Next Article in Journal
Bifunctional Hot Water Vapor Template-Mediated Synthesis of Nanostructured Polymeric Carbon Nitride for Efficient Hydrogen Evolution
Next Article in Special Issue
Recycling of Waste Bamboo Biomass and Papermaking Waste Liquid to Synthesize Sodium Lignosulfonate/Chitosan Glue-Free Biocomposite
Previous Article in Journal
A Comprehensive Update of Various Attempts by Medicinal Chemists to Combat COVID-19 through Natural Products
Previous Article in Special Issue
Facile Synthesis of Hollow Glass Microsphere Filled PDMS Foam Composites with Exceptional Lightweight, Mechanical Flexibility, and Thermal Insulating Property
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Molecules
Volume 28
Issue 12
10.3390/molecules28124861
molecules-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Comparative Study of Chemically Treated Sugarcane and Kevlar Fiber to Develop Brake Resistance Composites

by
Vikas Mehta
1,*,
Naresh Kumar
2,
Ali Algahtani
3,4,
Vineet Tirth
3,4,
Tawfiq Al-Mughanam
5 and
Kwok-Wing Chau
6
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Keimyung University, 1095 Dalgubeol-daero, Dalseo-gu, Daegu 42601, Republic of Korea
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Green Hill Engineering College, Solan 173229, HP, India
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, King Khalid University, Abha 61421, Saudi Arabia
4
Research Center for Advanced Materials Science (RCAMS), King Khalid University, Guraiger, Abha 61413, Saudi Arabia
5
Department of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, King Faisal University, P.O. Box 380, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia
6
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2023, 28(12), 4861; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124861
Submission received: 1 March 2023 / Revised: 27 April 2023 / Accepted: 8 May 2023 / Published: 20 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Molecules and Polymer Composite from Agricultural and Forestry Biomass)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Recently, much research has revealed the increasing importance of natural fiber in modern applications. Natural fibers are used in many vital sectors like medicine, aerospace and agriculture. The cause of increasing the application of natural fiber in different fields is its eco-friendly behavior and excellent mechanical properties. The study’s primary goal is to increase the usage of environmentally friendly materials. The existing materials used in brake pads are detrimental to humans and the environment. Natural fiber composites have recently been studied and effectively employed in brake pads. However, there has yet to be a comparison investigation of natural fiber and Kevlar-based brake pad composites. Sugarcane, a natural fabric, is employed in the present study to substitute trendy materials like Kevlar and asbestos. The brake pads have been developed with 5–20 wt.% SCF and 5–10 wt.% Kevlar fiber (KF) to make the comparative study. SCF compounds at 5 wt.% outperformed the entire NF composite in coefficient of friction (µ), (%) fade and wear. However, the values of mechanical properties were found to be almost identical. Although it has been observed that, with an increase in the proportion of SCF, the performance also increased in terms of recovery. The thermal stability and wear rate are maximum for 20 wt.% SCF and 10 wt.% KF composites. The comparative study indicated that the Kevlar-based brake pad specimens provide superior outcomes compared to the SCF composite for fade (%), wear performance and coefficient of friction (Δμ). Finally, the worn composite surfaces were examined using a scanning electron microscopy technique to investigate probable wear mechanisms and to comprehend the nature of the generated contact patches/plateaus, which is critical for determining the tribological behavior of the composites.

1. Introduction

The demand for brake friction materials is rising significantly in the modern day because of a rapid increase in the number of fast automobiles. To accomplish this objective, however, an effective braking system is necessary. Brake friction materials play a key role in achieving the competing performance criteria of friction and wear throughout a wide range of operating conditions. The current materials used in brake pads harm humans and the environment. Trending materials like Kevlar and asbestos are a cause of cancer. As a result, a brake friction composite comprises different materials, such as fibers, fillers, binders and friction modifiers. After asbestos was removed from brake friction materials due to its carcinogenic impact, the evolution of non-asbestos organic friction compounds was halted. Non-asbestos brake friction materials, on the other hand, have been technologically developed. Despite this, they have been prone to several braking-related performance peculiarities that needed to be more practically non-existent in asbestos-based brake friction composites. Attempts are being undertaken to improve the frictional performance of brake friction materials in various ways, principally by including novel chemicals or their combinations into the composition. Different waste materials, natural fibers and nanomaterials have been asserted to have the potential to be employed in automobile brake friction composites in this regard. Today’s investigation remains to progress in engineering practice to discover the alternative to Kevlar and asbestos. According to WHO reports, these substances harm humans and the environment [1]. These substances are one reason for cancer and have taken millions of lives [1,2,3]. As a substitute for asbestos, several scholars have proposed various alternatives, such as aluminum, steel, wollastonite, Lapinus and carbon [4,5,6,7]. However, Kevlar is still a brake friction substance without superior options [8,9]. The trending friction substance displays the same effect as asbestos. Furthermore, it has limitations, such as inadequate reuse, more cost, adversity to humans and the environmental condition and non-recyclability [10,11,12]. Natural fiber (NF) has become trendy because of its environment-friendly nature, superior mechanical properties, lightweight nature and accessibility [13,14,15,16,17,18]. Several articles have demonstrated the potential of NF polymer composites [19,20,21,22,23,24]. However, a few shortcomings of NF can be overcome by chemical treatment [25,26,27,28,29]. SCF is the utmost popular crop worldwide [30]. SCF can be used as polymer composite reinforcement due to its abundant availability, low density, low pre-treatment costs and good mechanical properties. SCF is an agricultural waste that is composed after the extraction of liquor. Moreover, to being nearly boundless, it is generally wasted in countries that cultivate it, which distinguishes a fiber of meager cost. It is usually used in ethanol, building boards and polypropylene polymer composites. It is made up of three major components: rind (22%), pith (5%) and fiber (73%). Mechanical parameters, such as tensile strength, Young’s modulus and density, range from 20 to 50 MPa up to 2.7 GPa and 1.28 g/cc, respectively [31,32,33]. The ingredients of SCF are lignin to 18–24%, hemicelluloses 20–25%, cellulose 45–55% and ash 1.18%. It had a vital role in the life of humans during ancient times. Therefore, SCF considers brake pad friction material because of its excellent mechanical properties. The SCF provides good thermal productivity, which can be applied to create brake pad composites. The role of such property by SCF gives a unique brake system performing in the motorized purpose if suitably optimized. Hence due to its excellent mechanical properties, an attempt to get the brake pad with different percentages of 5–20 wt.% SCF and 5–10 wt.% Kevlar fiber (KF) by weight in the total matrix mixture for optimization. The tensile strength, flexural strength, density, hardness test, impact test, wear, coefficient of friction, absorption and optimized composite percentage are well suited for making brake pad material. Several investigators have studied natural fibers frictional laminate materials in recent years and have proposed that the multiple benefits of natural fibers will give a less affordable and much more environmentally friendly substitute to expensive fibers, such as Kevlar, utilized in the brake friction material industry. Maleque et al. [16] discovered that adding 5% coir fibers to frictional compositions led to maximum wear resistance. The tribological characteristics of flax fiber-reinforced friction composites were investigated by Z. Fu et al. [27]. They discovered that 5.6 vol.% flax fibers stabilize the friction coefficient and increase wear resistance at high temperatures. Y. Liu et al. [28] investigated the effect of abaca fiber on phenol resin-based materials’ wear and friction characteristics. They found that the number of fibers and their length may significantly improve tribological properties. Furthermore, sisal fiber [29], hemp fiber [34], bamboo fiber [35], kenaf fiber [36] and, most recently, cow dung fibers [37] have been shown to increase tribological properties. Tej Singh et al. [38] study comparing pineapple fiber, and Kevlar offers good physical tribological properties. However, the comparison is made with constrained criteria. Natural fibers can be used to replace asbestos and other harmful materials. Sugarcane fiber, generated from the sugarcane plant and causing environmental degradation due to direct dumping on open areas, is one of the most abundant raw resources. Although sugarcane fiber-reinforced composites have been found to have acceptable physical and mechanical characteristics, the study refers to research on using these fibers in the development of limited brake friction materials [30,31,32,33]. The brake friction material is a cost-effective and environmentally friendly alternative to synthetic fibers, such as Kevlar, in the automobile sector. Natural sugarcane fibers were used as phenol-formaldehyde resin reinforcement to create the hybrid composite. Sugarcane fiber-based friction composites were also tested against Kevlar fiber-reinforced composites. To conduct the contrast investigation, the brake pads were made using 5–20 wt.% SCF and 5–10 wt.% Kevlar fiber (KF). The findings of the studies show that the new composite has adequate friction and wear performance, making it a good choice for brake components. A comparative investigation discovered that Kevlar-based brake pad specimens performed slightly better in terms of % fade, coefficient of friction and wear performance than Sugarcane composites. Mechanical property values were determined to be almost equal. The wear rate and thermal stability were maximum for composites containing 20% sugarcane fiber and 10% Kevlar.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Physical, Chemical, Mechanical and Tri-Biological Characterization of SCF/KF Compounds

