Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
DOI 10.1007/s12666-016-1026-1
TECHNICAL PAPER
Effect of Graphite and SiC Addition into Cu and SiC Particle Size
Effect on Fabrication of Cu–Graphite–SiC MMC by Powder
Metallurgy
Arabinda Meher1 • Debasis Chaira1
Received: 28 August 2015 / Accepted: 7 December 2016 / Published online: 7 January 2017
Ó The Indian Institute of Metals - IIM 2017
Abstract Here we have reported individual and combined
effect of graphite and SiC into Cu matrix during fabrication
of Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid metal matrix composite by
powder metallurgy. Mechanical properties of the compos-
ites are enhanced by simultaneous addition of 1, 3, 5, 10
and 15 vol. % of graphite along with 2, 5 and 10 wt. % of
SiC into pure Cu, whereas electrical conductivity deterio-
rates. Composites are fabricated by cold compaction of
composite powder mixture followed by conventional sin-
tering in a tubular furnace at 900 °C for 1 h in argon
atmosphere. For comparison, SiC powder size of 5 and
50 lm are used to study the effect of SiC particle size on
microstructure, mechanical and electrical properties of the
composites. Optical microscopy and scanning electron
microscopy reveal the homogeneous distribution of gra-
phite and SiC in matrix and good compatibility between
Cu–graphite and Cu–SiC particles. Hardness of the com-
posites decreases with increase in graphite and increases
with increase in SiC content. Composites containing fine
SiC particles show higher hardness value as compared to
coarse particles. Maximum Vickers hardness value of 75 is
obtained for Cu-1 vol. % graphite-10 wt. % SiC composite.
Electrical conductivity decreases with increase in both
graphite and SiC content. Composites containing coarse
SiC particles exhibit higher electrical conductivity than fine
SiC.
& Debasis Chaira
chaira.debasis@gmail.com
1 helps to improve high temperature mechanical properties,
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering,
National Institute of Technology Rourkela, Rourkela, Odisha
769008, India
Keywords Hybrid metal matrix composite 
Copper–graphite–SiC  Powder metallurgy  Microstructure
1 Introduction
Metal matrix composite provides a novel way of
strengthening materials. Metal matrix composites rein-
forced with ceramic impart both metallic properties like
high toughness and ductility as well as ceramic properties
like high strength and modulus. The properties of metal
matrix composites are controlled by volume fraction and
size of the reinforcement as well as their interface. When
the reinforcements are distributed uniformly around the
matrix, an optimum set of mechanical properties like
specific strength, specific stiffness, abrasion resistance,
thermal conductivity and dimensional stability can be
achieved [1]. The particulate reinforced Cu based metal
matrix composite is mainly used for tribological applica-
tion for its excellent wear resistance during sliding. Gasses
and oil can’t be used as lubricating agents in self-lubri-
cating component as it encounters high temperature. So
there is a need of excellent solid lubricant which works in a
wide range of temperature [2]. Cu based metal matrix
composite is used in many electrical contacts, thermal and
electronic packaging applications as it possesses high
thermal and electrical conductivity and good corrosion
resistance [3].
In Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid metal matrix composites,
graphite helps in improving the wear resistance as it acts as
a lubricating film on the contact surfaces and possesses low
co-efficient of thermal expansion. On the other hand, SiC
wear resistance and hardness of the material. As SiC is
semiconducting in nature, there will be very little reduction
123
2048
of electrical conductivity and hence can be used in elec-
trical application. Hence, Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid metal
matrix composites exploit both beneficial effects of gra-
phite and SiC and can be used extensively as contact
bushes and bearing materials and other electrical contact
applications.
Efe et al. [4] showed that relative density and hardness
of the Cu–SiC composite increases with increase in the
particle size of the composite. They also observed that
with addition of SiC, hardness of the composites effec-
tively improve with a minor loss of electrical conductiv-
ity. Nayak et al. [5] noticed that wear resistance of Cu
based hybrid metal matrix composite increases with
increase in graphite content. Due to the combined effect of
TiC and graphite, wear loss of the hybrid composite
reduces with higher amount of both the reinforcements.
They also observed that with the increase in TiC amount,
hardness of the hybrid composite increases. Moustafa
et al. [6] fabricated Cu–SiC and Cu–Al2O3 composite by
powder metallurgy route by taking both coated and
uncoated SiC and Al2O3 and noticed that densification rate
of coated powder is more than those made from uncoated
powder. They also observed that the compressive strength
of coated powder composite is more as compared to the
uncoated one. Tjong et al. [7] studied the wear behaviour
of Cu–SiC composite prepared by hot iso-static pressing
and noticed that by addition of 20 vol. % SiC in Cu
matrix, wear resistance increases. Gewfiel et al. [2] stud-
