Next Article in Journal
Validation of a 1D Thermodynamic Simulation of a 4-Cylinder Turbocharged DI Engine with Testbench Measurements
Previous Article in Journal
New Hospital Management in the Light of Informational Intelligence and Knowledge Management
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Engineering Proceedings
Volume 114
Issue 1
10.3390/engproc2025114001
engproc-logo
Submit to this Journal
► Article Menu

Article Menu

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

Influence of T6 Heat Treatment on Densification, Mechanical, and Wear Behavior of Plantain Peel Ash Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composites †

by
Osarue Osaruene Edosa
1,
Francis Kunzi Tekweme
1,
Peter A. Olubambi
2 and
Kapil Gupta
1,*
1
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Technology, University of Johannesburg, Doornfontein Campus, Johannesburg 2028, South Africa
2
Centre for Nanoengineering and Advanced Materials, School of Mining, Metallurgy and Chemical Engineering, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2092, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Presented at the 4th International Conference on Advanced Manufacturing and Materials Processing, Bali, Indonesia, 26–27 July 2025.
Eng. Proc. 2025, 114(1), 1; https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025114001
Published: 31 October 2025
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

In this article, we investigate the impact of T6 heat treatment on Al/Mg/PPA composites’ microstructure, densification, wear, and mechanical properties. The samples were synthesized using a ball milling machine and spark plasma sintering (SPS). Microstructural analysis revealed homogeneously distributed Al, Mg, and PPA particles. However, microstructural defects such as micro-pores and cracks increased due to prolonged heating. Precipitations such as Al2O3, MgO, and MgAl2O4 were present in the composites, and no new phase was detected after the heat treatment. The grain size analysis showed that no significant grain growth occurred. The porosity of the composite samples increased significantly, with sample H4 (Al/2Mg/15PPA) displaying the highest porosity of 148.55% after the heat treatment. The composites’ hardness improved after the T6 heat treatment, with sample H2 (Al/2Mg/5PPA) displaying the maximum hardness of 69.4 HV, representing an increase of 12.48%. More significantly, the compressive strength of all the samples reinforced with PPA, dropped at a percentage range of 42.30–51.50% after the heat treatment. It can, therefore, be inferred from this investigation that the T6 heat treatment is most suitable for improving the hardness of heat-treatable aluminum alloys and composites rather than improving their overall properties.

1. Introduction

Secondary operations, such as heat treatment, are required to modify the microstructure of metallic alloys and composites for improved performance. Heat treatment is a process that improves material properties by causing microstructural changes through heating, soaking, and quenching [1]. The casting process is mostly used for preparing materials for heat treatment [2,3]. This may be due to the casting process’s benefits, such as affordability, ease of use, and adaptability for intricate shapes or to the defects associated with casting, such as high porosity and inferior mechanical properties. Freshly fabricated metallic alloys and composites (especially through casting) take a while to reach permanent chemical stability and be ready for machining. Therefore, heat treatment of newly fabricated metallic alloys and composites is necessary to make them more chemically stable over time and ready for machining.
During the heat treatment process, the quenching media can significantly influence the properties of aluminum alloys and composites [4]. Quenching media, such as brine (salt water), freshwater, still oil, and air, are employed for cooling. For example, cooling a metal quickly makes it harder, whereas cooling it slowly makes it softer. Conversely, rapid cooling could cause internal stress and cracks [5].
Heat treatments such as tempering, normalizing, hardening, annealing, and surface hardening are commonly employed in improving the properties of metals like steel, whereas T4, T5, and T6 heat treatments are frequently employed to improve the properties of aluminum alloys and their composites [6]. T6 heat treatment, which is commonly utilized, is a three-step procedure that includes solid solutioning, quenching, and aging. The aging process could be natural (heating at room temperature) or artificial (heating at a temperature less than 250 °C). For instance, the strength and hardness of the AMC significantly improved at a solid solution temperature of 505 °C, according to an investigation conducted by Pei et al. into the effects of T4 and T6 heat treatment on the mechanical properties of SiCp/2024 Al composites [7]. However, the study concluded that T6 heat treatment was more effective than T4 heat treatment. T6 heat treatment increases yield strength but decreases ductility [8].
Not every aluminum alloy is heat-treatable. While those in the 2xxx, 6xxx, 7xxx, and 8xxx series are heat-treatable, those in the 1xxx, 3xxx, 4xxx, and 5xxx series are not. The primary alloying element(s) in most heat-treatable alloys are either copper alone or a combination of silicon, magnesium, zinc, tin, and iron [7,9].
Solutioning and artificial aging are often accompanied by interfacial precipitation that strengthens alloys and composites. Precipitations like Al2Cu, AlMg, CuNiAl, NbNiAl, and Al2CuMg have been reported to increase the strength and hardness of AMC [10,11]. The amount of precipitation by aging increases as the aging time increases. However, over-aging can degrade the properties of aluminum alloys and composites [10]. A shorter solutioning time (≤2 h) has been recommended to minimize grain growth and optimize the strength and hardness of AMC [12,13]. This explains why, compared to the conventional T6 heat treatment, the short T6 heat treatment performs better [14].
This study examines the impact of T6 heat treatment on the relative density (RD), mechanical, and wear properties of aluminum matrix composite (AMC) reinforced with plantain peel ash (PPA). The composite samples have been synthesized through ball milling and spark plasma sintering. Detailed analysis of the influence of solutionizing and aging temperatures and duration on the microstructure and mechanical properties of the heat-treated AMC has been documented.