Physical, mechanical and chemical properties achieved for the duration of the experiment are presented in Table 1. During the test, it was examined that an increased proportion of SCF porosity also increased in the matrix. However, the range of SCF composites’ porosity lies between 3.85% and 4.4%, while for Kevlar composites, it varies between 3.80% and 3.90%. It occurs because of the insufficient blending of the ingredients in the polymer matrix. However, with the increase of fibers, water absorption also increased. Although the range of water absorption of advanced composites lies between 2.70% and 3.27%, for SCF and Kevlar composites, it lies between 2.45% and 2.60%. The porosity and water absorption trend can be correlated. At the lowest porosities (SCF = 3.80% and KF = 3.85%), the water absorption value is also the lowest (SCF = 2.70% and KF = 2.45%). At the highest value of porosities (4.4% and 3.90%), the water absorption has been noted highest (SCF fiber = 3.27% and Kevlar = 2.60%). However, compressibility is expected at the lowest porosity value (SCF composite = 1.48% and Kevlar composite = 1.45%).
The greater porosity demonstrates maximum compressibility for developed composites [39,40,41]. In the polymer composite, the density decreases (SCF = 2.80–2.70 g/cm3 and Kevlar = 2.78–2.50 g/cm3) as SCF and Kevlar ratio increases. It may arise due to the lightweight (CF and Kevlar) replacing the heavyweight material (barium sulfate). The mechanical properties decrease with the rise of SCF and Kevlar because lightweight materials are replaced by heavy materials (barium sulfate). Therefore, as the percentage of fiber increases, the mechanical properties decrease simultaneously. However, a discrepancy in amounts of acetone extraction has been noted highly a smaller amount (SCF = 0.62–0.75% and Kevlar = 0.60–0.65), which exhibits the appropriate curing of the established friction items. The ash substances were reduced (SCF = 83.87–78.74% and Kevlar = 85.80–84.85%) with a rise in wt. (%) of SCF and Kevlar. However, the five wt.% displays the maximum amount of ash content. The hardness increases with the increased SCF and KF in the developed samples. The cause for reducing ash substances and a rise of SCF and KF is lower resistance fiber has been substituted high resistance barium sulfate. The hardness decreases with an increasing proportion of SCF and KF in composites (SCF 115.9–113.7 and Kevlar 113.6–109.3). However, the tensile strength has decreased (SCF 17.50–12.98 MPa and Kevlar 17.98–16.70 MPa). The maximum tensile strength value has been found at 5 wt.% composites (FS-1 = 17.50 MPa and KV-1 = 17.98 MPa) as shown in Table 1. Proof stress has been noticed highest for FS-4 (5 MPa) and KV-2 (4.7 MPa). In comparison, flexural strength demonstrates its uppermost value for FS-1 and KV-1 (SCF = 64.37 MPa and Kevlar = 68.29 MPa), and flexural Modulus also presents its highest value at FS-4 and KV-1 (SCF = 2.80 GPa and Kevlar = 2.45 GPa) [41] although an increase in SCF proportion in the composite heat swelling increases. The cause might be the extremely high temperatures. NF attempts to spread out and generate a few warm gases in the compounds. FS-1 (1.65) and KV-1 (1.5) present the minor extension in Table 2. The tensile modulus represents the maximum value for FS-1 (4675 MPa) and KV-1 (4832 MPa), including the lowest FS-4 (4174 MPa) and KV-2 (4756 MPa). It specifies that an improving percentage of SCF leads to a non-uniform matrix. The impact energy shows a better value for FS-1 (0.464) and KV-1 (0.470) and the lowest possible for KV-2 (0.465) and FS-4 (0.385).
Table
Table 1. Descriptions of SCF and KV compounds.
Table 1. Descriptions of SCF and KV compounds.
PropertiesStandard Applied [40,41,42,43,44]KV-1FS-1KV-2FS-2FS-3FS-4
% PorosityJISD 4418 standard3.83.853.93.953.434.4
% Ash contentASTM D570-9885.883.8784.8582.679.6378.74
% Water absorptionISO 6310 standard2.452.72.62.753.23.27
% Acetone extractionASTM D494 standard0.60.620.650.670.70.75
Density (g/cm3)ASTM C271/C271 M-162.82.752.72.72.652.62
% CompressibilityISO 63101.451.481.531.551.61.65
Hardness (HRR)Rockwell-R scale115.9113.6113.7111.4110.8109.3
% Heat swellingSAE J 160 JNU801.51.651.751.952.052.1
Impact energy (J)ASTM D2560.470.4650.4640.450.390.385
Shear strength (kgf)ASTM D732156014231510149013671320
Tensile strength (MPa)ASTM E817.9817.516.716.213.3912.98
Flexural strength (MPa)ASTM D79068.2964.3766.7661.6558.3457.28
Tensile modulus (MPa)ASTM E8483246754640454343764174
Flexural modulus (GPa)ASTM D7902.592.42.452.652.72.8
Failure strain (%)ASTM E81.651.71.61.852.052.1
Proof stress (MPa)ASTM E84.54.754.74.84.985
Ultimate compressive strength (MPa)ASTM E8178.7172.5180.6164.3160.7158.3
The compressive strength has been observed to be highest for FS-1 (180.6 MPa) and KV-1 (178.7 MPa) and lowest for FS-4 (158.3 MPa) and KV-2 (172.5 MPa) [42]. The shear strength has been observed maximum for FS-1 (1510 MPa) and KV-1 (1560 MPa); it can be conceivable that a rise proportion of 5–10% of SCF could act as a binder although 15–20% fiber compound has been presented, non-uniform medium revealed its lowermost amount for FS-1 and KV-1 and uppermost for FS-4 and KV-2 [43,44]. The flexural strength, failure strain and flexural modulus have demonstrated their maximum values at FS-1.