ied the effect of graphite and SiC in Al based composite
by taking different composition of graphite and SiC. They
noticed that SiC particles greatly improve the hardness
and wear resistance of the composite. Increasing the
concentration of graphite leads to a decrease in wear rate
of the composites which governs with the synergic effect
of graphite phase sliding properties and its distribution in
the composites. Berner et al. [8] studied the interface of
Cu–C composite and noticed that by heat treatment of Cu–
C composite, a thin (approximately 50 nm) layer of
interface forms which provides bonding between the
reinforcement and matrix. Zhang et al. [9] fabricated Cu–
SiC composite by introducing 10 vol. % SiC particles
with or without nickel coating by powder metallurgy plus
hot extrusion method and noticed that higher bulk hard-
ness and relative density are achieved for the composite
containing nickel coated SiC particles than the uncoated
one. SiC particle reinforced nickel coated composite
shows improved mechanical properties and interfacial
bonding. The SiC particles on nickel coating also helps in
increasing the wear resistance of the composite. Li et al.
[10] fabricated Cu–graphite and Cu–graphene nanosheets
(GNSs) by hot pressing technique and studied mechanical
and tribological properties of the composites. They found
that Cu–GNSs composites exhibit higher relative density,
123
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
microhardness and bending strength compared to Cu–Gr
composites with the same volume fraction of GNSs and
Gr. They also observed that the friction coefficients and
wear rates are reduced significantly by the addition of
GNSs, whereas the limited impact on reducing friction
and wear is found on graphite. Chen et al. [11] fabricated
Cu–graphite–h BN composite by powder metallurgy
route. They found that lubrication effects of graphite are
superior to those of h-BN. They noticed that addition of
graphite with low contents of h-BN can stabilize friction
and wear properties of Cu based P/M friction composites.
Yao et al. [12] prepared Cu–graphite composite by accu-
mulative roll bonding (ARB) and showed that ARB
remarkably decreases the size of graphite and improves
the dispersion of graphite in the Cu matrix. They indicated
that ARB can be an effective method for fabrication of
Cu/C composites from Cu and graphite with a combina-
tion of hardness and electrical conductivity better than or
as good as that of carbon nanotube or graphene reinforced
Cu matrix composites. Ren et al. [13] prepared Cu matrix
composites reinforced with flake graphite and diamond
particles by a powder hot pressing process. They showed
that Cu powders with particle sizes close to the size of the
diamond beneficially increases the performance of pre-
pared composites because their improved flowability
allows parallel arrangement of the flake graphite during
pressing. Qian et al. [14] fabricated Cu–graphite–WS2
composite by hot pressing and showed that 800 °C is the
optimum sintering temperature to obtain the best com-
prehensive properties of mechanical strength and lubri-
cation performance. They found that Cu-based composite
with 20% graphite and 10% WS2 show the best wear
resistance due to the excellent synergetic lubricating
effect of graphite and WS2. Gautam et al. [15] developed
Cu–Cr–graphite composite by solidification processing
and studied the dry sliding wear behavior of as cast, hot
forged and annealed composites by sliding against a
counterface of SAE 4615 steel disc under ambient con-
ditions using a pin-on-disc machine. They found that wear
rate increases linearly with increasing normal load. They
established that wear rate of Cu–4Cr–4G composite is
significantly lower than that of all other materials either
hot forged or annealed. Xiao-Ming et al. [16] studied the
effect of graphite content on the tribological performance
of copper-matrix composites under different friction
speeds. They showed that the friction coefficient and wear
rate generally decreases with the increase in Gr content.
Pradhan et al. [17] investigated dry sliding wear and
friction behaviour of Cu–SiC composite coating fabri-
cated by pulsed-reverse electro-co-deposition. They
observed that the wear rate of the nano-composite
increases with an increase in normal load, whereas it
decreases with an increase in sliding speed.
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
It is noticed that although literatures are available on
copper–graphite and copper–SiC composites fabricated by
powder metallurgy route, but none of them give proper
attention to the combined effect of SiC and graphite.
However, there is a scarcity of literature on microstruc-
tural, mechanical and electrical properties of Cu–SiC–
graphite composite which are mostly used in electrical
contact applications like contact bushes, bearings and heat
sink because of its low co-efficient of thermal expansion
and higher wear resistance. Moreover, there are scattered
data on the effect of SiC particle size and its amount in Cu–
SiC composite. Hence, the effect of SiC and graphite in
Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid MMC has been studied in the
present investigation. In the present investigation, our main
aim is to fabricate Cu–graphite–SiC composite by taking
different composition of copper, graphite and SiC and to
