| Literature DB >> 35808030 |
Zaib Un Nisa1, Lee Kean Chuan1, Beh Hoe Guan1, Saba Ayub1, Faiz Ahmad2.
Abstract
Erosion caused by the repeated impact of particles on the surface of a substance is a common wear method resulting in the gradual and continual loss of affected objects. It is a crucial problem in several modern industries because the surfaces of various products and materials are frequently subjected to destructively erosive situations. Polymers and their hybrid materials are suitable, in powdered form, for use as coatings in several different applications. This review paper aims to provide extensive information on the erosion behaviors of thermoset and thermoplastic neat resin and their hybrid material composites. Specific attention is paid to the influence of the properties of selected materials and to impingement parameters such as the incident angle of the erodent, the impact velocity of the erodent, the nature of the erodent, and the erosion mechanism. The review further extends the information available about the erosion techniques and numerical simulation methods used for wear studies of surfaces. An investigation was carried out to allow researchers to explore the available selection of materials and methods in terms of the conditions and parameters necessary to meet current and future needs and challenges, in technologically advanced industries, relating to the protection of surfaces. During the review, which was conducted on the findings in the literature of the past fifty years, it was noted that the thermoplastic nature of composites is a key component in determining their anti-wear properties; moreover, composites with lower glass transition, higher ductility, and greater crystallinity provide better protection against erosion in advanced surface applications.Entities:
Keywords: erosion efficiency; erosion rate; erosive wear; fiber-reinforced composites; nanocomposite; polymer; surface erosion; surface protection; thermoplastic polymers; thermoset polymers
Year: 2022 PMID: 35808030 PMCID: PMC9268736 DOI: 10.3390/nano12132194
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.719
Figure 1Erosion effects on surfaces.
Figure 2Factors governing erosion phenomena.
Figure 3Historical utilization of materials for surface protection.
Figure 4Minimum reported erosion efficiencies of neat polymers at optimized impact velocity using different erodents [15,24].
Figure 5Minimum reported erosion rate (×10−7) of neat polymers at optimized impact velocity using different erodents [92].
Data on the erosion rates of neat thermoset and thermoplastic polymers.
| Sr. no | Nomenclature | Material Density | Hardness Value | Erodent Used | Impingement Velocity | Erosion Rate | Coefficient of Wear | Remarks | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||
| 1. | PA66 | 1.14 | 11.1 | Quartz | 243 | 2.30 × 10−6 | N.R. | Study of material response in erosive situations in relation to matrix–particle interaction | 1970 | [ |
| 2. | Polystyrene | 1.16 | 11.9 | Glass beads | 15 | 0.06 × 10−9 | N.R. | Study of erosion behavior of PS | 1981 | [ |
| 20 | 0.14 × 10−9 | |||||||||
| 40 | 0.16 × 10−9 | |||||||||
| 3. | PA6 | 1.15 | 10.2 | SiO2 | 80 | 9.08 × 10−9 | N.R. | Study of erosive wear of PA | 2001 | [ |
| 4. | PA66 | 1.14 | 11.1 | -do- | 80 | 7.02 × 10−9 | ||||
| 5. | Aromatic PA | 1.12 | 11.7 | -do- | 80 | 19.64 × 10−9 | ||||
| 6. | TPU-1 | 1.14 | 14.5 | Corundum | 70 | 0.74 × 10−9 | N.R. | Study of erosion process and factors affecting it | 2002 | [ |
| 7. | PEK | 1.32 | 32.6 | SiO2 | 39 | 4.92 × 10−9 | N.R. | Study of morphology and possible wear mechanism | 2003 | [ |
| 8. | PEI | 1.27 | 40 | SiO2 | 25 | 4 × 10−8 | 1.26 × 10−2 | Relation of erosion rate and mechanical properties of the neat polymer was studied | 2008 | [ |
| 9. | PEEK | 1.30 | 28 | 3 × 10−8 | 6.06 × 10−3 | |||||
| 10. | PEK | 1.30 | 34.4 | 5 × 10−8 | 6.88 × 10−3 | |||||
| 11. | PPS | 1.40 | 26.5 | 2 × 10−8 | 4.46 × 10−3 | |||||
| 12. | PES | 1.37 | 24.2 | 3 × 10−8 | 5.12 × 10−3 | |||||
| 13. | PSU | 1.24 | 21.4 | 1 × 10−8 | 4.76 × 10−3 | |||||
| 14. | UHMWPE | 0.93 | N.R. | 4 × 10−9 | N.R. | |||||
| 15. | PEEK | 1.3 | 32.6 | SiC | 34 | 0.25 × 10−8 | 0.25 × 10 −8 | Study of mechanism and wear process | 2017 | [ |
|
| ||||||||||
| 16. | PP | 0.91 | 5.40 | Quartz | 243 | 3.10 × 10−6 | N.R. | Details of material interaction with the particle in erosive conditions | 1970 | [ |
| 17. | EP | 1.2 | 40.8 | 10.0 × 10−5 | ||||||
| 18. | Bismaleimide | 1.33 | 54.1 | Alumina | 60 | 3.44 × 10−6 | 96 | Study of erosion behavior | 1991 | [ |
| 19. | PU-1 | 1.26 | 18.1 | Corundum | 70 | 1.11 × 10−9 | N.R. | Study of erosion process and factors affecting it | 2002 | [ |
Abbreviations used: PA = polyamide, PP = polypropylene, EP = epoxy, PU = polyurethane, TPU = thermoplastic polyurethane, PEK = polyether ketone, PEEK = polyether ether ketone, PEI = polyetherimide, PPS = polyphenylene sulfide, PES = polyether sulfone, PSU = polysulfone, UHMWPE = ultra-high-density polyethylene, N.R. = not reported.