2.2. Tri-Biological Properties of Samples

In the tri-biological test, the favorable values of the coefficient of friction are shown in Table 2.

2.3. Effect of Friction (µ) in Fade and Recovery Phases

The coefficient of friction is increased to 175 °C for all SCF composites and Kevlar-based composites. It has been observed that, once the temperature reaches 175 °C, the SCF-3 and SCF-4 compounds reduce abruptly even though the rate of SCF-1 and SCF-2 rises to the temperature of 200 °C and then decreases very slowly. However, it has been noticed that KV-1 and KV-2 fiber compounds have minimal alterations, demonstrating outstanding sustainability, as illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2. In the secondary fade cycle for SCF-1 and SCF-2 compounds, it has been noticed that the coefficient of friction rises temp. 250 °C, while for SCF-3 and SCF-4, it rises to 195 °C and later starts to decline (steeply), similarly to 1st fade cycle. For KV-1 and KV-2, the coefficient of friction is identical. In the recovery cycle, µ has been improved up to 220 °C for all samples afterward; µ leads to a steady decline for SCF-1 and SCF-2; however, SCF-3 and SCF-4 decreased rapidly. For secondary recovery, µ for SCF-1 and SCF-2 raised to 200 °C; later, it appeared to be a gradual decline, and for SCF-3 and SCF-4, the µ started to fall rapidly after 150 °C temp.

2.4. Frictional Stability (μS) and Variability (μV) Coefficient Performance

The μS and μV coefficients have been calculated through Equations (1) and (2) [44,45,46]. During the test, it was determined that the stability value reduces with a raised proportion of SCF, while the importance of variability rises with a high SCF ratio. The limit for peace has been noted between 0.88 and 0.84, and for variability, the range has been reported between 0.49 and 0.56, as presented in Figure 3a,b.
Stability = performance μ/max μ
Variability = variation in (Δ) μ/performance μ
SCF-1 composite demonstrates its maximum value of 0.56 and lowest value of 0.49 for variability. The Kevlar composite’s variability and stability rates lie between 0.57 and 0.59 and 0.91 and 0.94, respectively. The lower value of μv and higher value of μS is considered adequate for whole frictional compounds. It has been observed that the value of %F rises with an increasing proportion of SCF and KF Composite.

2.5. Fade (F) (%) and Recovery (R) Performance Analysis

The calculations formula for finding R and F (%) are:
%F = performing μ − fade μ/performing μ × 100
%R = recovery μ/performing μ × 100
It has been observed that the fade value varies between 37.2 and 47.6 for SCF composites, and Kevlar composites vary from 54.6 to 54.7, as indicated in Figure 4. However, recovery rises with the increase in SCF proportion and lies in 108.6–110.6%. SCF-4 reveals the ultimate value, but SCF-1 shows the most negligible value of %R. The lowest fade values are observed, i.e., 37.2 for SCF-1, and the highest recovery, i.e., 110.6 for SCF-4, as shown in Figure 4. The %R of KF based also increased with the proportion of Kevlar (KV-1 = 110.8, KV-2 = 111.3). The most negligible value of %F and the utmost importance of %R is considered favorable for the entire friction experiments. The SCF-1 and SCF-2 lower proportion-based SCF compounds present the most negligible fade value (%F), i.e., 28% lower than SCF-3 and SCF-4. The enhancement in fade (%F) with reduction has been noticed in NF substances.
The rising proportion of SCF in polymer mixtures creates a discrepancy matrix; in tribal experiments, it may be caused to generate extra wear particles and debris (act as the third body) among the frictional boundaries and enhance the performance [46]. However, the improved fiber makes an inhomogeneous matrix that produces debris and performs as wear particles throughout the friction test to improve friction [34,39,40,46]. Although, with increasing the proportion of SCF and KF, the values of fade and recovery were observed to be enhanced. The accumulation of SCF and KF in polymer compounds indicates easier shear and degradation. It improves the values of %F and %R, as described in the literature [46,47,48,49,50].