study microstructure, mechanical and electrical properties.
We have also studied the effect of SiC particle size on the
mechanical and physical properties of the composites.
2 Experimental
2.1 Fabrication of Cu–Graphite–SiC Composite
In order to manufacture Cu–graphite–SiC composite, Cu
powder of electrolytic grade (99% purity), graphite powder
(95% purity) and SiC powder (98% purity) of 5 (fine) and
50 lm (coarse) particle sizes were used as the starting
materials. Cu powders were reinforced with 1, 3, 5, 10 and
15 vol. % graphite and 2, 5 and 10 wt. % SiC (coarse) to
fabricate the hybrid composites. Powders were blended in a
Turbula shaker mixer (Turbula-T2F, Willy Bachofen,
Switzerland) for 30 min to ensure the uniform distribution
and homogeneous mixing of copper, graphite and SiC
powders. The powder mixtures were cold compacted by
uniaxial die pressing by applying pressure of 700 MPa for
5 min and then sintered in a tubular furnace at 900 °C for
1 h in argon atmosphere. Another set of samples were
prepared by mixing Cu powder with 1 and 5 vol. % gra-
phite along with 2 and 5 wt. % SiC (fine) while keeping
same compaction and sintering parameter to know the
effect of SiC particle size on microstructural, mechanical
and electrical properties of the composites.
2.2 Characterization of Composites
The sintered composites were characterized by Regaku
Ultima IV X-ray diffractometer using Cu Ka (k = 1.542 Å)
target with an accelerating voltage of 20 kV. Carl Zeiss
AxioCam ERc5s was used for optical microstructural anal-
ysis. SEM (JEOL 6480 LV) and FESEM (Nova NanoSEM
450) were used using suitable accelerating voltage by both
2049
secondary electron (SEI) and back scattered electron (BSE)
imaging modes as per the requirement. Archimedes method
was used to measure the relative density of the sintered
composites. Vickers hardness tester (Leco Micro-hardness
Tester LM248AT) was used to measure the hardness of the
composite. Sample for compression test were prepared by
using same compaction and sintering parameters by main-
taining L/D ratio [0.8. Compression test of the composite
was carried out in INSTRON 1195 Series IX (Universal
testing machine). Four probe electrical resistivity measuring
instrument was used to measure the electrical resistance of
the sample in which two probes were connected with the
ammeter (Keithly 6221, DC) and another two with the
voltmeter (Keithly 2182A).
3 Results and Discussions
3.1 Characterization of as Received Powder
In order to prepare Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid metal matrix
composites, starting material Cu (purity 99%, electrolyte
grade), graphite (purity 95%) and SiC (purity 95%) were
taken. Here SiC particles of two different sizes were used.
Figure 1 shows the SEM micrographs of as received
powders. Figure 1a, b show dendritic structure of Cu and
flaky graphite respectively. From Fig. 1c, d we can clearly
see angular and irregular shaped SiC particles with sharp
edges. It is also observed that average size of coarse SiC is
50 lm, whereas fine SiC is 5 lm.
3.2 X-ray Diffraction (XRD) Study
XRD analysis of metal matrix composites with different
volume percent of graphite and SiC was conducted. Fig-
ure 2a, b show the XRD spectra of Cu–SiC and Cu–gra-
phite–SiC conventional sintered composite respectively.
XRD spectrum shows the strong peaks of Cu along with
some weak peaks of graphite, SiC and CuO. Weak oxide
peaks of Cu are present due to the reaction between
residual atmospheric oxygen present in furnace with the
composites. It is also possible that air/O2 present in com-
mercial grade argon gas used for conventional sintering in
tubular furnace may also react with Cu. It is also confirmed
from the XRD spectra that no reaction takes place between
Cu and SiC.
3.3 Microstructure Study
3.3.1 Optical Microscopy
Figure 3 shows the optical micrographs of pure Cu, Cu-
2 wt. % SiC (SiC coarse), Cu-5 wt. % SiC (Coarse) and
123
2050
Fig. 1 SEM micrograph of
a Cu, b Graphite, c SiC, coarse
and d SiC, fine powder
Fig. 2 XRD spectra of a Cu–SiC and b Cu–graphite–SiC MMCs
Cu-10 wt. % SiC (Coarse) respectively. The micro-
graphs show the uniform distribution of SiC in copper
matrix. Figure 4 shows the optical micrographs of Cu-
10 vol. % graphite with 2 and 5 wt. % SiC composites.
The graphite and SiC particles are labelled in the
micrograph. It is clearly noticed that some of SiC and
graphite particles are lying on the surface. This is due
to large difference of density between reinforcement
(SiC and graphite) and matrix (Cu) and low solubility
of graphite and SiC in copper matrix. Hence, the
homogeneous mixing of graphite and SiC with Cu is
really a great challenge.
123
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
3.3.2 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)/Field
Emission SEM (FESEM)
Figure 5 shows FESEM micrograph which represents
uniform distribution of graphite and SiC for Cu-5 vol. %
graphite-5 wt. % SiC composite. It is observed that there is
no agglomeration between graphite and SiC. From the
micrograph we can notice the distribution of graphite
(black and dull appearance) and SiC (grey and shining
appearance) in copper matrix.
Figure 6 shows the FESEM micrograph of Cu-5 vol. %
graphite-5 wt. % SiC composite, where enlarged view of
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057 2051