Data on the erosion rates of GF/CF-reinforced composites.
| Sr. no | Nomenclature | Material Density | Hardness Value | Erodent Used | Impingement Velocity | Erosion Rate | Coefficient of Wear | Remarks | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | BMI + 20 bisphenol | 1.29 | 53.4 | Alumina | 60 | 6.14 × 10−6 | 193 | Study of erosion behavior | 1991 | [ |
| 2. | BMI + 40 bisphenol | 1.23 | 34.9 | 60 | 3.31 × 10−6 | 63 | ||||
| 3. | BMI + 60 bisphenol | 1.29 | 53.4 | 60 | 3.44 × 10−6 | 74 | ||||
| 4. | EP unidirectional + CF 56% | 1.51 | 40.7 | Steel balls | 45 | 0.88 × 10−7 | N.R. | Response in solid particle erosion conditions of unidirectional CF- and GF-reinforced epoxy composites | 2003 | [ |
| 5. | EP unidirectional + GF 56% | 1.88 | 63.7 | 45 | 1.38 × 10−7 | |||||
| 6. | PEK | 1.32 | 32.6 | SiO2 | 39 | 4.92 × 10−9 | N.R. | Study of morphology and possible wear mechanism | 2003 | [ |
| 7. | 68 | 1.62 × 10−8 | ||||||||
| 8. | 90 | 4.22 × 10−8 | ||||||||
| 9. | PEK + 10% GF | 1.38 | 35.5 | SiO2 | 39 | 6.23 × 10−9 | ||||
| 10. | PEK + 20% GF | 1.44 | 39.5 | 39 | 0.83 × 10−8 | |||||
| 11. | PEK + 30% GF | 1.53 | 43.7 | 39 | 1.04 × 10−8 | |||||
| 12. | PEEK | 1.31 | 333.5 | 39 | 1.05 × 10−8 | |||||
| 13. | PEEK + 30% CF | 1.36 | 50.6 | 39 | 1.82 × 10−8 | |||||
| 14. | PEI | 1.27 | 41.9 | SiO2 | 30 | 6.69 × 10−9 | N.R. | Mechanical properties and possible wear mechanisms discussed | 2007 | [ |
| 15. | PEI + 20% GF | 1.42 | 42.1 | 30 | 5.98 × 10−9 | |||||
| 16. | PEI + 30% GF | 1.51 | 46.7 | 30 | 5.63 × 10−9 | |||||
| 17. | PEI + 25% CF | 1.7 | 41.7 | 30 | 0.75 × 10−8 | |||||
| 52 | 1.25 × 10−8 | |||||||||
| 60 | 5.50 × 10−8 | |||||||||
| 88 | 9.51 × 10−8 | |||||||||
| 18. | PEEK | 1.30 | 28 | SiO2 | 25 | 3.0 × 10−8 | 6.06 × 10−3 | Mechanical properties and possible wear mechanisms discussed | 2009 | [ |
| 19. | CF/PEEK | 1.56 | 60 | 3 × 10−9 | 3.12 × 10−2 | |||||
| 20. | GF/PEEK | 1.99 | 101 | 3 × 10−9 | 7.07 × 10−2 | |||||
| 21. | CF/PEKK | 1.58 | 85 | 1 × 10−9 | 5.30 × 10−2 | |||||
| 22. | GF/PEKK | 2.08 | 112 | 2 × 10−8 | 8.45 × 10−2 | |||||
| 23. | PPS + 20% GF | 1.48 | 35.8 | Silica sand | N.R. | 3 × 10−8 | N.R. | Study of erosion rates | 2009 | [ |
| 24. | PPS + 30% GF | 1.6 | 37.5 | 3 × 10−8 | ||||||
| 25. | PPS + 40% GF | 1.6 | 110 | 2 × 10−8 | ||||||
| 26. | PEEK | 1.3 | 32.6 | SiC | 34 | 0.25 × 10−8 | N.R. | Study of mechanism and wear process | 2017 | [ |
| 27. | PEEK + 30% GF | 1.51 | 40.9 | 0.40 × 10−8 | ||||||
| 28. | PEEK + 30% CF | 1.38 | 37.7 | 0.50 × 10−8 |
Abbreviations used: EP = epoxy, PEK = polyether ketone, GF = glass fiber, CF = carbon fiber, PEEK = polyether ether ketone, PEI = polyetherimide, PPS = polyphenylene sulfide, BMI = bismaleimide, N.R. = not reported.
