Materials and Design 58 (2014) 332338

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Technical Report

Evaluation of mechanical properties of aluminium alloyaluminaboron

carbide metal matrix composites
B. Vijaya Ramnath a,, C. Elanchezhian a, M. Jaivignesh a, S. Rajesh a, C. Parswajinan b,1,
A. Siddique Ahmed Ghias c,1
a
b
c

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sri Sai Ram Engineering College, Chennai 600 044, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, SCSVMV University, Kanchipuram 631 561, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Vels University, Chennai 600117, India

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 13 September 2013
Accepted 29 January 2014
Available online 11 February 2014

a b s t r a c t
This paper deals with the fabrication and mechanical investigation of aluminium alloy, alumina (Al2O3)
and boron carbide metal matrix composites. Aluminium is the matrix metal having properties like light
weight, high strength and ease of machinability. Alumina which has better wear resistance, high strength,
hardness and boron carbide which has excellent hardness and fracture toughness are added as reinforcements. Here, the fabrication is done by stir casting which involves mixing the required quantities of additives into stirred molten aluminium. After solidication, the samples are prepared and tested to nd the
various mechanical properties like tensile, exural, impact and hardness. The internal structure of the
composite is observed using Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM).
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Nowadays, Metal Matrix Composites (MMCs) are under serious
consideration to replace conventional materials for a large number
of structural applications such as those in the aeronautical/aerospace, transportation, defence and sports industries because of
their superior properties. The excellent mechanical properties
and the comparatively low cost make them as an attractive option
[1,2]. A large number of fabrication techniques are currently used
to manufacture the MMC materials according to the type of reinforcement used like stir casting (or compocasting) [3], liquid metal
inltration [4], squeeze casting [5] and spray co-deposition [6].
Compocasting process involves the agitation of particulate reinforcement and semisolid metal (SSM). Rajan et al. [7] studied the
effect of three different stir casting routes on the structure and
properties of ne y ash particles in reinforced aluminium silicon
alloy composite and found that the separation of y ash particles
and its dispersion are more effective in compocasting method than
in liquid metal stir casting due to the shearing of y ash particles.
Similarly, Rosso presented a paper on ceramic and metal matrix
composites which focussed on different technologies involved,
applications and future of advanced ceramics, metal matrix and
ceramic matrix composites [8].
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9841446655.
1

E-mail address: vijayaramnath.mech@sairam.edu.in (B. Vijaya Ramnath).

Research Scholar.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.01.068
0261-3069/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

High homogeneity is required to attain optimum mechanical

properties for the composite material. Therefore, the important
parameters controlling the process must be identied and corrected in order to achieve a good quality composite. Tzamtzis
et al. [9] worked on processing of advanced Al/SiC particulate metal matrix composites under intensive shearing and found that the
distribution of the SiC particles in the metal matrix was improved
signicantly when the composites were produced using the Rheoprocess. CFD with nite element analysis is also used to improve
the distribution of the reinforcement in the matrix. Hashim et al.
[10] investigated the effect of stirrer position in the crucible and
stirring speed, on the ow pattern of particles using computer simulation and compared it with visualisation experiment results
using glycerol and polystyrene particles in order to disperse reinforcement particles in the molten matrix as uniformly as possible.
However, there are some problems associated with the fabrication
of reinforced composites like the uneven distribution of the reinforcement in the matrix. The current processing methods often
produce agglomerated particles in the ductile matrix and thus they
exhibit extremely low ductility [11,12].
The microstructure is also a very important parameter which
inuences the properties of the composite. It was done earlier by
trial and error methods which were later replaced by scientic
based techniques. One such trial and error method was used by
Rabiei et al. [13], who experimentally tested aluminium matrix
composites with various particle reinforcements, to evaluate their
fracture toughness and compare the experimental results with the

