Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 13556–13562 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

ICMMM - 2017

Aluminium Alloy Composites and its Machinability studies; A

Review
Joel .J 1, M. Anthony Xavior 2*
1
Assistant Professor, 2 Professor
1, 2
School of Mechanical Engineering, VIT University, Vellore-632014, India

Abstract

In the recent years, composite materials have emerged as one of the functional material with improved properties,
contributing to the wide range of applications. However shaping and machining of these materials leftover a challenge due to
combination of various dissimilar reinforcements and its abrasive nature. So far conventional machining process like milling,
turning or drilling are adopted for machining of metal matrix composites. But, due advancement in the manufacturing of
composites with the combination of novel materials, there will be always new challenges for machining of such materials with
close tolerance. The current article gives an overview about the advances in the composite material and its properties, recent
development in the machinability analysis of metal matrix composite. Most of the discussions presented in this review article
focuses on aluminum and its alloy based composites.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of International Conference on Materials Manufacturing and Modelling (ICMMM - 2017).

Keywords: Composites, machinability, aluminium and its alloys, hardness

1. Introduction

Technological advancements in the area of composites is diverted towards combining innovative materials and
new forming methods to synthesis Metal Matrix Composites (MMC’s). Thus fabricated composites with improved
properties received a lot of attention in various fields like aerospace, defense automobile and many industries due to
its distinctiveness and extensively better-quality compared to its base materials. Due to properties like high strength
and light weight of Aluminum (Al) MMC’s, these materials, has a big share in engineering materials. The benefit of
composite technology is the combination of most important features of the base metals/matrix and the

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9443687391;
E-mail address: [email protected]

2214-7853 © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of International Conference on Materials Manufacturing and Modelling (ICMMM - 2017).
 Joel J & M Anthony Xavior / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 13556–13562 13557

reinforcements used. The technology enables achieving high strength materials without sacrificing the ductility and
density besides overcoming the drawbacks of base materials by providing possibility to add one or more high
strength particles and platelets. The necessity for fixing the various properties and crushing strength performance
will be decided by its applications in various operating conditions. SiC (micro and nano sized particulate) and Al2O3
is usually incorporated in Al and its alloy based composite as reinforcing materials to enhance several of its
properties[1][2][3]. Especially, Metal matrix composites have offered materials with improved properties,
particularly in terms of hardness, stiffness, strength and wear.
The factor that typically improve the materials performance often degrade its machinability. Therefore, to
manufacture components economically, engineers are challenged to find ways to improve machinability without
harming the performance[4]. Important properties of composite materials are: improved strength and stiffness,
excellent fatigue resistance and high corrosion resistance etc. The matrix is the primary constituent in a composite
material that provides load transfer and structural integrity. The reinforcements will enhance the mechanical
properties. Aluminium, Mg and Ti are the main matrix material in MMC. Major reinforcement materials are silicon
carbide, alumina and graphite. Aluminum Metal Matrix Composites (MMCs) reinforced with ceramic particles have
been developed for high wear resistance applications such as cylinder liners and brakes as a replacement for gray
cast iron. Ceramic particles in an aluminum matrix improve its wear resistance property, but also cause high
abrasive wear on cutting tools, which results in poor tool life and inconsistent part quality. [5]
The cutting tool starts wearing while machining aluminum due to abrasion of the free surface. Wear increases
with the number of large hard particles which are embedded in the aluminium workpiece. The wear is extremely
high in case of cast comonents. Wrought alloys with low silicon contents cause minimum tool wear. Machining
results of MMCs are different than metal machining due to presence of hard and brittle reinforcements. The main
problem in machining MMC is the high tool wear; wich leads to an uneconomical production process or makes the
process impossible. Thus, machining of composite materials imposes special demands on geometry and wear
resistance of the cutting tools [6].