Reported composites with properties related to erosion.
| Sr. no | Nomenclature | Material Density | Hardness Value | Erodent Used | Impingement Velocity | Erosion Rate | Coefficient of Wear | Remarks | Year | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| APS modified TiO2 nanoparticles/in PU | ||||||||||
| 1. | UT-1 (PU with 1% neat nano titania) | N.R. | 167 | N.R. | Only Tg was reported | 2009 | [ | |||
| 2. | TT-1 (PU with 1% modified nano titania) | N.R. | 185 | N.R. | Only Tg was reported | 2009 | [ | |||
| 3 | TT-2 (PU with 2% modified nano titania) | N.R. | 187 | N.R. | ||||||
| 4. | TT-3 (PU with 3% modified nano titania) | N.R. | 187 | N.R. | ||||||
| 5. | CNT/epoxy composites | N.R. | Only graphical data for the wear study is available | 2014 | [ | |||||
| 6. | Epoxy neat resin | N.R. | 0.17 | N.R. | Study of mechanical and anticorrosive properties of surface | 2015 | [ | |||
| 7. | Resin + 0.1% graphene | 0.19 | N.R. | |||||||
| 8. | Resin + 0.4% graphene | 0.41 | N.R. | |||||||
| 9. | Resin + 0.7% graphene | 0.51 | N.R. | |||||||
| 10. | Graphene | Study of mechanical stability to be used as a coating for erosion resistance in mechanical corrosion coupling environments | 2015 | [ | ||||||
| 11. | Epoxy/clay nanocomposite with organically modified montmorillonite | Study of mechanical strength, electrical conductivity, flammability, and thermal stability for applications in aerospace, adhesives, and coating industries | 2016 | [ | ||||||
| Silica-filled epoxy nanocomposite | Effect of pyrogenic silica on epoxy resin for use as anti-cavitation painting | 2017 | [ | |||||||
| 12. | H (Neat) | 1.11 | 75 | SiO2 | N.R. | |||||
| H3SiO2 (3 wt%) | 1.12 | 61 | ||||||||
| H5SiO2 (5 wt%) | 1.13 | 60 | ||||||||
| 13. | Epoxy/graphene-reinforced composites | Composites were qualitatively and quantitatively evaluated in terms of contact angle, surface roughness, adhesion to the substrate, corrosion resistance, and abrasion resistance for oil and gas pipelines | 2018 | [ | ||||||
| 14. | Ni-P-nano-NiTi composites | Only scratch test and indentation test were performed | 2019 | [ | ||||||
| 15. | Mechanical characterization of wood apple- and coconut shell-reinforced hybrid composites | Fabrication of coconut and wood apple shell powder-reinforced epoxy composites and experimental investigation of mechanical properties | 2020 | [ | ||||||
| 16. | Characterization of carbon fiber-reinforced polyphenylene sulfide composites prepared with compatibilizers | Interfacial adhesion was studied using SEM and DMA (dynamic mechanical analysis) with the addition of Joncryl between carbon fiber and polyphenylene sulfide | 2020 | [ | ||||||
Abbreviations used: H = epoxy, PU = polyurethane, APS = aminopropyl trimethoxy silane, N.R. = not reported.