2.6. μP, μR, μF and Δμ Performance of SCF Compounds

The performance of the coefficient of friction has been presented in Figure 5. Several parameters like μp, μF, μR and Δμ have been investigated during the test. It has been observed that the performance of μ and F coefficient decreased with the increasing proportion of SCF in polymer compounds. However, the ranges lie between 0.360 and 0.284 for μF and 0.549 and 0.523 for μP at more than 200 °C. The friction values reduce as the NF compounds and phenolic resin decompose [34,39,40,46,47,48]. The μR value increased (0.586–0.590) in SCF proportion in developed mixtures and KF composite (0.655–0.641)—the value of Δμ increases as the SCF proportion rises in the developed brake pad models. The Δμ value for SCF-1 and SCF-2 fibers grew compound limits between 0.220 and 0.223, whereas SCF-3 and SCF-4 samples were in the 0.228–0.235. However, due to the method of tribo-produced boundaries (reorganization and fragmentation), the Δμ value could be enhanced, leading to the creation of friction film. Secondly, raising the proportion of pure fibers in compounds reduced the adhesion strength with phenolic resin. Therefore, it forms debris and discontinuity information and performs as a third party, enhancing friction values [34,39,40]. The μF and μp for KV-1 values were noticed as 0.575 and 0.395, respectively, although KV-2 has shown fall values, i.e., 0.570 and 0.392. The decreasing tendency in the values may be caused by tribo-interfaces process [51]. The performance of µR for KV-1 and KV-2 is 0.655 and 0.641, respectively. The Δµ value has been noticed at 0.186 and 0.197, respectively, for KV-1 and KV-2. However, SCF-1 shows 60% less fluctuation in friction (Δµ) than SCF-4 compounds. However, the value of SCF-1 demonstrates a 5% better value than SCF-4 for μp, indicating that with an increasing proportion of SCF, good fiber values begin to reduce. The μF value for SCF-1 and SCF-2 compounds must be 27% greater than that of SCF-3 and SCF-4; however, for μR (maximum discount is beneficial), the value rises with a rising proportion of SCF. The SCF-1 and SCF-2 show enhanced values. It has also been seen in the KF case that KV-1 indicated improved outcomes for μp, μF, Δµ and µR than that of KV-2.

2.7. Wear Performance

The wear test has observed the wear rate increase with an increasing proportion of SCF and Kevlar in composites although the wear range was found between 1.1 and 1.7 g for SCF and 1.0–1.08 for Kevlar-based polymer composites, as shown in Figure 6. SCF-1 composite has established the minimum wear value, whereas SCF-4 has demonstrated the maximum wear value. KV-1 has shown better results than KV-2. The increased percentage of sugarcane fiber does not mix properly with other ingredients in a polymer composite, which leads to an increase in the wear rate [34,39,40]. The velocity of wear performance was 4.2 m/s with a sliding distance of 1200 m. The tensile stress-strain rate of the developed composite has been presented in Figure 6.

2.8. Worn Surface Assessment

According to the worn surface research, the formation of primary and secondary contact patches/plateaus is one of the most crucial factors in determining the tribological performance of the composite, along with abrasive and adhesive wear processes. From scanning electron microscope (SEM), it has been observed that small pits, contact plateaus, small debris and more smooth areas created on the exterior portion of SCF-1 and SCF-2 compounds where more pits, fewer interaction plateaus, high derbies and high rough surfaces arise in the external part of SCF-3 and SCF-4 compounds. The inadequate blending of resin and NF in the polymer compounds may cause more spalling pits, debris and surface irregularity. However, SCF-1 and SCF-2 have shown higher contact plateaus, favorable for mixing all ingredients. KV-2 offers rougher surfaces with more wear debris and shear-induced texture than KV-1 composites. Furthermore, several fibers were found in SCF-3, while SCF-4 compounds pulled away from the polymer matrix, as shown in Figure 7. The chase test found that higher sugar fiber-based samples were easily worn when encountering hard grinding substances, which raised the wear rate [34,39,40,48]. However, KV-1 and SCF-1 display the smoothest surface of all compounds with small wear debris and spalling pits.

2.9. TGA of SCF-Based Experiments

The TGA has been performed with nitrogen and oxygen in two different environmental conditions. It has been noticed that the degradation occurred in three stages for both sugarcane and Kevlar composites. The weight reduction in the first stage has been seen as very low or less than 12%. In the second stage, a steep or heavy degradation has been noticed. At this stage, the losses were recorded by more than 77%. The third degradation shows a minimum loss in weight. The first, second and third degradation were reordered to 0–249 °C, 249–599 °C and 599–900 °C [41,42,43,44], respectively, as shown in Figure 8.
The degradation has been noted in a nitrogen environment from 0–299 °C, 299–599 °C and 600–900 °C, respectively, as shown in Figure 9 [42,43]. Heavy loss of more than 78% has been noted at 299–599 °C, where the first and third degradation shows minimum losses, less than 11%. The first degradation occurs due to the moister substance in the fiber and Kevlar. Secondly, degradation might be the reason for the decrease in hydrogen bonding in Kevlar compounds, the deficit of hemicelluloses and the discharge of gases from the SCF compounds. The third degradation occurs due to the amide group deficiency and loss of lignin and cellulose from KF and SCF [41,42,43,44,52,53,54,55,56]. The study has examined that raising the SCF and KF proportion in the compounds (5–20%) enhanced thermal stability [41,42,43,44]. The reach of the oxidation index under the O2 environment has been recorded between 5.40 and 5.63 and 5.70 and 5.84 in the N2 environment for SCF composites described in Table 3. In the case of Kevlar compounds, OI reach has been recorded between 5.60 and 5.65 in the O2 climate, while for the N2 environment, it was recorded at 5.80–5.85. However, for SCF-4, the thermal stability has been recorded as maximum, and for Kevlar-based composites, KV-2 displays more excellent thermal stability. The TGA of SCF and KF-based compounds in the N2 atmosphere are presented in Figure 9.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Compound or Composite Assembly