Fig. 3 Optical micrographs of

a pure Cu, b Cu-2 wt. % SiC,
c Cu-5 wt. % SiC and d Cu-10
wt. % SiC

Fig. 4 Optical micrograph of

Cu-10 vol. % graphite with
a 2 wt. % SiC and b 5 wt. %
SiC

SiC (Coarse) and graphite in Cu matrix are observed. The

Fig. 5 FESEM micrograph of Cu-5 vol. % graphite-5 wt. % SiC
(coarse)
bonding of SiC and graphite particle with copper matrix are
clearly shown, where angular and irregular shaped SiC
particle and the flaky shaped graphite particles are visible.
It is also noticed from the micrographs that some
detectable gap is visible at the interface between Cu matrix
and SiC particles but no gap is visually detected between
Cu matrix and graphite particles. SiC is hard and brittle and
hence it is difficult to deform during consolidation. How-
ever, graphite is very soft which can be easily deformed
with Cu.
Figure 7a, b show the SEM micrograph of Cu-5 vol. %
graphite-5 wt. % SiC hybrid composite for both coarse and
fine SiC particles respectively. Here, we can see the size
difference of SiC particles after sintering. From Fig. 7c, d it

123
2052 Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057

Fig. 6 a SiC (coarse) and

b Graphite particle with copper
matrix under FESEM

Fig. 7 SEM micrograph shows

a distribution of graphite and
SiC (coarse), b distribution of
graphite and SiC (fine) and c,
d interface between SiC particle
in Cu-5 vol. % graphite-5 wt. %
SiC (coarse)