2. Processing of Aluminum Matrix composites

In the stir casting process the distribution of reinforcement phase in a molten metal is carried out through
mechanical stirring. This method with ceramic particles is appropriate for manufacturing of composites up to < 30%
volume fractions [7][8] of reinforcement/constituents. The distribution of the particulates depends on material
behaviour and process constraints (wetting, strength of mixing, rate of solidification and relative density). Compo
casting process includes addition of reinforcement during solidifying melt and agitated well to distribute the
particles. The method results in better distribution of the reinforcement particles, lower porosity, better wettability
and lower shrinkage. The process also has a great impact on increase in hardness and impact energy [9]. Squeeze
casting is a combination of closed die forging and gravity die casting process. In this technique, metal solidifies
under pressure within closed die halves. The process offers high metal yield, minimum porosity, minimum
shrinkage followed by excellent surface finish. The solidification under pressure enhances refinement in structure
and up to 50% reduction in the grain size [10]. Powder Metallurgy (PM) is the process of blending refined powdered
materials, compacting them into a net shape followed by heating (sintering) in a controlled atmosphere. This method
is evolved to manufacture near net shaped components by blending elemental or alloyed powders. The process
enables the capability of combining a relatively high volume/weight fraction with one or more type of reinforcement
with matrix and reinforcement systems. Further, this method may not be an ideal production technique for mass
production [11].
Mechanical Alloying (MA) is a solid state method which is used to obtain highly metastable
structures (Nanocrystalline and amorphous) with high thermal stability. Further, the properties of reinforcements
highly rely on reinforcement parameter and volume fraction. The milling time results in reduction of the grain size
13558 Joel J & M Anthony Xavior / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 13556–13562

and faster the grain refinement unlike the lattice strain of Aluminum matrix [12]. In situ synthesis is a type of
fabrication method wherein the reinforcements which are formed in the matrix materials by controlled metallurgical
reactions by externally adding fine powder or gaseous phase. Thus developed composites exhibit higher values of
hardness, UTS and Young’s modulus compared to the base alloy[13]. In case of Ultrasonic Assisted Casting (UAC)
significant effort has been made to develop metal matrix nanocomposites (MMNCs) to fabricate new class of
advanced composites that are blend with micro inclusions to overcome low fracture toughness, poor ductility and
machinability [14]. Ultrasonic cavitation blending of reinforcement will create the high temperature with strong
impact which enables the breaking of nanoparticle cluster in the molten metal which is very much suitable for
dispersion of nano SiC, B4C, CNTs and able to achieve isotropic material [15][16]. Infiltration process is a novel
method to fabricate aluminum based composites. The method comprises of the injection of liquid state aluminum or
aluminum alloy into the pre forms of short fibre, continuous fibre or particle or whisker to produce MMCs. The
process has a flexibility to incorporate 10 to 70% volume fraction of reinforcement [17]. The shape of the
reinforcement plays a major role in aluminum composites. Whiskers/fiber or particulate are the major classification
of reinforcement in which whiskers/short fiber has shown the better results in terms of mechanical properties. So, in
order to obtain composite with desired properties and well refined microstructure, interfacial reactions should be
taken care.