The waste composition (fiber) has been accumulated from Himachal Pradesh; in India, fiber is cut out into 2–6 mm small sizes. Therefore, it has been treated with NaOH to remove the impurities from small pieces of thread [57,58]. The ingredients used in brake pads are barium sulfate, aluminum oxide, vermiculite, graphite and sugarcane. All these materials were appropriately mixed with the plow machine. After that, these materials were poured into the molding machine to develop brake pads [34,39]. The compositional detail, mixing and molding conditions are shown in Table 4 and Figure 10. Various materials were used in the composite formulation. The Novolac phenolic reis is manufactured using an acidic catalyst and a relative surplus of phenolic to formaldehyde. The simplified synthesis shows the enormous number of conceivable polymers. The first reaction takes place between methylene glycol and phenol. A standard phenol novolac resin has an average molecular weight (Mn) of 250 and 900. Barium sulfate is an inorganic substance having the chemical formula BaSO4. It is a white crystalline material that is notoriously insoluble in water. It may be found in mineral barite, the primary commercial barium source. Its significant applications take advantage of its opaque white appearance and high density. In the composite, barium sulfate D-1.0 (98%min) was used. Aluminum oxide (Al2O3) is a chemical compound of aluminum and oxygen. It is the most common of many aluminum oxides and is known as aluminum oxide. The aluminum oxide used in the composite has a molecular weight of 101.961. Kevlar fiber is intrinsically durable at higher temperatures, with slight shrinkage, little creep and a high glass transition temperature. It is corrosion-resistant, non-conductive and chemically resistant to all but solid acids and bases. The properties of Kevlar used in the composite have a tensile strength of 23 gpd, initial modulus of 550 gpd, elongation of 3.6%, a density of 1.44 g/cc and moisture regain of 6%.

3.2. Physico-Mechanical and Thermal Attributes

Mechanical assets like ultimate tensile strength (UTS), proof stress, ultimate compressive strength (UCS), total elongation and tensile modulus have been determined by a universal testing machine (UTM) observed by the ASTM E8 standard. The sample size has been taken with (70 × 20 × 10) mm dimensions. However, the impact energy test has been accomplished on the pendulum impact testing machine at GIET, Solan. UTM has been used to calculate the strength at three points and the modulus (flexure) of the samples as per the ASTM ED790 standard. Hind-type UTM (Allied Nippon, Ghaziabad, India) has been used to calculate the shear strength. The uncured resin has been evaluated with acetone extraction instruments [40]. The density has been determined with a sensor weighing scale [39]. The specimens were dipped in preheated oil (SAE 90) to discover the permeability of the prepared samples [39]. The manufactured pieces (2–4 g) were burnt in the furnace for 2 h at a temperature of 860 °C to get the ash content. As per ASTM D 570-98 standard to calculate the water absorption, the developed brake pads are plunged into distilled water for 24 h [41]. However, the pendulum impact testing machine has been used at GHEC, Solan, for the impact strength of the specimen calculation. The compressibility testing machine has been applied to achieve compressibility corresponding to ISO 6310 Standard [42]. A weighing device has been used to discover the alterations in the weight of the experiment sample, i.e., water absorption and ash contents test. However, the hardness calculates the R ratio on the harness tester (model: TRSN). Fuel instruments supply UTM, and engineering has been applied to examine the shear strength. To find heat swelling (%), samples were heated in a muffle furnace for 5 h at 50 °C temperature; tests were carried out as per 38SAE J 160 JNU80 standard, and sample dimension was taken (25 × 10 × 5) mm [42,43,44].
TGA was carried out on approximately 10 ± 0.1 mg of fabricated friction composite material on a TA-60WS model supplied by Shimadzu scientific instruments at a heating rate of 10 °C/min from 50 °C temperature to 800 °C in the presence of air and nitrogen atmosphere with the flow rate of 40 mL/min. Oxidation Index (OI) was calculated based on the weight of carbonaceous char (CR) [41,42,43,44]. The thermo-gravimetric analysis results are presented in Table 5.

3.3. Assessment of Tri-Biological Attributes of Established Compounds

A chase machine was used [34,39,40] for the experimental conditions shown in Table 6. The various tribological proprieties have been assessed through the analysis, i.e., friction fluctuation (Δμ), wear, stability coefficient (μs), fade (%), performance coefficient (μp), variability coefficient (μv), recovery (%).

4. Conclusions

Non-asbestos sugarcane fiber-containing brake pads were fabricated to study the physical, chemical, thermal, mechanical and tri-biological properties. The result achieved from the study has been presented as follows. The sample’s water absorption, porosity and compressibility increased with a higher proportion of SCF in the compound. However, adding SCF proportion and hardness in developed mixtures decreases the ash proportion and hardness value.
(1)
The tensile strength, ultimate compressive strength, flexural strength, tensile modulus, flexural modulus and impact energy revealed the most excellent performance for SCF-1 (5 wt.%) brake pad composite, including all SCF composites. The SCF brake pads have shown the most mechanical results near Kevlar-based compounds. It has also been observed that the percentage of wear and friction level increases with the addition of SCF in the mix.
(2)
The ultimate shear strength and proof stress revealed the best performance for SCF-2 brake pad compounds, including the entire SCF composites. In contrast, Kevlar composites have shown their maximum value of 5 wt—% (KV-1) compounds. SCF-1 sample showed the highest and lowest values of µs and µ, respectively.
(3)
The value of µs enhances with SCF proportion, while µv decreases with an increasing proportion of SCF. The SCF compounds (SCF-4) showed the ultimate value of recovery percentage. Although, the (%) recovery has been discovered to be over the hundred percent for all the desirable compounds. SCF-1 showed the utmost value of the performance of COF, with minor wear.
(4)
The comparative study determined that the Kevlar-based brake pad samples revealed slightly improved %-fade, µ, wear and thermal stability results than SCF and KV-2 compounds. Thermal stability for SCF compounds exhibited the maximum value of OI (5.84) at 20 wt—% SCF composites. From the analysis, it has been concluded that SCF-based brake pad samples indicated excellent performance in physical and chemical mechanical properties and noticed values very near Kevlar composites. Moreover, SCF-1 compounds exhibit improved thermal, tri-biological and mechanical outcomes among all SCF compounds.
(5)
The worn surface study reveals that, in addition to abrasive and adhesive wear processes, the development of primary and secondary contact patches/plateaus is one of the most critical elements in determining the tribological performance of the composite.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.M., N.K., A.A., V.T., T.A.-M. and K.-W.C.; Methodology, V.M. and K.-W.C.; Software, K.-W.C.; Validation, A.A. and K.-W.C.; Formal analysis, T.A.-M.; Investigation, K.-W.C.; Writing—original draft, K.-W.C., A.A., V.T., T.A.-M.; Writing—review & editing, N.K., A.A., V.T., T.A.-M. and K.-W.C.; Visualization, V.T.; Funding acquisition, V.T. and T.A.-M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University Abha 61421, Asir, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, through the Large Groups Project under grant number RGP.2/142/44. Deanship of Scientific Research, Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research at King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia, under the annual funding track [GRANT3394].