is observed that there is no formation of interfacial product,
which confirms that no reaction takes place between rein-
forcement and matrix during fabrication of composite.
From Fig. 7d we can see formation of crack along SiC
particle. As SiC is very hard and brittle, hence it is possible
that fracturing takes place during cold compaction stage.
To confirm the presence of different elements and their
distribution in the composites, X-ray elemental mapping was
performed for Cu-5 vol. % graphite-5 wt. % SiC composite
as shown in Fig. 8. Blue region in the point mapping indi-
cates the Cu matrix phase. Red and green regions show the
carbon and silicon respectively. From the mapping we can
conclude the uniform distribution of reinforcements in the
composite. EDX analysis was carried out for Cu-10 vol. %
graphite-5 wt. % SiC composite at three different points for
quantitative analysis of three different phases. Figure 9
shows the EDX analysis of the composite where mark 1
denotes the matrix phase (Cu) which contains 100% Cu.
Mark 2 denotes graphite particle which contains mainly
carbon. Mark 3 represents the SiC particle which contains
both silicon and carbon. The quantitative value of copper,
carbon and silicon are shown in Fig. 9.
3.4 Density Measurement
Figure 10 shows the variation of relative density with vol.
% of graphite for Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid composites
containing different amount of SiC. Compaction of

123
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057 2053

Fig. 8 FESEM elemental mapping of Cu-5 vol. % graphite-5 wt. % SiC (coarse)

Element Cu C Si O
Spectrum (wt. %) (wt. %) (wt. %) (wt. %)
1 95.58 4.42 - -
2 - 91.67 3.20 5.13
3 - 37.38 62.62 -

Fig. 9 FESEM EDX analysis of Cu-10 vol. % graphite-5 wt. % SiC at different spectrum