2. Materials and Methods

The Al matrix (~75 micron), PPA (~70 micron), and Mg (~100 micron) were used for synthesizing the composites for the heat treatment. The PPA reinforcement, which is an example of agro-waste, has lower density and cost advantages. The percentage weight concentrations of the PPA reinforcement for this study are 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt%, while a fixed concentration of 2 wt% Mg was used as the wetting agent. The chemical composition of the PPA reinforcement includes K2O, SiO2, Fe2O3, and P2O5 as the major oxides, and Al2O3, and MgO as the minor oxides. The fabrication of Al/Mg/PPA composites using ball milling and spark plasma sintering has been reported [15,16].

2.1. Heat Treatment of the Fabricated Composite Samples

The Al/Mg/PPA samples were T6 heat-treated using a muffled furnace under ambient conditions and in an uncontrolled atmosphere. Figure 1 illustrates the samples’ fabrication and heat treatment steps, while Figure 2 shows the furnace for the heat treatment. Table 1 shows the elemental composition of the heat-treated samples and their designations. The procedure for the T6 heat treatment includes the following:
Step 1: solutioning the samples at a temperature of 500 °C for 5 h.
Step 2: cooling the samples in fresh water to room temperature.
Step 3: artificial aging of the samples at 180 °C for 5 h.
Step 4: finally, cooling the artificially aged samples in fresh water to room temperature.
Engproc 114 00001 g001
Figure 1. Steps for the synthesis and heat treatment of Al/Mg/PPA samples.
Figure 1. Steps for the synthesis and heat treatment of Al/Mg/PPA samples.
Engproc 114 00001 g001
Engproc 114 00001 g002
Figure 2. Furnaces for heat treatment: (a) box muffle furnace, (b) tube furnace.
Figure 2. Furnaces for heat treatment: (a) box muffle furnace, (b) tube furnace.
Engproc 114 00001 g002
Table 1. Heat-treated samples and their designation.
Table 1. Heat-treated samples and their designation.
Al Matrix CompositesSolutionizing and Aging Temp. and Time (°C, h)Designation
Al/2Mg500-5 h, 180-5 hH1
Al/2Mg/5PPA500-5 h, 180-5 hH2
Al/2Mg/10PPA500-5 h, 180-5 hH3
Al/2Mg/15PPA500-5 h, 180-5 hH4
Al/2Mg/20PPA500-5 h, 180-5 hH5

2.2. Characterization of the Heat-Treated Composite Samples

Characterization of the heat-treated samples to determine the density, microstructural features, hardness, compressive strength, and wear properties was carried out following the procedures reported by Edosa et al. [15,16]. The densities of the heat-treated Al-Mg-PPA samples were determined using Archimedes’ principle following the ASTM B962-13 standard. An optical microscope (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany ), SEM-EDS (JEOL JSM-7900F, JEOL, Peabody, USA), and X-ray diffractometer (Malvern Panalytical Ltd Malvern, UK) were used for microstructural characterization of the samples. Before the analysis, the samples were polished and etched using a Keller reagent (47 mL distilled water + 1.25 mL HNO3 + 0.75 mL HCl + 0.5 mL HF). The hardness and compression tests were conducted using a Vickers’ hardness testing machine (Innovatest Falcon 500) and an Instron compression machine. The hardness and compression tests followed the ASTM E 92 and ASTM E9–19 standards, respectively. The composite samples for the test measure 12 mm in height and 20 mm in diameter. A pin-on-disk tribometer (Anton Paar) was used for the wear test under dry sliding conditions at 2 N and 5 N loads, 5 m sliding distance, and 1 cm/s speed. The wear resistance of the samples was evaluated using the difference in mass before and after the wear test.