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are included in the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University Abha 61421, Asir, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, for funding this work through the Large Groups Project under grant number RGP.2/142/44. The authors acknowledge the Deanship of Scientific Research, Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research at King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia, for financial support under the annual funding track [GRANT3394].

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Sample Availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Mohanty, S.; Chugh, Y.P. Development of fly ash-based automotive brake lining. Tribol. Int. 2007, 40, 1217–1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ramazzini, C. Call for an international ban on asbestos. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 1999, 41, 830–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. World Health Organization. Asbestos: Elimination of Asbestos-Related Diseases; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2010; Fact sheet No. 343.
  4. Ahmadiokani, F.; Shojaei, A.; Arjmand, M.; Alaei, Y.; Yan, N. Effect of short carbon fiber on thermal, mechanical, and tribological behavior of phenolic-based brake friction materials. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 168, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Singh, T.; Patnaik, A.; Chauhan, R.; Rishiraj, A. Assessment of braking performance of Lupinus wollastonite fiber reinforced friction composite materials. J. King Saud Univ. 2017, 29, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Kumar, M.; Bijwe, J. Optimized selection of metallic fillers for best combination of performance properties of friction materials: A comprehensive study. Wear 2013, 303, 569–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Aranganathan, N.; Mahale, V.; Bijwe, J. Effects of aramid fiber concentration on the friction and wear characteristics of non-asbestos organic friction composites using standardized braking test. Wear 2016, 354–355, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kim, S.J.; Cho, M.H.; Lim, D.S.; Jang, H. Synergistic effects of aramid pulp and potassium titanate whiskers in the automotive friction material. Wear 2001, 251, 1484–1491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Park, S.H. Types, and health hazards of fibrous materials used as asbestos substitutes. Saf. Health Work 2018, 9, 360–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dunnigan, J.; Nadeau, D.; Paradis, D. Cytotoxic effects of aramid fibers on rat pulmonary macrophages: Comparison with chrysotile asbestos. Toxicol. Lett. 1984, 20, 277–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Drummond, G.; Bevan, R.; Harrison, P. A comparison of the results from intra-pleural and intra-peritoneal studies with those from inhalation and intratracheal tests for the assessment of pulmonary responses to inhalable dust and fibers. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2016, 81, 89–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Harrison, P.T.; Levy, L.S.; Patrick, G.; Pigott, G.H.; Smith, L.L. Comparative hazards of chrysotile asbestos and its substitutes: A European perspective. Environ. Health Perspect. 1999, 107, 607–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cruz, J.; Fangueiro, R. Surface modification of natural fibers: A review. Proceeding Eng. 2016, 155, 285–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Van de Velde, K.; Kiekens, P. Thermal degradation of flax: The determination of kinetic parameters with thermogravimetric analysis. J. Appl. Polym. 2002, 83, 2634–2643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wallenberger, F.T.; Weston, N. Natural Fibers Plastics and Composites; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Maleque, M.A.; Atiqah, A. Development and Characterization of Coir Fibre Reinforced Composite Brake Friction Materials. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2013, 38, 3191–3199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gurunathan, T.; Mohanty, S.; Nayak, S.K. A review of the recent developments in bio composites based on natural fibers and their application perspectives. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2015, 77, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Yun, R.; Filip, P.; Lu, Y. Performance and evaluation of eco-friendly brake friction materials. Tribol. Int. 2010, 43, 2010–2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Faga, M.G.; Casamassa, E.; Iodice, V.; Sin, A.; Gautier, G. Morphological and structural features affecting the friction properties of carbon materials for brake pads. Tribol. Int. 2019, 140, 105889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Puglia, D.; Biagiotti, J.; Kenny, J.M. A Review on Natural Fiber-Based Composites-Part II: Application of Natural Reinforcements in Composite Materials for Automotive Industry. J. Nat. Fibers 2004, 2, 23–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Koronis, G.; Silva, A.; Fontul, M. Green Composites: A Review of Adequate Materials for Automotive Applications. Compos. Part B 2013, 44, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ticoalu, A.; Aravinthan, T.; Cardona, F. A review of current development in natural fiber composites for structural and infrastructure applications. In Proceedings of the SREC2010-F1-5, 2010 Conference on Call for an International Ban on Asbestos, Toowoomba, Australia, 11–12 November 2010. [Google Scholar]
  23. Savage, L. Eco-Friendly Brake Pads Promise Greener Transport. 2007, pp. 1–2. Available online: http://www.ohlsti.co.uk/ohl/stipdfs/ohl_sti74.pdf (accessed on 26 April 2023).