333

B. Vijaya Ramnath et al. / Materials and Design 58 (2014) 332338

fracture toughness estimates using the HahnRoseneld model

and found that there was a close agreement between the experimental results and the predicted toughness using the modied
fracture model. Similarly, Narayana Murty et al. [14], worked on
the hot working characteristics of 6061AlSiC and 6061Al2O3 particulate reinforced metal matrix composites for the development of
processing maps. A simple instability condition for assessing the
extent of plastic deformation in a work piece is derived based on
the Zieglers continuum principles. Raj [15] developed Ashbys concept of maps to construct a processing map, which represent the
limiting for cavity formation at hard particles in a soft matrix
occurring at lower temperatures and higher strain rates and vice
versa.
Fly ash can also be combined with aluminium and magnesium
alloys to produce a new type of MMCs called syntactic foams or
Ash alloys [1618]. The use of y ash reduces the amount of waste
product that would normally need to be disposed by the electrical
industry in MMCs since the manufacture of aluminium and magnesium is energy-intensive. The replacement of a part of aluminium or magnesium by y ash provides signicant energy savings
[19,20]. Its feasibility was studied by Rohatgi et al. [21] and it
was found that the process of incorporating y ash cenospheres
in die cast magnesium alloy showed renement in microstructure.
The agglomeration, non-uniform distribution and poor wettability of reinforcement used in squeeze or stir casting, spray forming and powder metallurgy techniques diminish the mechanical
and electrical properties of the fabricated composites. Also, manufacturing cost of MMCs produced by the above method is high due
to expensive equipment and complex processing routes. In order to
overcome the above problems, Accumulative Roll Bonding (ARB)
process is used to develop Al/B4C composites, in which the particles were distributed evenly throughout the matrix; in addition
particles agglomeration did not exist in their nal composite [22].
Shari et al. [23] mixed B4C nanoparticles with pure Al powder
by ball milling to produce AlB4C powder. AlB4C powders containing different amounts of B4C were subsequently hot pressed
to produce bulk nanocomposite samples. The hardness, ultimate
compressive strength and wear resistance, of the nanocomposites
increased signicantly by increasing the B4C content in pure Al
powder. Different techniques have been used for fabrication of
AlB4C composites such as liquid phase methods [25] and solidstate consolidation (powder metallurgy).
A decrease in the reinforcement particle size to the nanometer
range can improve mechanical and tribological properties of the
aluminium matrix composites [26]. The formation of a mechanically mixed layer (MML) can act as an effective insulation layer
that prevents metal to metal contact. Higher reinforcement content in the nanocomposite promotes stronger material transfer
from the counterface and oxidation reaction, and consequently
causes faster formation of more protective MML with higher thickness and higher amount of oxide compounds content on the worn
surface, leading to the lower wear rate. This has also been conrmed by research ndings [27].

2.1.1. Aluminium alloy (LM 25)

The tensile properties of aluminium alloy (LM 25) at elevated
temperatures are inuenced by the condition (heat treatment) of
the castings and the duration at the elevated temperatures. The
heat treated alloy has fairly good machining properties. They are
of high resistance to corrosive attack by sea water and marine
atmospheres.
2.1.2. Aluminium oxide or alumina
Aluminium oxide is a chemical compound of aluminium and
oxygen having chemical formula Al2O3. It is commonly called alumina. Al2O3 is an electrical insulator but has a relatively high thermal conductivity (30 W m 1 K 1) like ceramic material. Its
hardness makes it suitable for use as an abrasive and also as a cutting tool.
2.1.3. Boron carbide
Boron carbide is one of the most promising ceramic materials due to its attractive properties, including high strength, low
density, extremely high hardness (the third hardest material
after diamond and boron nitride), good chemical stability and
neutron absorption capability [24]. Boron carbide has stability
to ionizing radiation. It has toughness similar to diamond. It
is difcult to sinter to high relative densities without the
use of sintering aids. It has good nuclear properties. The properties of aluminium alloy (LM 25), alumina and boron carbide
are shown in Table 1.
2.2. Fabrication procedure
The schematic diagram of stir casting for production of MMC is
shown in Fig. 1. Stir casting is a primary process of composite production in which continuous stirring of molten base metal is done
followed by introduction of reinforcements. The resulting mixture
is poured into the die and allowed to solidify. In stir-casting, the
particles often tend to form agglomerates, which can be only dissolved by vigorous stirring at high temperature. The various advantages of stir casting are simplicity, exibility, applicability to large
quantity, near net shaping, lower cost of processing and easier control of matrix structure. In this work, stir-casting method is used
for preparing aluminium metalmatrix composite. This whirlpool
technique provides high strength and homogeneous set of aluminium composite materials.
3. Experimentation
The experimental arrangement consists of the main furnace and
components along with four mild steel stirrer blades. The rst process in the experiment is preheating. Here, the empty crucible and
the reinforcement powders, namely boron carbide and alumina
powders are heated separately to a temperature close to that of
the main process temperature. The melting of the aluminium alloy
(95%) ingot is carried out in the graphite crucible inside the

2. Experimental details
2.1. Materials
In this work for preparing metalmatrix composite, aluminium
alloy (LM 25) is used as base material; alumina and boron carbide
in powder form are used as the reinforcements. Boron carbide having 220 mesh size, aluminium oxide and aluminium alloy ingot are
required for the preparation. Aluminium alloy ingot is cut into
small pieces of 1 cm  1 cm  3 mm, so that it can be easily placed
in graphite crucible for melting.