3. Results and Discussion

The influences of the T6 heat treatment on the composites’ porosity, hardness, compressive strength, and wear properties are discussed as follows:

3.1. Effect of Heat Treatment on Relative Density

Figure 3 presents the variation in the RD of Al/Mg/PPA composites with T6 heat treatment. As observed from the Figure, aside from composite sample H3, the RD of the composites declined after the T6 heat treatment. This outcome contradicts Veeranaath et al. [17]’s finding, which reported improved densification after heat treatment. According to the authors, the improvement in density may be due to the types of heat treatment (tempering, annealing, and normalizing) and the reinforcements (alumina and graphite). Sample H1 (Al/2Mg) exhibited higher RD after heat treatment, suggesting that the sample was not fully densified, and as a result, requires further consolidation to achieve higher densification and bonding strength. The composite samples (H1, H3, and H4) exhibited lower RD after heat treatment for several reasons: microstructural defects such as micro-pores and cracks increased, as evident from Figure 4. Although a solutionizing temperature of 500 °C for 5 h was used, it is sufficient for grain recrystallization and growth. Therefore, the increase in particle size in some of the composite samples up to a maximum of ~220 µm, due to prolonged heating, as illustrated in Figure 5, indicates grain growth. Composites reinforced with agro-wastes are susceptible to grain growth after prolonged heating, which results in porosity.
Furthermore, the difference in coefficient of thermal expansion between the Al matrix and the PPA reinforcement affects the RD of the composites. Aluminum has a high coefficient of thermal expansion, while the PPA reinforcement has a low coefficient of thermal expansion. This results in unequal expansion between the Al matrix and the PPA reinforcement after prolonged heating, creating vacancies and increasing pores. More so, it was discovered that the PPA transmutes from fine to coarse grain after prolonged heating, and the presence of more coarse grains in the microstructure increases the porosity compared to fine grains.
Besides the heating procedure, the quenching process also influences the porosity of the AMC. Rapid cooling, such as cooling in water, increases brittleness and decreases ductility, resulting in a decline in the RD of the Al/Mg/PPA composites.

3.2. Effect of Heat Treatment on Hardness

As illustrated in Figure 6, the hardness (Vickers hardness) of the fabricated Al/PPA/Mg composites (H2–H5) increased after the heat treatment, while it decreased in sample H1 (Al/2Mg). The composites’ hardness improved due to the homogeneity of the powder particles, precipitation hardening due to the artificial aging and quenching procedures [18]. The microstructures of the heat-treated samples are characterized by evenly distributed powder particles of mixed sizes, as seen in the Figure, resulting in increased hardness. More so, interfacial precipitations such as MgO (82.89°) and AlMgSi, distributed within the grains and grain boundaries, as indicated by SEM-EDS and XRD analysis in Figure 4 and Figure 7, could be responsible for the improved hardness [8]. The quenching of the heat-treated samples was by water, causing rapid cooling and refining the composites’ grains. Refined grains enhance hardness when compared with coarse grains. Similarly, the hardness of sample H1 declined after the heat treatment, possibly because it is not heat-treatable due to its elemental composition (Al/Mg).