  24. Glória, G.O.; Teles, M.C.A.; Neves, A.C.C.; Vieira, C.M.F.; Lopes, F.P.D.; Gomes, M.A.; Margem, F.M.; Monteiro, S.N. Bending test in epoxy composites reinforced with continuous and aligned PALF fibers. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2017, 6, 411–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Todkar, S.S.; Patil, S.A. Review on mechanical properties evaluation of pineapple leaf fiber (PALF) reinforced polymer composites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 174, 106927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ridzuan, M.J.M.; Abdul Majid, M.S.; Khasri, A.; Gan, E.H.D.; Razlan, Z.M.; Syahrullail, S. Effect of pineapple leaf (PALF), Napier, and hemp fibers as filler on the scratch resistance of epoxy composites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019, 8, 5384–5395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fu, Z.; Suo, B.; Yun, R.; Lu, Y.; Wang, H.; Qi, S.; Jiang, S.; Lu, Y.; Matejka, V. Development of eco-friendly brake friction composites containing flax fibers. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 2012, 31, 681–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Liu, Y.; Ma, Y.; Che, J.; Duanmu, L.; Zhuang, J.; Tong, J. Natural fibre reinforced non-asbestos organic non-metallic friction composites: Effect of abaca fibre on mechanical and tribological behaviour. Mater. Res. Express 2018, 5, 055101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Xin, X.; Xu, C.G.; Qing, L.F. Friction properties of sisal fibre reinforced resin brake composites. Wear 2007, 262, 736–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Candido, R.G.; Godoy, G.G.; Gonsalves, A.R. Study of sugarcane bagasse pretreatment with sulfuric acid as a step of cellulose obtaining. Int. J. Nutr. Food Eng. 2012, 6, 6–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Candido, V.S.; Da Silva, A.C.R.; Simonassib, N.T.; Luz, F.S.; Monteiro, S.N. Toughness of polyester matrix composites reinforced with sugarcane bagasse fibers evaluated by Charpy impact tests. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2017, 64, 334–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cao, Y.; Shibata, S.; Fukumoto, I. Mechanical properties of biodegradable composites reinforced with bagasse fiber before and after alkali treatments. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2006, 37, 423–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cerqueira, E.F.; Baptista, C.A.R.P.; Mulinari, D.R. Mechanical behaviour of polypropylene reinforced sugarcane bagasse fibers composites. Procedia Eng. 2011, 10, 2046–2051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Kumar, N.; Singh, T.; Grewal, J.S.; Patnaik, A.; Fekete, G. Experimental investigation on the physical, mechanical and tribological properties of hemp fiber-based non-asbestos organic brake friction composites. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 085710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ma, Y.; Shen, S.; Tong, J.; Ye, W.; Yang, Y.; Zhou, J. Effects of bamboo fibers on friction performance of friction materials. J. Plast. Compos. Mater. 2012, 26, 845–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Mustafa, A.; Abdollah, M.F.B.; Shuhimi, F.F.; Ismail, N.; Amiruddin, H.; Umehara, N. Selection and verification of kenaf fibres as an alternative friction material using Weighted Decision Matrix method. Mater. Des. 2015, 67, 577–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ma, Y.; Wu, S.; Zhuang, J.; Tong, J.; Qi, H. Tribological and physio-mechanical characterization of cow dung fibers reinforced friction composites: An effective utilization of cow dung waste. Tribol. Int. 2019, 131, 200–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kumar, N.; Singh, T.; Grewal, J.S.; Patnaik, A.; Fekete, G. A novel hybrid AHP-SAW approach for optimal selection of natural fiber reinforced non-asbestos organic brake friction composites. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 065701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Singh, T.; Kumar, N.; Grewal, J.S.; Ashok Raj, J.; Fekete, G. Natural fiber reinforced non-asbestos brake friction composites: Influence of ramie fiber on physic mechanical and tribological properties. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 115701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kumar, N.; Grewal, J.S.; Kumar, S. Mechanical and Thermal Properties of NaOH treated Sisal natural fiber reinforced polymer composites: Barium uses as filler. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 45, 5575–5578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kumar, N.; Mehta, V.; Kumar, S.; Grewal, J.S.; Ali, S.; Kashyap, K.; Kumar, N.; Devi, S. Physical mechanical, tribological, and thermal properties of new developed composites with Grewia optiva fiber and pan material. Polym. Compos. 2022, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Grewal, J.S.; Kumar, N.; Singh, T. Experimental investigation on the physical, mechanical, and thermal properties of chemical treated ramie fiber-based non-asbestos organic brake friction composites. Trans. Stellar 2021, 10, 2249–6890. [Google Scholar]
  43. Grewal, J.S.; Kumar, N.; Singh, T. Mechanical and thermal properties of chemical treated hemp natural fiber reinforced polymer composites. Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 2020, 10, 879–888. [Google Scholar]
  44. Singh, T.; Rathi, M.K.; Patnaik, A.; Chauhan, R.; Ali, S.; Fekete, G. Application of waste tire rubber particles in non-asbestos organic brake friction composite materials. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 035703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Singh, T.; Patnaik, A.; Fekete, G.; Chauhan, R.; Gangil, B. Application of hybrid analytical hierarchy process and complex proportional assessment approach for optimal design of brake friction materials. Polym. Compos. 2019, 40, 1602–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Singh, T.; Chauhan, R.; Patnaik, A.; Gangil, B.; Nain, R.; Kumar, A. Parametric study and optimization of multi-walled carbon nanotube fulfilled friction composite materials using taguchi method. Polym. Compos. 2018, 39, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Singh, T.; Tiwari, A.; Patnaik, A.; Chauhan, R.; Ali, S. Influence of wollastonite shape and amount on tribo-performance of no asbestos organic brake friction composites. Wear 2017, 386–387, 157–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Matějka, V.; Fu, Z.; Kukutschová, J.; Qi, S.; Jiang, S.; Zhang, X.; Yun, R.; Vaculik, M.; Heliova, M.; Lu, Y. Jute fibers and powderized hazelnut shells as natural fillers in non-asbestos organic non-metallic friction composites. Mater. Des. 2013, 51, 847–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wang, Z.Y.; Wang, J.; Ma, Y.H. The evaluation of physic mechanical and tribological properties of corn straw fiber-reinforced environment-friendly friction composites. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 2018, 1562363. [Google Scholar]