Table 1
Properties of material used.
Material

Tensile
strength
(MPa)

Density
(g/cm3)

Coefcient of
thermal expansion
(10 6/C)

Aluminium
alloy LM
25 grade
Al2O3
B4C

190250

2.68

2.2

71

255.2
261

3.98
2.32.55

7.4
3.2

380
362

Modulus of
elasticity
(GPa)

334

B. Vijaya Ramnath et al. / Materials and Design 58 (2014) 332338

4.3. Impact test

Impact testing involves the sudden and dynamic application of
the load on the composite specimen. This test measures the
amount of energy absorbed by the specimen for the rupture in
joules. Charpy impact test is carried out in this work. The specimen
is prepared as per IS: 1757 standard.
4.4. Hardness test

Fig. 1. Fabrication of MMC using stir casting method.

furnace. Initially, the ingot was preheated for 34 h at 550 C. At

the same time boron carbide and alumina powders are also
preheated to 400 C in the respective containers. Then, the crucible
with aluminium alloy is heated to 830 C while the preheated
powders are mechanically mixed with each other below their
melting points.
This metalmatrix is then kept into the furnace at the same
temperature. The furnace completely melts the pieces of aluminium alloy and the powders of alumina and boron carbide. The stirring mechanism is lowered into the crucible inside the furnace and
set at the required depth. The vigorous automatic stirring of the
material takes place for 10 min with 550 rpm of stirring rate, thereby uniformly dispersing the additive powders in the aluminium alloy matrix. The temperature rate of the furnace should be
controlled at 830 10 C in nal mixing process. The degasser removes all the trapped gases from the mixture in the crucible and
ensures that the temperature of the mixture in the crucible does
not get transferred easily to the atmosphere. This experiment is
repeatedly done by varying the compositions of the composite
powder. For each composition, a total of 1.5 kg (1500 g) material
mix is used for preparing the samples. Apart from the above compositions, the aluminum alloy [LM 25] alone is melted and solidied in dies.
In this paper, sample 1 contains aluminium alloy95%,
alumina3% and boron carbide2%, sample 2 contains aluminium
alloy95%, alumina2% and boron carbide3% and sample 3
contains aluminium alloy only.

The hardness test measures the resistance of a solid to permanent shape change when a force is applied. Brinell hardness test
is carried out in this work to nd out the deformation of the composite under constant compressive load from an object which is
sharp.
5. Results and discussion
The results of the test are discussed in this section. In this paper,
ve specimens from each sample is test.
5.1. Tensile test
The tensile test is done using universal testing machine and the
specimens are cut as per the ASTM: B-557M standard. The results
obtained are furnished in Table 2. The tensile test specimen is
shown in Fig. 2.
5.1.1. Comparison of tensile properties for different composites
Fig. 3 shows the comparison of Force Vs Stroke for the three
samples. It can be noted that sample 1 has the highest value of
force for the same values of stroke followed by sample 2 and sample 3.
Fig. 4 shows the comparison of break load, maximum displacement and percentage elongation for three samples. Sample 3 has
the maximum values of break load, maximum displacement and
percentage elongation. The sample 1 has greater break load and
percentage elongation than sample 2 whereas sample 2 has greater
displacement than sample 1. Since sample 3 contains aluminium
alloy only the tensile strength of that sample is higher than other
two samples. [23].
5.2. Flexural test

4. Testing
The following tests are conducted on the aluminium composites
to know their mechanical properties.

The exural test is done using three point exural testing machine and the specimen was cut using ASTM: A-370 standard.
Tested specimen is shown in Fig. 5 and exural properties are furnished in Table 3.

4.1. Tensile test

The ability of a material to withstand a static load can be determined by testing the material in tension or compression. Mechanical testing plays an important role in evaluating the fundamental
properties of engineering materials as well as in developing new
composite materials and to control the quality of materials used
in design and construction. In this work the tensile test is carried
out using a universal testing machine. The specimen is prepared
as per ASTM: B-557M standards.
4.2. Flexural test
The use of exural test is to determine the exural property of
composite. This test measures the behaviour of materials
subjected to simple bending loads. The specimen is prepared as
per ASTM: A-370 standard.

5.2.1. Comparison of exural properties for different composites

Fig. 6 shows Force Vs Stroke graph for three samples of exural
test. It can be noted that sample 1 has the highest value of force for
the same values of stroke followed by sample 2 and sample 3. Similar to tensile strength, the exural strength of sample 3 is higher
than other two samples because of presence of aluminium alloy.
Fig. 7 shows the values of break load and maximum deection
for three samples. From Fig. 7 it can be seen that sample 3 has
the highest break load and maximum deection. Sample 1 has a
higher break load than sample 2 whereas sample 2 has greater
deection than sample 1.
5.3. Impact test
The Charpy test is performed by preparing the specimens as per
standard IS 1757.

335

B. Vijaya Ramnath et al. / Materials and Design 58 (2014) 332338

Table 2
Tensile properties of composites.
Sample

Composition of composite
specimen

Break load (kN)

Maximum displacement
(mm)

Tensile strength (MPa)

Elongation
(%)

Tensile modulus (Gpa)

Sample 1

Aluminium alloy95%
Alumina3%
Boron carbide2%

7.22

5.5

54.60

4.00

1.37

Sample 2

Aluminium alloy95%
Alumina2%
Boron carbide3%

6.47

6.4

51.75

3.71

1.39

Sample 3

Aluminium alloy

9.43

8.2

68.24

4.00

1.71

Table 3
Flexural properties of composites.

Fig. 2. Tensile test specimen.

Sample

Composition of
composite
Specimen

Flexural
break
load (kN)

Maximum
deection
(mm)

Flexural
strength
(N/mm2)

Sample 1

Aluminium
alloy95%
Alumina3%
Boron carbide2%

3.87

0.39

199.52

Sample 2

Aluminium
alloy95%
Alumina2%
Boron carbide3%

3.76

2.12

193.85

Sample 3

Aluminium alloy

4.40

2.98

226.84

Fig. 3. Force Vs Stroke graph for tensile test.

Fig. 6. Force Vs Stroke graph for exural test.

Fig. 4. Break load, maximum displacement and percentage elongation (tensile test).

Fig. 5. Flexural test specimen of sample 1.

Fig. 7. Break load and maximum deection (exural test).

336

B. Vijaya Ramnath et al. / Materials and Design 58 (2014) 332338

Table 4
Impact properties of composites.
Sample

Composition of composite specimen

Energy absorbed (J)

Sample 1

Aluminium alloy95%
Alumina3%
Boron carbide2%

2.18

Sample 2

Aluminium alloy95%
Alumina2%
Boron carbide3%

2.42

Sample 3

Aluminium alloy

Fig. 10. Brinell hardness number (hardness test).

Fig. 8. Impact test specimen of sample 1.

Fig. 11. Scanning Electron Microscope setup.

6. Morphological analysis using Scanning Electron Microscope

(SEM)
Fig. 9. Energy absorbed (impact test).

From Table 4 and Fig. 9, it is clear that sample 2 absorbs more

energy followed by samples 1 and 3. Fig. 8 shows the tested specimen of impact test.
5.4. Brinell hardness test
The Brinell hardness test is carried out on the three samples and
the results are furnished in Table 5. The ball shaped indenter made
of hardened tungsten is used for this test. The diameter of ball
shaped indenter is 10 mm and the load applied is 500 Kgf.
Fig. 10 shows the hardness value of three samples. It can be
noted that sample 2 has the maximum hardness followed by sample 1 and sample 3 in all the trials.

The Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) uses electrons instead

of light to form an image. The main principle of SEM is the bombarding of electrons and the secondary electrons which are reected are formed as an image. Fig. 11 shows the setup of a
Supra 55 Scanning Electron Microscope.
The sample holder stub is cleaned with acetone and dried in the
sputter coater machine with 240 volts. After the sample is prepared, its microstructure is analysed using SEM.
6.1. Microstructure of samples
Fig. 12 shows the microstructure of the fractured surface of tensile test of sample 1 at 100 magnication. The general arrangement of aluminium molecules and reinforcements of the
aluminium alloy are faintly visible in the image. The darker particles are boron carbide and the lighter ones are aluminium. The

Table 5
Hardness values of composites [in BHN].
Sample

Composition of composite specimen

Trail 1 (BHN)

Trial 2 (BHN)

Trial 3 (BHN)

Average hardness (BHN)

Sample 1

Aluminium alloy95%
Alumina3%
Boron carbide2%

48.6

48.4

48.6

48.53

Sample 2

Aluminium alloy95%
Alumina2%
Boron carbide3%

52.9

52.6

52.9

52.80

Sample 3

Aluminium alloy

37.9

37.9

37.7

37.83

B. Vijaya Ramnath et al. / Materials and Design 58 (2014) 332338

337

Fig. 14. Sample 2 at 108.

Fig. 12. Sample 1 at 100.

Fig. 15. Sample 2 at 500.

Fig. 13. Sample 1 at 500.

elliptically shaped aluminium particles in the matrix are more

clearly visible at a magnication of 500 as shown in Fig. 13.
It is seen that the reinforcements of the matrix are predominantly located in the centre of the image and aluminium molecules
at the outer region, suggesting that the reinforcements are unevenly distributed in the matrix. The uneven distribution of the
matrix and reinforcement is attributed to poor stirring during the
manufacturing of the sample. The specimen shows a ductile fracture appearance with shearing effects on the surface.
Fig. 14 reveals the fractured surface of the sample 2 after tensile
test at 108 magnication. The general arrangement of the composite is clearly visible in the image. Many micro cracks and porous
sites are observed in the sample which is attributed to poor manufacturing and improper stirring of the composite.
Fig. 15 shows the microstructure of sample 2 with a magnication of 500. Typical examples of crack paths on the specimen surface of the composites are seen in the image. However, only a few
debonding particles are observed compared to sample 1.
Fig. 16 shows the microstructure of sample 3 which consist of
aluminium alloy [LM 25]. The picture shows the inner surface of
sample 3 which consist of aluminium and other components like

Fig. 16. Sample 3 at 250.

copper, silicon, magnesium, etc. It consists of tighter packing than

the other composites which explains the better tensile and exural
properties of the sample 3 compared to samples 2 and 3.
From Fig. 17, the images of sample 3 can be clearly distinguished from those of samples 1 and 2 as these images lack the

338

B. Vijaya Ramnath et al. / Materials and Design 58 (2014) 332338

Fig. 17. Sample 3 at 750.

elliptical molecules of the reinforcements which are visible in the

cases of samples 1 and 2.
7. Conclusions
In this work, three different samples are fabricated and the following inferences are made;
(1) It has been inferred that the tensile strength of sample 3 is
marginally higher than other two samples because of its aluminium content. But, the sample 1 has higher tensile
strength (54.60 MPa) than sample 2 (51.75 MPa).
(2) It has been noted that the exural strength of sample 3 is
higher than other two samples.
(3) Considering the results of the impact test, the impact value
of sample 1 (2.18 J) is lower than the impact value of
sample 2 (2.42 J), but higher than that of sample 3 (2 J).
(4) Also, the Brinell hardness of sample 1 (48.53) is marginally
lower than that of sample 2 (52.80) but higher than that of
sample 3 (37.83).

Acknowledgement
The authors thank the Department of Production Technology
M.I.T. campus, Anna University for providing partial support for
carrying out this research work.
References
[1] David L. Analysis of stressstrain, fracture and ductility behaviour of
aluminium matrix composites containing discontinuous silicon carbide
reinforcement. Metall Trans A 1985;16A:110515.