3.3. Effect of Heat Treatment on Compressive Strength

As illustrated in Figure 8, the Al/Mg/PPA composites’ compressive strength (H2–H5) declined after the T6 heat treatment. However, sample H1 (Al/Mg), which contains no PPA reinforcement, exhibited higher compressive strength after the heat treatment, possibly due to the strain hardening effect. The primary alloying element(s) in most heat-treatable alloys are either copper alone or a combination of silicon, magnesium, zinc, tin, and iron. Sample H1 is not heat-treatable owing to its elemental composition (Al/Mg), and as a result, can only be strengthened through strain hardening. The composite’s compressive strength (H2–H5) dropped after the T6 heat treatment, possibly due to the following reasons: increased microstructural defects and the difference in coefficient of thermal expansion between the Al and PPA phases due to prolonged heating. Porosity and micro-cracks increased in the composites due to prolonged heating, as illustrated in Figure 4. Prolonged heating of PPA at elevated temperatures makes it more porous and weaker. This may be responsible for the decreased compressive strength of the composites. As already stated, prolonged heating of the PPA or any other agro-waste ashes at elevated temperatures results in grain growth or coarse grains. Porous and coarse grains have low load-bearing capacity. Therefore, prolonged solutionizing of the Al/Mg/PPA composites weakens the PPA phase, degrading the interfacial bond strength and boundary pinning effect, causing the compressive strength to drop. However, contrary results were obtained for composites reinforced with synthetic materials such as SiC and Ni60Nb40 [8,13,19]. It can therefore be inferred from this study that solutionizing agro-waste reinforced aluminum matrix composites at a high temperature and for a longer duration degrades the strength of the composites. This is because, at elevated temperatures and longer heating times, agro-waste ash devolatilizes to create voids that limit plastic deformation in the composites.
Furthermore, the difference in the coefficient of thermal expansion between the Al matrix and the PPA reinforcement can impair the microstructure after prolonged heating. Aluminum has a high coefficient of thermal expansion, and as a result, expands after prolonged heating. This expansion leads to an increase in volume, which ultimately decreases density. The low coefficient of thermal expansion of PPA reinforcement creates a thermal gradient at the Al/PPA interface, resulting in increased vacancies in the microstructures. The presence of vacancies and other microstructural defects, such as micro-cracks and weak interfacial boundaries, degrades the compressive strength of the heat-treated composite samples.

3.4. Effect of Heat Treatment on Wear Properties

The influence of heat treatment on the wear rate is shown in Figure 9. As observed from the Figure, the wear rate of the samples reinforced with a higher concentration of PPA (H3, H4, and H5) reduced, while the samples with little to no PPA reinforcement (H1 and H2) increased. This is because ceramic reinforcement, such as PPA, reduces the wear rate by increasing hardness [2]. Comparing Figure 6 with Figure 9 reveals that the samples that displayed reduced wear rate also exhibited improved hardness. Therefore, it can be inferred that the heat treatment enhanced the wear resistance of the composites by increasing the hardness, which agrees well with Equation (1) [19].
V = K D L H V
where V is the volume loss of material, D is the sliding distance, L is the applied load, K is the wear constant, and HV is the hardness of the material.
Figure 10 represents the friction coefficient of Al/Mg/PPA composites under an applied load of 5 N. The COF of the composite samples before heat treatment range from 0.35 to 0.50, while it is 0.28–0.57 after the heat treatment. Comparing Figure 9 with Figure 10 reveals that there is no direct relation between the COF and the wear rate of the samples. More so, the inconsistency of the COF with increasing concentration of PPA reinforcement makes it difficult to conclude that the heat treatment significantly influenced the COF. The wear responses of aluminum matrix composites can be influenced by several factors, such as the nature of the contact surfaces, applied load, sliding distance, environmental conditions, and velocity [20,21]. It was also discovered that the wear debris and oxide layer, such as Al2O3, which acts as a lubricant [22,23,24,25], could influence the COF of AMC.

3.5. Worn Surface Morphology After Heat Treatment

Figure 11a-b (H1 and H2) shows the SEM images of the heat-treated abraded Al/Mg/PPA composites. The Figure shows that the worn surfaces are typical of abrasive wear [26]. Deep grooves, scratches, and ripples characterize the worn surfaces. In addition, as shown in Figure 11b, H5 shows evidence of abrasive wear through fracturing, indicative of increased brittleness. More so, the worn surfaces display abrasive wear through grain cutting and pull-out, which substantiates that the sintered composites’ surfaces are softer than the tribometer pin.

3.6. Effect of Heat Treatment on Fracture Surfaces

Figure 12 (H1 and H5) shows the Al/Mg/PPA samples’ fracture surfaces after heat treatment. Shear steps, micro-void coalescence, cleavages, intergranular, and transgranular fracture characterized the composites’ surfaces, which is typical of ductile-brittle fracture. The H1 sample in Figure 12a is composed of Al and Mg as the major elements, while the H5 sample in Figure 12b is composed of Al, Mg, and PPA. From the fracture surfaces illustrated in Figure 12, it can be inferred the H5 sample is more brittle than the H1 sample. This may be due to the 20 wt% PPA reinforcement and the effect of the T6 heat treatment, which increased the porosity of the sample. The fracture surface of H1 has a stripy pattern, implying that a certain amount of plastic deformation occurred before fracture. Porosity increases brittleness, as the weight fraction of the PPA increases, a more brittle phase evolves in the composites [27,28]. Micro-voids and cleavages are the main characteristics of Figure 12 (H1 and H2), suggesting that substantial plastic deformation occurred before fracture.