123
2054
Fig. 10 Variation of relative density of hybrid composites with vol.
% of graphite
composite powder mixture was carried at 700 MPa which
is much higher than yield strength of soft phase (Cu and
graphite). Hence, densification results from plastic or vis-
cous-deformation of soft particles (Cu and graphite).
Density of the composite containing 2 wt. % SiC increases
from 79 to 84% with increasing graphite from 1 to 15 vol.
%. During compaction, graphite particles easily flow
plastically as graphite is soft and finally density goes up.
It is also observed that the value of relative density
increases with increase in SiC content for composites
containing coarse SiC. The density of composite depends
on volume fraction of soft and hard phase. At low fraction
of SiC, hard particle is well dispersed and soft graphite and
Cu particles can deform to fill the gaps and a density value
of around 80% is achieved depending on graphite content.
It is generally accepted that at higher fraction of brittle
particle, density value decreases as hard particles forms a
continuous network. However, from the figure, it is
observed that higher density value is achieved at higher
SiC content. It is also known that density of the composites
depend on the particle size ratio (i.e. ratio of diameter of
soft and hard particle). Fedrizzi et al. [18] showed that if
the particle size ratio is much lower than one, higher
density can be achieved at higher fraction of hard particle.
Hence, in the case of coarse SiC; particle size ratio of soft
to hard particle is very less and high density value of 86%
is achieved at 10 wt. % SiC content. Higher volume of SiC
does not hinder densification.
On the other hand, composite containing fine SiC shows
higher density than coarse SiC. Fine SiC particles are
accommodated in the space between Cu and graphite and
hence density value goes up. A maximum density value of
89% is achieved for the composite containing 1 vol. %
graphite and 2 wt. % SiC (fine). However, for composites
containing fine SiC, density decreases marginally with
increasing graphite. The reason is high interparticle friction
123
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
and lower flowability for the composites containing fine
SiC and higher amount of graphite particles.
3.5 Hardness Measurement
Figure 11 shows the variation of hardness of Cu–graphite–
SiC hybrid metal matrix composite with vol. % of graphite
for composite containing 2, 5 and 10 wt. % of SiC. Samal
et al. [19] showed that hardness of Cu–graphite MMC
decreases with increase in the percentage of graphite due to
its soft nature. These authors also showed that the maxi-
mum hardness value was achieved for higher content of
SiC and low content of graphite. They reported these val-
ues as 76.1 VHN for Cu-1 vol. % graphite-10 wt. % SiC
and 32 VHN for pure Cu. As SiC is hard and brittle, it
improves the hardness value. However, some of the hard-
ness data for some composites are uneven and scattered.
We have also observed that hardness of the composite
containing fine SiC particle is more as compared to the
coarse SiC particle as shown in Fig. 11a, b. For Cu-1 vol.
% graphite-2 wt. % SiC we achieve a hardness value of 55
VHN while using coarse SiC particle but hardness value of
58.5 VHN is obtained for fine SiC.
As per Orowan hardening mechanism
Gb
t¼ ð1Þ
k
where s = stress; G = shear modulus; b = Burger vector;
k = separation between two particles in slip plane.
The distance of separation between two particles is less
in case of fine SiC particles. Hence more stress is required
to dislocate the particles. But distance of separation
between coarse SiC particles is more and hence less stress
is required for the movement of dislocations. Hence com-
posite containing fine SiC particles exhibits higher hard-
ness than coarse particles.
3.6 Compressive Strength Study
Figure 12 shows the compressive stress–strain curve for
Cu–graphite–SiC composites. It is observed that compres-
sive strength of the composite containing fine SiC particle
is more as compared to coarse SiC particles. This is due to
higher density and hardness of composites containing fine
SiC than coarse one. However, yield strength of hybrid
metal matrix composite containing coarse SiC particle is
more as compared to fine SiC particle. We have obtained a
yield strength of 486 MPa for Cu-5 vol. % graphite-5 wt.
% SiC composite containing fine SiC particle whereas
551 MPa for coarse SiC particle. As a ductile matrix, Cu
and graphite particles tend to plastically deform but their
deformation is hindered by coarse SiC particle to a large
extent then the fine SiC particles during yielding.
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
Fig. 11 Variation of hardness of the hybrid composites with vol. % of graphite for a 2, b 5 and c 10 wt. % SiC
Fig. 12 Variation of compressive strength with strain of Cu–
graphite–SiC hybrid MMCs
Figure 13 shows the fracture surface of the Cu–graphite
and Cu–graphite–SiC composite. From the figure we notice
that dimple is formed on the Cu rich zone which represents
ductile fracture. From the micrograph we can see the de-
2055
bonding between matrix and reinforcement and the crack
initiation at the interface of the particles. The propagation
of crack formed by the weak interface creates failure in the
composite under compression. Both mixed ductile and
brittle fracture occurs in Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid com-
posite due to the presence of hard and brittle SiC particles
and soft Cu and graphite as shown in the figure.