[2] Ralph B, Yuen HC, Lee WB. The processing of metal matrix composites an
overview. J Mater Process Technol 1997;63:33953.
[3] Seo YH, Kang CG. Effects of hot extrusion through a curved die on the
mechanical properties of SiC/Al composites fabricated by melt-stirring.
Compos Sci Technol 1999:64354.
[4] Yunsheng X, Chung DDL. Low-volume-fraction particulate preforms for
making metalmatrix composites by liquid metal inltration. J Mater Sci
1998;33:47079.
[5] Young HS, Chung GK. The effect of applied pressure on particle-dispersion
characteristics and mechanical properties in melt-stirring squeeze-cast SiC/Al
composites. J Mater Process Technol 1995;55:3709.
[6] Zhang S, Cao F, Chen Y, Li Q, Jiang Z. Acta Mater Compos Sinica 1998;15:88.
[7] Rajan TPD, Pillai RM, Pai BC, Satyanarayana KG, Rohatgi PK. Fabrication and
characterisation of Al7Si0.35Mg/y ash metal matrix composites processed
by different stir casting routes. Compos Sci Technol 2007;67:336977.
[8] Rosso M. Ceramic and metal matrix composites: routes and properties. J Mater
Process Technol 2006;175:36475.
[9] Tzamtzis S, Barekar NS, Hari Babu N, Patel J, Dhindaw BK, Fan Z. Processing of
advanced Al/SiC particulate metal matrix composites under intensive
shearing a novel Rheo-process. Composite: Part A 2009;40:14451.
[10] Hashim J, Looney L, Hashmi MSJ. Particle distribution in cast metal matrix
composites Part I. J Mater Process Technol 2002;123:2517.
[11] Segurado J, Gonzles C, Llorca J. A numerical investigation of the effect of
particle clustering on the mechanical properties of composites. Acta Mater
2003;51:235569.
[12] Deng X, Chawla N. Modeling the effect of particle clustering on the mechanical
behaviour of SiC particle reinforced Al matrix composites. J Mater Sci
2006;41:57314.
[13] Rabiei A, Vendra L, Kishi T. Fracture behaviour of particle reinforced metal
matrix composites. Composites: Part A 2008;39:294300.
[14] Narayana Murty SVS, Nageswara RB, Kashyap BP. On the hot working
characteristics of 6061AlSiC and 6061Al2O3 particulate reinforced metal
matrix composites. Compos Sci Technol 2003;63:11935.
[15] Raj R. Development of a processing map for use in warm forming and hot
forming processes. Metall Trans A 1981;12:108997.
[16] Zhang XF, Wang DJ, Xie G. Manufacturing of aluminium y ash composites
with liquid reactive sintering technology. Acta Metall Sinica 2002;15:46570.
[17] Bienias J, Walczak M, Surowska B, Sobczak J. Microstructure and corrosion
behaviour of aluminium y ash composites. J Optoelectron Adv Mater
2003;5:493502.
[18] Rohatgi PK, Guo RQ. Low cost cast aluminiumy ash composites for ultralight
automotive application. TMS annual meeting. Automot Alloys 1997:15768.
[19] Rohatgi PK, Guo R, Keshavaram BN, Golden DM. Cast aluminium y ash
composites for engineering applications. Trans Am Foundrymens Soc
1995;99:57585.
[20] Rohatgi PK, Kim JK, Guo RQ, Robertson DP, Gajdardziska JM. Age hardening
characteristics of aluminium alloyhollow y ash composites. Metall Mater
Trans A 2002;33A:15417.
[21] Rohatgi PK, Daoud A, Schultz BF, Puri T. Microstructure and mechanical
behaviour of die casting AZ91D-Fly ash cenosphere composites. Composites:
Part A 2009;40:88396.
[22] Yazdani A, Salahinejad E. Evolution of reinforcement distribution in AlB4C
composites during accumulative roll bonding. Mater Des 2011;32:313742.
[23] Shari EM, Karimzadeh F, Enayati MH. Fabrication and evaluation of
mechanical and tribological properties of boron carbide reinforced
aluminium matrix nanocomposites. Mater Des 2011;32:326371.
[24] Toptan F, Kilicarslan A, Karaaslan A, Cigdem M, Kerti I. Processing and
microstructural characterisation of AA 1070 and AA 6063 matrix B4Cp
reinforced composites. Mater Des 2010;31:8791.
[25] Lashgari HR, Zangeneh S, Shahmir H, Sagha M, Emamy M. Heat treatment
effect on the microstructure, tensile properties and dry sliding wear behaviour
of A35610% B4C cast composites. Mater Des 2010;31:441422.
[26] Hosseini N, Karimzadeh F, Abbasi MH, Enayati MH. Tribological properties of
Al6061Al2O3 nanocomposite prepared by milling and hot pressing. Mater Des
2010;31:477785.
[27] Rao RN, Das S. Effect of matrix alloy and inuence of SiC particle on the sliding
wear characteristics of aluminium alloy composites. Mater Des
2010;31:12007.