  50. Singh, T.; Patnaik, A. Performance assessment of lapinus-aramid based brake pad hybrid phenolic composites in friction braking. Arch. Mech. Eng. 2015, 15, 151–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lertwassana, W.; Parnklang, T.; Mora, P.; Jubsilp, C.; Rimdusit, S. High-performance aramid pulp/carbon fiber-reinforced poly benzoxazine composites as friction materials. Compos. Part B Eng. 2019, 177, 107280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Singaravelu, D.L.; Vijay, R.; Filip, P. Influence of various cashew friction dusts on the fade and recovery characteristics of non-asbestos copper-free brake friction composites. Wear 2019, 426–427, 1129–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mosquera, M.E.G.; Jamond, M.; Martinez, A.; Tascon, J.M.D. Thermal transformations of Kevlar aramid fibers during pyrolysis: Infrared and thermal analysis studies. Chem. Mater. 1994, 6, 1918–1924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Amit, C. Thermal degradation analysis of thermoset resins. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2009, 114, 1417–1425. [Google Scholar]
  55. Kumar, N.; Kumar, S.; Grewal, J.S.; Mehta, V.; Ali, S. Comparative study of Abaca fiber and Kevlar fibers-based brake friction composites. Compos. Polym. 2021, 43, 730–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kumar, N.; Grewal, J.S.; Singh, A.; Mehta, V. A Comparative study of alkali-treated date palm fiber-based brake friction composites and standard Kevlar-based brake friction composites. Compos. Polym. 2021, 43, 239–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kumar, N.; Grewal, J.S. Tribo-performance evaluation of eco-friendly brake friction composite materials. AIP Conf. Proc. 2018, 1953, 090083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kumar, N.; Fekete, G.; Singh, T.; Grewal, J.S. Natural Fiber Reinforced brake friction composites: Optimization using hybrid AHP- Moora Approach. AIP Conf. Proc. 2019, 2142, 150015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Molecules 28 04861 g001 550
Figure 1. (a) 1st Recovery cycles of developed samples; (b) 2nd Recovery cycles of developed samples.
Figure 1. (a) 1st Recovery cycles of developed samples; (b) 2nd Recovery cycles of developed samples.
Molecules 28 04861 g001
Molecules 28 04861 g002 550
Figure 2. (a) 1st Fade cycles of developed samples; (b) 2nd Fade cycles of developed samples.
Figure 2. (a) 1st Fade cycles of developed samples; (b) 2nd Fade cycles of developed samples.
Molecules 28 04861 g002
Molecules 28 04861 g003 550
Figure 3. (a) Frictional behavior of μS (stability coefficient); (b) μV (Variability coefficient) of developed composites.
Figure 3. (a) Frictional behavior of μS (stability coefficient); (b) μV (Variability coefficient) of developed composites.
Molecules 28 04861 g003
Molecules 28 04861 g004 550
Figure 4. Frictional Behavior of %Fade (a) and %Recovery (b) of developed composites.
Figure 4. Frictional Behavior of %Fade (a) and %Recovery (b) of developed composites.
Molecules 28 04861 g004
Molecules 28 04861 g005 550
Figure 5. (a) COF performance of μ of the developed compound; (b) wear performance of μ of the developed compound.
Figure 5. (a) COF performance of μ of the developed compound; (b) wear performance of μ of the developed compound.
Molecules 28 04861 g005
Molecules 28 04861 g006 550
Figure 6. Tensile stress-strain rate of developed compound.
Figure 6. Tensile stress-strain rate of developed compound.
Molecules 28 04861 g006
Molecules 28 04861 g007 550
Figure 7. SCF-1, SCF-2, SCF-3, SCF-4, KV-1 and KV-2 composites with worn-out surface morphology.
Figure 7. SCF-1, SCF-2, SCF-3, SCF-4, KV-1 and KV-2 composites with worn-out surface morphology.
Molecules 28 04861 g007
Molecules 28 04861 g008 550
Figure 8. TGA of SCF and Kevlar-based compounds in the O2 environment.
Figure 8. TGA of SCF and Kevlar-based compounds in the O2 environment.
Molecules 28 04861 g008
Molecules 28 04861 g009 550
Figure 9. TGA of sugarcane and Kevlar-based composites at N2 atmosphere.
Figure 9. TGA of sugarcane and Kevlar-based composites at N2 atmosphere.
Molecules 28 04861 g009
Molecules 28 04861 g010 550
Figure 10. Composites assembly details.
Figure 10. Composites assembly details.
Molecules 28 04861 g010
Table
Table 2. Attributes utilized in the tri-biological application.
Table 2. Attributes utilized in the tri-biological application.
Favorable Value of Elements
µPµv%Fadeµs% RµRµFWear rate
µ-standardLeastSmallLargerLargerLargerSmallLeast
Table
Table 3. Residue and oxidation index for SCF and Kevlar compounds.
Table 3. Residue and oxidation index for SCF and Kevlar compounds.
SamplesSCF-4SCF-3SCF-2SCF-1KV-1KV-2
% residue (O2) of SCF compounds80.579.878.977.480.779.7
Oxidation index of SCF composites5.635.585.555.405.655.60
% residue (N2) of SCF composites83.7083.4582.6982.5883.7282.9
Oxidation index (OI) N25.845.765.725.705.855.80
Table
Table 4. Composition aspect of materials.
Table 4. Composition aspect of materials.
SampleSCF-1KV-1SCF-2KV-2SCF-3SCF-4
KF (wt.%)-05-10--
BaSO4 (wt.%)505045454035
SCF (wt.%)05-10-1520
Composition454545454545
Formulation = Phenol formaldehyde resin (10%), lapinus fiber (20 wt.%), property modifiers (graphite, alumina and vermiculite = equal ratio (15 wt.%).
Table
Table 5. Materials TGA assessment.
Table 5. Materials TGA assessment.
InstrumentShimadzu Scientific Instruments
Fabricated friction compound on
TA-60WS model		10 ± 0.1 mg (around)
Heating ratio50 °C to 800 °C and 10 °C/min
Flow value40 mL/min (air and nitrogen)
Calculation of oxidation index (OI)Vary with a weight of carbonaceous char (CR)
Table
Table 6. Experimental conditions of tribological proprieties (IS 2742-4 Standard).
Table 6. Experimental conditions of tribological proprieties (IS 2742-4 Standard).
Test
Parameters		Application AppliedHeating (Status)Applied
Load (N)		Speed
(rpm)		Max. Temp. (°C)Time
(min.)		Min.
Temp. (°C)
Primary fade1off4403089320-
Primary recovery1on6604112891082
Secondary fade1off6604112611093
Secondary recovery1off6604113171082
Burnish1off6604113451093
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mehta, V.; Kumar, N.; Algahtani, A.; Tirth, V.; Al-Mughanam, T.; Chau, K.-W. Comparative Study of Chemically Treated Sugarcane and Kevlar Fiber to Develop Brake Resistance Composites. Molecules 2023, 28, 4861. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124861

AMA Style

Mehta V, Kumar N, Algahtani A, Tirth V, Al-Mughanam T, Chau K-W. Comparative Study of Chemically Treated Sugarcane and Kevlar Fiber to Develop Brake Resistance Composites. Molecules. 2023; 28(12):4861. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124861

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mehta, Vikas, Naresh Kumar, Ali Algahtani, Vineet Tirth, Tawfiq Al-Mughanam, and Kwok-Wing Chau. 2023. "Comparative Study of Chemically Treated Sugarcane and Kevlar Fiber to Develop Brake Resistance Composites" Molecules 28, no. 12: 4861. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28124861

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop