.

Manuf. 2008, 39, 1606–1617.[111] Babu KV, Jappes JW, Rajan T, Uthayakumar M. Proc. Inst.

Mech. Eng. Part L: J. Mater. Des. Appl. 2016, 230, 182–189.[112] El-Labban HF, Abdelaziz M, Mahmoud ERI. J. King Saud Univ.

Eng. Sci. 2016, 28, 230–239.[113] Karamış MB, Alper Cerit A, Selçuk B, Nair F. Wear 2012, 289,

73–81.[114] Thaw C, Minet R, Zemany J, Zweben C. JOM 1987, 39, 55.[115] Miracle DB. Affordable Metal-Matrix Composites for High

Performance Applications II, John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, 2001, pp 1–22.

[116] Rawal SP. JOM 2001, 53, 14–17.[117] Miracle DB. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2005, 65, 2526–2540.

Documents

Jitendra M. Mistry and Piyush P. Gohil* Research review of