3.7 Electrical Conductivity Measurement
3.7.1 Effect of Graphite and SiC on Conductivity
Figure 14 shows that electrical conductivity value of
hybrid composite decreases with increase in graphite and
SiC content because the conductivity of graphite and SiC
are lower than that of pure copper. The ceramic based SiC
forms a barrier to motion of copper electrons, providing
electrical conductivity. Electrical conductivity of a metal
depends mainly on the mobility of electrons in the struc-
ture. SiC particles added into pure copper redouble the
123
2056
Fig. 13 Fracture surface of a,
b Cu-10 vol. % graphite and c,
d Cu-5 vol. % graphite-5 wt. %
SiC (coarse)
Fig. 14 Variation of electrical conductivity with vol. % of graphite
electrical resistivity via distorting the structure and so
electrical conductivity of composites decreases with
increasing the volume ratio of SiC.
3.7.2 Effect of SiC Particle Size on Conductivity
SiC particle size also affects the electrical conductivity of
the composites. Electrical conductivity value increases
with increase in particle size as evident from the figure.
With addition of coarse SiC particle into copper matrix,
less electrons are scattered and thus mobility and conduc-
tivity of the composite increases. Celebi et al. [20] also
showed the similar kind of behaviour for Cu–SiC com-
posite fabricated by powder metallurgy. The electrical
123
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
conductivity for pure Cu is found to be 4.39 9 106 S/m
and it gradually decreases with increase of reinforcement
and it reaches to 1.93 9 106 S/m for Cu-15 vol. % gra-
phite-10 wt. % SiC. Electrical conductivity value is found
to be 4.09 9 106 S/m for Cu-1 vol. % graphite-2 wt. % SiC
composite containing coarse SiC particles and it decreases
to 3.68 9 106 S/m for fine SiC particles.
4 Conclusions
The following conclusions can be drawn from the present
investigation.
1. Cu–graphite–SiC hybrid metal matrix composites have
been successfully fabricated by using powder metal-
lurgy route taking different composition of graphite
and SiC as well as by taking both coarse and fine SiC
particle.
2. XRD study reveals that no reaction takes place
between Cu, graphite and SiC during fabrication of
composites. However, some oxide peaks are present
due to the presence of atmospheric oxygen during
conventional sintering of the composite.
3. Optical and SEM analysis show that graphite and SiC
reinforcement are distributed homogeneously in Cu
matrix. We noticed that there is good bonding between
reinforcement (SiC and graphite) and matrix.
4. Relative density of the composites increases with
increase in both graphite and SiC reinforcement in case
Trans Indian Inst Met (2017) 70(8):2047–2057
of coarse SiC particle. In case of fine SiC, relative
density decrease with increase in SiC content. Also
higher relative density was achieved in case of fine SiC
particle.
5. Hardness of the hybrid composite decreases with
increase in graphite content and increases with
increase in SiC content. Upto 10 wt. % of SiC addition
increases the value of hardness to 77 VHN, whereas
hardness of pure Cu is 32 VHN. Higher hardness value
has been achieved using fine SiC particle as compared
to coarse SiC particle.
6. Compressive strength of the composite decreases with
increase in graphite content in the composite. It
increases with increase in SiC content in the compos-
ite. Compressive strength of the composite containing
fine SiC particle is more as compared to coarse SiC
particle before yielding. But post yield strength of the
composite containing fine SiC particle is less when
compared with coarse SiC particle.
7. Electrical conductivity decreases with increase in SiC
and graphite content in the composite. By decreasing
the SiC particle size, the electrical conductivity value
decreases.
Acknowledgements Financial support for this work from the
Department of Science and Technology (DST), India (Grant No. SR/
FTP/ETA-100/2010) is gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. Tjong S C, and Ma Z Y, Mater Sci Eng R Rep 29 (2000) 49.
2057
2. Gewfiel E, El-Meniawi M A H, and Fouad Y, in International
Conference on Engineering and Technology (ICET) (2012),
p 1–6.
3. Efe G C, Altinsoy I, Yener T, Ipek M, Zeytin S, and Bindal C,
Vacuum 85 (2010) 643.
4. Efe G, Ipek M, Zeytin S, and Bindal C, Compos Part B Eng 43
(2012) 1813.
5. Nayak D, Ray N, Sahoo R, and Debata M, Tribol Trans 57 (2014)
908.
6. Moustafa S F, Abdel-Hamid Z, and Abd-Elhay A M, Mater Lett
53 (2002) 244.
7. Tjong S C, and Lau K C, Mater Lett 43 (2000) 274.
8. Berner D, Fuks D, Ellis E, Mundim K, and Dorfman S, Appl Surf
Sci 144–145 (1999) 677.
9. Zhang S, and Wang F, J Mater Process Technol 182 (2007) 122.
10. Li J-F, Zhang L, Xiao J -K, and Zhou K -C, Trans Nonferrous
Met Soc China 25 (2015) 3354.
11. Chen B, Bi Q, Yang J, Xia Y, Hao J, Tribol Int 41 (2008) 1145.
12. Yao G C, Mei Q S, Li J Y, Li C L, Ma Y, Chena F, and Liu M,
Mater Des 110 (2016) 124.
13. Ren S, Hong Q, Chen J, He X, and Qu X, J Alloys Compd 652
(2015) 351.
14. Qian G, Yi F, Chen Y M, Fei M, Wang Y Q, and Liu W H, Trans
Nonferrous Met Soc China 25 (2015) 1986.
15. Gautam R K, Ray S, Sharma S C, Jain S C, and Tyagi R, Wear
271 (2011) 658.
16. Han X -M, Gao F, Su L -L, Fu R, Zhan E, J Tribol (2016). doi:
10.1115/1.4035014.
17. Pradhan A K, and Das S, Tribol Trans 57 (2014) 46.
18. Fedrizzi A, Pellizzari M, and Zadra M, Powder Technol 228
(2012) 435.
19. Samal C P, Parihar J S, and Chaira D, J Alloys Compd 569 (2013)
95.
20. Efe G C, Zeytin S, and Bindal C, Mater Des 36 (2012) 633.
123