4. Conclusions

The findings from this investigation are summarized as follows:
  • Porosity increased in most of the composite samples containing PPA reinforcement, whereas it reduced in sample H1 containing no PPA reinforcement.
  • The hardness property of the samples reinforced with PPA improved after the heat treatment; however, the hardness of the sample not reinforced with PPA reduced.
  • After the heat treatment, the compressive strength of the samples reinforced with PPA dropped significantly, while the compressive strength of the sample not reinforced with PPA increased considerably, possibly due to strain-hardening effect.
  • The wear rate for samples reinforced with higher percentage weight fraction of PPA reduced, whereas it increased for samples reinforced with little to no PPA. The wear mechanism of the composites remains abrasive wear. Fracture surface analysis shows that the composite samples exhibited ductile-brittle fracture after the heat treatment.
  • Finally, it is evident from the findings that the T6 heat treatment is not designed to improve all the properties of the composites, such as strength, hardness, and wear, simultaneously. Instead, it is tailored to enhance the hardness properties of the composites.
  • Further study should be conducted to compare the effects of long and short solid solutionizing time during T6 heat treatment using agro-waste and synthetic reinforced AMC.

Author Contributions

Conceptualizing and designing experiments—O.O.E., F.K.T., P.A.O. and K.G.; investigation and software—O.O.E.; analysis—O.O.E., F.K.T., P.A.O. and K.G.; writing—original draft—O.O.E.; review, editing, and supervision—F.K.T., P.A.O. and K.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available upon request.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the technicians and lab staff of the Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Technology as well as the Department of Metallurgy at the University of Johannesburg.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Sharma, S.; Nanda, T.; Pandey, O.P. Heat Treatment T4 and T6 Effects on the Tribological Properties of Sillimanite Mineral-Reinforced LM30 Aluminum Alloy Composites at Elevated Temperatures. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part J J. Eng. Tribol. 2022, 236, 946–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Azadi, M.; Rezanezhad, S.; Zolfaghari, M.; Azadi, M. Investigation of Tribological and Compressive Behaviors of Al/SiO2 Nanocomposites after T6 Heat Treatment. Sādhanā 2020, 45, 1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lakshmikanthan, A.; Prabhu, T.R.; Babu, U.S.; Koppad, P.G.; Gupta, M.; Krishna, M.; Bontha, S. The Effect of Heat Treatment on the Mechanical and Tribological Properties of Dual Size SiC Reinforced A357 Matrix Composites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 6434–6452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Singh, M.; Biswas, A. Impact of Quenching on the Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Hybrid Aluminum Matrix Composites (Al7075/SiC/TiB2). Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part E J. Process Mech. Eng. 2025, 239, 1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Li, J.; Zhang, X.; Geng, L. Effect of Heat Treatment on Interfacial Bonding and Strengthening Efficiency of Graphene in GNP/Al Composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2019, 121, 487–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Fadare, D.A.; Fadara, T.G.; Akanbi, O.Y. Effect of Heat Treatment on Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of NST 37-2 Steel. J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng. 2011, 10, 299–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pio, L.Y. Effect of T6 Heat Treatment on the Mechanical Properties of Gravity Die Cast A356 Aluminum Alloy. J. Appl. Sci. 2011, 11, 2048–2052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ertugrul, O.; He, T.; Shahid, R.N.; Scudino, S. Effect of Heat Treatment on Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Al 2024 Matrix Composites Reinforced with Ni60Nb40 Metallic Glass Particles. J. Alloys Compd. 2019, 808, 151732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kumar, L.V.S.; Prakrathi, S. Energy Conservation during Heat Treatment of A356 Aluminum Alloy. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 2018, 13, 59–61. [Google Scholar]
  10. Wąsik, A.; Leszczyńska-Madej, B.; Madej, M.; Goły, M. Effect of Heat Treatment on Microstructure of Al4Cu–SiC Composites Consolidated by Powder Metallurgy Technique. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2020, 29, 1841–1848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mahan, H.M.; Konovalov, S.V.; Panchenko, I. Effect of Heat Treatment on the Mechanical Properties of the Aluminum Alloys AA2024 with Nanoparticles. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. 2023, 20, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Prathap Singh, S.; Tittu George, D.X.; Anitto Joe Xavier, A.; Abinicks Raja, G. Effect of Heat Treatment on the Hardness Behaviour of the Aluminium 6061 Alloy. Mater. Today Proc. 2023, 80, 171–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mousavi Abarghouie, S.M.R.; Reihani, S.M.S. Aging Behavior of a 2024 Al Alloy–SiCp Composite. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, 2368–2374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Md Ali, A.; Omar, M.Z.; Salleh, M.S.; Mohamed, I.F.; Hashim, H.; Wakhi Anuar, N.F.B. Effect of Heat Treatment on the Microstructures and Mechanical Properties of Thixoformed Graphene-Reinforced Aluminum Alloy Composite. Int. J. Met. 2024, 18, 1695–1709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Edosa, O.O.; Tekweme, F.K.; Olubambi, P.A.; Gupta, K. Microstructural Analysis, Compressive Strength, and Wear Properties of Spark-Plasma-Sintered Al–Mg–PPA Composites. Quantum Beam Sci. 2024, 8, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Edosa, O.O.; Tekweme, F.K.; Olubambi, P.A.; Gupta, K. Effects of PPA Reinforcement and Sintering Parameters on the Densification and Hardness Properties of Al/Mg/PPA Composites. Materials 2025, 18, 1246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Veeranaath, V.; Daga, U.; Sharma, P.; Kumar, Y. Analysis of the Upshot of Heat Treatment on Physical and Mechanical Behavior of Aluminum Hybrid Composites. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 65, 81–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Menachery, N.; Thomas, S.; Deepanraj, B.; Senthilkumar, N. Processing of Nano reinforced Aluminum Hybrid Metal Matrix Composites and the Effect of Post-Heat Treatment: A Review. Appl. Nanosci. 2023, 13, 4075–4099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Sawla, S.; Das, S. Combined Effect of Reinforcement and Heat Treatment on the Two Body Abrasive Wear of Aluminum Alloy and Aluminum Particle Composites. Wear 2004, 257, 555–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Arya, R.K.; Kumar, R.; Telang, A. Influence of Microstructure on Tribological Behaviors of Al6061 Metal Matrix Composite Reinforced with Silicon Nitride (Si3N4) and Silicon Carbide (SiC) Micro Particles. Silicon 2023, 15, 3987–4001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pramanik, A. Effects of Reinforcement on Wear Resistance of Aluminum Matrix Composites. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2016, 26, 348–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ayodele, O.O.; Babalola, B.J.; Olubambi, P.A. Characterization, Nano mechanical, and Wear Attributes of Sintered Al–TiB2 Composites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 24, 4153–4167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lucchetta, M.C.; Ramasamy, P.; Saporiti, F.; Eckert, J.; Audebert, F. Influence of the 1% Ti Content on Microstructure, Friction Coefficient and Contribution to the Strengthening Mechanisms in the Al20Sn1Cu Alloy. Results Eng. 2022, 15, 100506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Raghav, G.R.; Janardhanan, S.; Sajith, E.; Chandran, V.; Sruthi, V. Mechanical and Tribological Performance of Al–Fe–SiC–Zr Hybrid Composites Produced through Powder Metallurgy Process. Mater. Res. Express 2021, 8, 115007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mohammad Sharifi, E.; Karimzadeh, F.; Enayati, M.H. Fabrication and Evaluation of Mechanical and Tribological Properties of Boron Carbide Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Nanocomposites. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 3263–3271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Shaikh, M.B.N.; Aziz, T.; Arif, S.; Ansari, A.H.; Karagiannidis, P.G.; Uddin, M. Effect of Sintering Techniques on Microstructural, Mechanical and Tribological Properties of Al–SiC Composites. Surf. Interfaces 2020, 20, 100598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Brillon, A.; Garcia, J.; Riallant, F.; Garnier, C.; Joulain, A.; Lu, Y.; Silvain, J.F. Characterization of Al/B4C Composite Materials Fabricated by Powder Metallurgy Process Technique for Nuclear Applications. J. Nucl. Mater. 