3. Carbon reinforced Aluminium matrix composites

The fields of modern engineering like avionics and even automobile sectors have seen a huge demand for
materials with high strength to weight ratio. And with the advancement in the development of composite materials
such materials are easily realizable[18]1[9]. However with the search for even better combinations AA 7075 has
proved to be one of the best materials that answer to these needs. Much research has been conducted to find a much
superior material leading to the usage of both graphene and CNT hybrids as the reinforcements within the
Aluminium matrix[20]. AA 7075 has proved to be an effective matrix in case of graphene with reduced wear
resistance and better lubricating properties[21]. Thus it was required to check the compatibility of AA7075 with
MWCNT in order to further probe into its properties related to a composite matrix. However there are two prime
problems regarding the strength of these composites.
The first problem is caused due to non-homogeneous and poorly distributed
CNT in the AA matrix. This may be attributed to the strong Van der Waals forces that exist between the CNT
themselves causing self-entanglement. Secondly the imperfect bonding between the Al-CNT matrixes has also been
another hindrance; this is the result of the poor wettability between the molecules of the members hence giving rise
to a poorly bonded mass. In the recent times, processes including high-energy ball milling (HEBM) [22], friction
stir-processing [23], flake metallurgy [24], and nano-scale dispersion [25] have been used in fabricating CNT-Al
composites. Even then the process of the dispersion seemed to be ineffective as it altered the parent properties of the
reinforcement and hence the desired effects were not obtained at full potential so new dispersion methods were
concentrated upon. However the process of ultra-sonication which has exhibited a promising potential has not been
completely explored. Less attention has been devoted to the study of the CNT/Al interface, which is key to
understand the intrinsic behaviour of CNTs in CNT-Al matrix composites [26]. Thus, strong interfacial bonding is a
prerequisite for effective load transfer in CNT-Al matrix composites. The Young’s Modulus of the MWCNT was
estimated with the help of Voigt-Reuss and Nardone-Prewo models. However further studies have shown that even
with higher Young’s modulus value better reinforcement is not observed in SWCNT as there was significant
damage during the ball milling process[27]. Thus the focus was shifted to the incorporation of MWCNT instead of
its SW counterpart in order to further enhance the properties. TEM images of pure Al with MWCNT have shown
promising results of effective weight transfer thus it is possible that AA 7075 will further increase the effective
properties [28]. An exciting observation on the direct imaging of the tensile failure of the CNT reinforced
 Joel J & M Anthony Xavior / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 13556–13562 13559

Aluminum matrices has been performed to demonstrate the dominance of the fibre strengthening mechanism in
CNT reinforced composites. In-situ tensile tests were performed on the AL-CNT composites within the SEM
chambers and relevant observations were made. The failure has been observed due to the CNT pull-outs from the
sample whereas the telescopic sliding of the wall of the CNT was observed to strengthen the composite .Thus it was
concluded that the reinforcement should be preferably longer and at low concentrations. Few studies exist on the
crystal orientation relationships among MWCNTs, carbides, and the metal matrix; in general, researchers in the field
have poor comprehension of the formation and growth of carbides at MWCNTs. Commonly employed processes
seldom obtain direct evidence of the existence of carbides at the MWCNT/metal matrix interface. This is because
MWCNTs usually experience degradation and non- uniform dispersion, and thus have poor contact with the matrix.
In particular, the HEBM process causes severe damage to MWCNTs [29]. In the last few years, the research on
metal–carbon composites was done for the diverse range of engineering material applications and Fig.1 shows
various molecular forms of carbon allotropes in the same physical state (graphitic forms). Also, research shows the
considerable improvement in the materials properties [30]. In recent studies the process of ultra-sonication has
proved to be much useful in order to achieve a higher homogeneity in the materials and the same may be expected in
the case of Al-MWCNT as well [31].

4. Phenomenon of Metal Matrix Composite (MMC) machining

Table.1 summarises the advanced aluminum alloy composite combinations, which are currently being used for
various applications. Machining of such Metal Matrix composites (MMCs) is similar to conventional metal
machining and its phenomenon is depicted in the fig.2. During machining of MMCs, there will be massive tool wear
of cutting tool (both in coated and uncoated). The major tool wear is due to abrasion of the reinforcement material
on the matrix material at the cutting edge due to particle sliding motion which are relative to the clearance face.
Multiple wear mechanism is responsible for the tool wear which are namely micro cracking, micro cutting and
micro ploughing at the cutting edge BC and the fracture which take place at the plane DC.

Fig. 2 Machining of Metal Matrix

13560 Joel J & M Anthony Xavior / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 13556–13562

Table.1 Advanced aluminum alloy composite combinations and its applications

Composition Properties Applications Ref
Al A356 + 4 wt% nano Al2O3 Compressive Strength Automotive, aerospace [32]
(Stir casting) (630.5 MPa) and electrical industries
Al A356 + 10% wt SiC + 1% Yield strength (170 MPa), [33]
Spacecraft
wt graphite) (Compocasting) Modulus of elasticity ( GPa 81.2 )
Al – Cu (4.5 wt% Cu), Al – Hardness (139 BHN), Engine piston and heat [34]
Cu/SiCp (squeeze casting) UTS (239 MPa) sink
Al A356 + 0 5 vol% micro [35]
Yield strength (271 MPa),
TiB2 Drum brake material
UTS - (308MPa)
(Stir casting)
Magneto parts, [36]
87.048 VHN,
Al 6061 + 10wt% Si3N4 appliance fittings,
UTS-201 MPa
(Stir casting)
2009Al + (1wt% CNT + [37]
Yield strength (385 MPa), Automotive and
3wt% CNT) (1-pass FSP)
UTS-(477 MPa), aerospace applications
(Friction stir processing)
Al 2024 + (5wt% Gr + 20 [38]
Density (2.94 g/cm3), Spacecraft and the
wt% SiC) (Powder
Hardness (63 BHN) antenna dish
metallurgy)
Al 7075, Al 7075 + 7wt% SiC Density (2.81 g/cm3, 2.784 g/cm3), Electrical signal [39]
+ 3wt% Gr) (Stir casting) Hardness (175 Hv, 219 Hv) transmission
Al 6061 + (20wt% AlNp ) UTS - (241 MPa), [40]
Microelectronic devices
(Stir casting) Microhardness (91 VHN),
[41]
Microhardness (149 Hv), High temperature
Al 6082 + (24 vol% TiC)
UTS- (382 MPa) applications
(Friction stir processing )
Al 6061-T6 + (8vol% SiC +
UTS-(219 MPa), Used in automobile
4vol% Gr) (900 rpm) [42]
Yield strength (185 MPa) components
(Friction stir processing)
Al 7009 + ( 25wt% SiCp) land-based systems in [43]
Hardness (138 Hv)
(as cast) military

Higher intensity of strain hardening is found for the reinforced composites compare to its monolithic.
Further, intensity depends on the particle shape, volume fractions of the added particles [44][45]. The study made on
the Aluminum – Silicon carbide composites found to be micro-grooving on the composite surface and notch
chipping at the flank surface. This formation take place due the presence of harder SiC particles which are observed
for the Al2O3/TiC tools [46]. On the other hand, flushing out of alumina from the tool due to SiC particulate
abrading which make the tool got wider and subjecting to crater wear [47]. Wet machining/Coolant is the best
option for the machining of the composite in which it absorbs the complete abnormal heat from the composites also,
prevents the surface hardening due to recasting. During machining of composites, higher the cutting force lead to
build up edge formation which further subjects to Flank wear in case of Aluminum-SiC composite [48].

PCD inserts proved to have better tool life for Aluminum-SiC composite compared to PCBN and
CVD diamond inserts in the prospect of flank wear [46][49] and lower friction coefficient[47]. Further, coating
(diamond tool coatings) proved to show significant difference in the tool life. Also, Bi-layer and multilayer coating
coated TiN, Al2O3 and TiCNi proved to result in better machinability of Aluminum and-SiC composite[50]. Further
alternatively multiphase coating (Fig.3) cutting tools are also suitable for composite machining. Thermal softening
is the other feature during machining of the metal matrix composite in which the composite get heat up on
 Joel J & M Anthony Xavior / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 13556–13562 13561

increasing the cutting speed. This increasing in the heat on the cutting surface will help in the ploughing of the
added particle into the matrix which reduces the tool wear[47][51]. Further, the clear cut of the particulate will gives
the fine surface finish compare to pull out or ploughing mechanism[52]. The chip formation mechanism of the
composite is same as like monolithic material but the rolling or curling of the chip formation during machining is
directly depends on the percentage of added reinforcement to the matrix[53].

5. Conclusion

The current study provides the overview on the machinability of Metal Matrix Composite. Enormous trials and
solutions have been made for the existing traditional particulate reinforced composite especially for Aluminum
Metal Matrix Composites (AMMCs). Further, due to the combination of novel reinforcement and its hybrid
combinations, machinability still become a challenge. There is increasing attention on Metal Matrix Composites
(MMCs) which comprises of Graphene, carbon nano tubes nano ceramic particulates and its hybrid combinations.
So, it seeks researcher’s keen attention to optimize the machining parameters of such novel composites.

References

[1] Bastwros, Mina, Gap-Yong Kim, Can Zhu, Kun Zhang, Shiren Wang, Xiaoduan Tang, and Xinwei Wang Composites Part B:
Engineering 60 (2014): 111-118.
[2] Bastwros, Mina MH, Amal MK Esawi, and Abdalla Wifi Wear 307, no. 1 (2013): 164-173.
[3] Lin, C. B., Zue-Chin Chang, Y. H. Tung, and Yuan-Yuan Ko. Wear 270, no. 5 (2011): 382-394.
[4] Mitchell, L. A., and C. Osgood. Wear 40, no. 2 (1976): 203-222.
[5] Kumar, HG Prashantha, and M. Anthony Xavior. Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals 69, no. 2 (2016): 415-419..
[6] Sahoo, Ashok Kumar, Swastik Pradhan, and A. K. Rout. Archives of civil and mechanical engineering 13, no. 1 (2013): 27-35.
[7] Luo, A. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 26, no. 9 (1995): 2445-2455.
[8] Saravanan, R. A., and M. K. Surappa Materials Science and Engineering: A 276, no. 1 (2000): 108-116.
[9] Amirkhanlou, S., and B. Niroumand. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China 20 (2010): s788-s793.
[10] Raji, Abdulkabir. AU Journal of Technology 13, no. 3 (2010): 158-64p.
[11] Rana, R. S., Rajesh Purohit, and S. Das. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research 3, no. 6 (2012): 1-16.
[12] Deng, K. K., K. Wu, Y. W. Wu, K. B. Nie, and M. Y. Zheng Journal of Alloys and Compounds 504, no. 2 (2010): 542-547.
[13] Christy, T. V., N. Murugan, and S. Kumar Journal of Minerals and Materials Characterization and Engineering 9, no. 01 (2010): 57.
[14] Rana, R. S., Rajesh Purohit, and S. Das. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research 3, no. 6 (2012): 1-16.
13562 Joel J & M Anthony Xavior / Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 13556–13562

[15] Suslick, Kenneth S., Yuri Didenko, Ming M. Fang, Taeghwan Hyeon, Kenneth J. Kolbeck, William B. McNamara, Millan M. Mdleleni,
and Mike Wong Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 357, no.
1751 (1999): 335-353.
[16] Donthamsetty, S., N. R. Damera, and P. K. Jain AIJSTPME 2 (2009): 27-34.
[17] Kang, C. G., and Y. H. Seo. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 61, no. 3 (1996): 241-249.
[18] Liu, Shuan, Lin Gu, Haichao Zhao, Jianmin Chen, and Haibin Yu. Journal of Materials Science & Technology 32, no. 5 (2016): 425-431.
[19] Sharma, Pardeep, Satpal Sharma, and Dinesh Khanduja Materials and Manufacturing Processes 30, no. 11 (2015): 1370-1376.
[20] Asano, Kazunori. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 30, no. 11 (2015): 1312-1316.
[21] Baradeswaran, A., and A. Elaya Perumal. Composites Part B: Engineering 56 (2014): 472-476.
[22] Esawi, A., and K. Morsi Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing 38, no. 2 (2007): 646-650.
[23] Lim, D. K., T. Shibayanagi, and A. P. Gerlich. Materials Science and Engineering: A 507, no. 1 (2009): 194-199.
[24] Jiang, Lin, Zhiqiang Li, Genlian Fan, Linlin Cao, and Di Zhang. Carbon 50, no. 5 (2012): 1993-1998.
[25] Mackay, Alastair M., Stephen C. Beck, J. Mary Murphy, Frank P. Barry, Clinton O. Chichester, and Mark F. Pittenger. Tissue
engineering 4, no. 4 (1998): 415-428.
[26] Bakshi, Srinivasa R., and Arvind Agarwal. Carbon 49, no. 2 (2011): 533-544.
[27] Choi, Heekyu, Lin Wang, Dongkeun Cheon, and Woong Lee Composites Science and Technology 74 (2013): 91-98.
[28] Zhou, Weiwei, Sora Bang, Hiroki Kurita, Takamichi Miyazaki, Yuchi Fan, and Akira Kawasaki. Carbon 96 (2016): 919-928.
[29] Thostenson, Erik T., and Tsu-Wei Chou. Journal of physics D: Applied physics 35, no. 16 (2002): L77.
[30] Inukai, Shigeki, Toru Noguchi, Ken-ichi Niihara, Naoki Oyaizu, Eisuke Yamada, Shinji Inagaki, Kenji Takeuchi, and Morinobu Endo.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 54, no. 35 (2015): 8690-8698.
[31] Gür, C. H. Materials Science and Engineering: A 361, no. 1 (2003): 29-35.
[32] Ezatpour, H. R., M. Torabi-Parizi, and Seyed Abdolkarim Sajjadi Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China 23, no. 5 (2013):
1262-1268.
[33] Vencl, Aleksandar, Ilija Bobic, Saioa Arostegui, Biljana Bobic, Aleksandar Marinković, and Miroslav Babić. Journal of Alloys and
Compounds 506, no. 2 (2010): 631-639.
[34] Onat, Adem Journal of Alloys and Compounds 489, no. 1 (2010): 119-124.
[35] Akbari, M. Karbalaei, H. R. Baharvandi, and K. Shirvanimoghaddam. Materials & Design (1980-2015) 66 (2015): 150-161.
[36] Ramesh, C. S., R. Keshavamurthy, B. H. Channabasappa, and S. Pramod. Tribology international 43, no. 3 (2010): 623-634.
[37] Liu, Z. Y., B. L. Xiao, W. G. Wang, and Z. Y. Ma. Carbon 50, no. 5 (2012): 1843-1852.
[38] Ravindran, P., K. Manisekar, P. Rathika, and P. Narayanasamy. Materials & Design 45 (2013): 561-570.
[39] Kumar, Ravinder, and Suresh Dhiman Materials & Design 50 (2013): 351-359.
[40] Kumar, B. Ashok, and N. Murugan. Materials & Design 40 (2012): 52-58.
[41] Thangarasu, A., N. Murugan, I. Dinaharan, and S. J. Vijay Archives of civil and mechanical engineering 15, no. 2 (2015): 324-334.
[42] Aruri, Devaraju, Kumar Adepu, Kumaraswamy Adepu, and Kotiveerachari Bazavadajournal of materials research and technology 2, no. 4
(2013): 362-369.
[43] Rao, R. N., S. Das, D. P. Mondal, and G. Dixit. Tribology International 43, no. 1 (2010): 330-339.
[44] Li, Y., et.al Acta Materialia 46, no. 16 (1998): 5633-5646.
[45] Li, Y., K. T. Ramesh, and E. S. C. Chin Acta materialia 48, no. 7 (2000): 1563-1573.
[46] Ding, X., W. Y. H. Liew, and X. D. Liu Wear 259, no. 7 (2005): 1225-1234.
[47] Muthukrishnan, N., M. Murugan, and K. Prahlada Rao. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 38, no. 5-6
(2008): 447-454.
[48] Basavarajappa, S., G. Chandramohan, and J. Paulo Davim, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 196, no. 1 (2008): 332-338.
[49] Pramanik, Alokesh, L. C. Zhang, and J. A. Arsecularatne. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 46, no. 14 (2006):
1795-1803.
[50] Sahoo, Ashok Kumar, Swastik Pradhan, and A. K. Rout Archives of civil and mechanical engineering 13, no. 1 (2013): 27-35.
[51] Tomac, Nikola, K. Tannessen, and Finn Ola Rasch. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology 41, no. 1 (1992): 55-58.
[52] Cheung, C. F., K. C. Chan, S. To, and W. B. Lee. Scripta Materialia 47, no. 2 (2002): 77-82.
[53] Hung, N. P., S. H. Yeo, K. K. Lee, and K. J. Ng. Material and Manufacturing Process 13, no. 1 (1998): 85-100.