2022, 565, 153724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Venkatesh, V.S.S.; Deoghare, A.B. Effect of Microwave Sintering on the Mechanical Characteristics of Al/Kaoline/SiC Hybrid Composite Fabricated through Powder Metallurgy Techniques. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2022, 287, 126276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Engproc 114 00001 g003
Figure 3. Effect of heat treatment on the RD of Al/Mg/PPA composites.
Figure 3. Effect of heat treatment on the RD of Al/Mg/PPA composites.
Engproc 114 00001 g003
Engproc 114 00001 g004
Figure 4. SEM image of Al/Mg/PPA composites after heat treatment: (a) Al/2Mg/5PPA, (b) Al/2Mg/20PPA, (c) Al/2Mg/15PPA, (d) Al/2Mg/20PPA-EDS.
Figure 4. SEM image of Al/Mg/PPA composites after heat treatment: (a) Al/2Mg/5PPA, (b) Al/2Mg/20PPA, (c) Al/2Mg/15PPA, (d) Al/2Mg/20PPA-EDS.
Engproc 114 00001 g004
Engproc 114 00001 g005
Figure 5. Optical micrograph and particle size distribution of Al/Mg/PPA composites after heat treatment: (a) Al/2Mg/20PPA, (b) Al/2Mg/15PPA.
Figure 5. Optical micrograph and particle size distribution of Al/Mg/PPA composites after heat treatment: (a) Al/2Mg/20PPA, (b) Al/2Mg/15PPA.
Engproc 114 00001 g005
Engproc 114 00001 g006
Figure 6. Impact of T6 heat treatment on the hardness (HV) of Al/Mg/PPA composites.
Figure 6. Impact of T6 heat treatment on the hardness (HV) of Al/Mg/PPA composites.
Engproc 114 00001 g006
Engproc 114 00001 g007
Figure 7. XRD pattern for Al/Mg/PPA composites after heat treatment.
Figure 7. XRD pattern for Al/Mg/PPA composites after heat treatment.
Engproc 114 00001 g007
Engproc 114 00001 g008
Figure 8. Effects of heat treatment on Al/Mg/PPA samples’ compressive strength.
Figure 8. Effects of heat treatment on Al/Mg/PPA samples’ compressive strength.
Engproc 114 00001 g008
Engproc 114 00001 g009
Figure 9. Effect of T6 heat treatment on the wear resistance of Al/Mg/PPA composites.
Figure 9. Effect of T6 heat treatment on the wear resistance of Al/Mg/PPA composites.
Engproc 114 00001 g009
Engproc 114 00001 g010
Figure 10. Influence of heat treatment on the COF of Al/Mg/PPA samples.
Figure 10. Influence of heat treatment on the COF of Al/Mg/PPA samples.
Engproc 114 00001 g010
Engproc 114 00001 g011
Figure 11. SEM micrograph of worn surfaces of AMCs after heat treatment (a) H1 and (b) H5.
Figure 11. SEM micrograph of worn surfaces of AMCs after heat treatment (a) H1 and (b) H5.
Engproc 114 00001 g011
Engproc 114 00001 g012
Figure 12. SEM fracture surfaces of Al-Mg-PPA composites after heat treatment (a) Al-2Mg, (b) Al/2Mg/20PPA.
Figure 12. SEM fracture surfaces of Al-Mg-PPA composites after heat treatment (a) Al-2Mg, (b) Al/2Mg/20PPA.
Engproc 114 00001 g012
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

Edosa, O.O.; Kunzi Tekweme, F.; Olubambi, P.A.; Gupta, K. Influence of T6 Heat Treatment on Densification, Mechanical, and Wear Behavior of Plantain Peel Ash Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composites. Eng. Proc. 2025, 114, 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025114001

AMA Style

Edosa OO, Kunzi Tekweme F, Olubambi PA, Gupta K. Influence of T6 Heat Treatment on Densification, Mechanical, and Wear Behavior of Plantain Peel Ash Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composites. Engineering Proceedings. 2025; 114(1):1. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025114001

Chicago/Turabian Style

Edosa, Osarue Osaruene, Francis Kunzi Tekweme, Peter A. Olubambi, and Kapil Gupta. 2025. "Influence of T6 Heat Treatment on Densification, Mechanical, and Wear Behavior of Plantain Peel Ash Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composites" Engineering Proceedings 114, no. 1: 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025114001

APA Style

Edosa, O. O., Kunzi Tekweme, F., Olubambi, P. A., & Gupta, K. (2025). Influence of T6 Heat Treatment on Densification, Mechanical, and Wear Behavior of Plantain Peel Ash Reinforced Aluminum Matrix Composites. Engineering Proceedings, 114(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025114001

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop