
Fig. 1.
Fabrication of AZ61/ B4C nanocomposites

Fig. 2.
SEM micrographs of nanocomposites of AZ61/B4C: (a) AZ61 alloy, (b) AZ61/2.5wt%B4C, (c) AZ61/5wt%B4C, (d) AZ61/7.5wt%B4C, (e) AZ61/10wt%B4C

Fig. 3.
EDS analysis of nanocomposites of AZ61/B4C: (a) AZ61 alloy, (b) AZ61/2.5wt%B4C, (c) AZ61/5wt%B4C, (d) AZ61/7.5wt%B4C, (e) AZ61/10wt%B4C
Table 1.
The density of AZ61/B4C nanocomposites
| Composites | Experimental density g/cm3 | Theoretical density g/cm3 | Porosity % |
|---|---|---|---|
| A (AZ61-Mg alloy) | 1.785 | 1.790 | 1.38 |
| B (AZ61 with 2.5wt% B4C) | 1.801 | 1.824 | 1.24 |
| C (AZ61 with 5wt% B4C) | 1.814 | 1.831 | 1.18 |
| D (AZ61 with 7.5wt% B4C) | 1.826 | 1.840 | 1.07 |
| E (AZ61 with 10wt% B4C) | 1.830 | 1.848 | 1.04 |
Table 2.
Tensile characteristics of AZ61/B4C nanocomposites
| Composites | Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) | Yield strength (MPa) | Elongation (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 158 | 101 | 10.4 |
| B | 166 | 114 | 8.6 |
| C | 178 | 126 | 6.8 |
| D | 194 | 138 | 5.6 |
| E | 182 | 129 | 6.0 |

Fig. 4.
AZ61/B4C nanocomposites and the hardness of their relationship

Fig. 5.
(a) AZ61/B4C nanocomposites and the compressive strength of their relationship (b) stressstrain curve of AZ61/B4C nanocomposites

Fig. 6.
AZ61/B4C nanocomposites and the impact strength of their relationship

Fig. 7.
AZ61/ B4C nanocomposites and the flexural strength of their relationship
Table 3.
Corrosion properties of the AZ61/B4C nanocomposites
| Composites | Icorr (mA/cm2) | Ecorr (mV) | Corrosion rate (mils/yr) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 0.0039751 | −753.15 | 355.37 |
| B | 0.0032398 | −856.25 | 338.70 |
| C | 0.0030175 | −869.60 | 320.96 |
| D | 0.0021956 | −916.36 | 220.47 |
| E | 0.0024096 | −909.77 | 240.36 |
Table 4.
Experimental results
| Exp. No. | Wt% B4C | L (N) | SV (m/s) | SD (m) | WR (mm3/m) | COF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 400 | 0.0084 | 0.482 |
| 2 | 0 | 8 | 2 | 800 | 0.0076 | 0.526 |
| 3 | 0 | 12 | 3 | 1200 | 0.0087 | 0.489 |
| 4 | 0 | 16 | 4 | 1600 | 0.0097 | 0.561 |
| 5 | 2.5 | 4 | 2 | 1200 | 0.0049 | 0.597 |
| 6 | 2.5 | 8 | 1 | 1600 | 0.0075 | 0.606 |
| 7 | 2.5 | 12 | 4 | 400 | 0.00672 | 0.685 |
| 8 | 2.5 | 16 | 3 | 800 | 0.00789 | 0.587 |
| 9 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 1600 | 0.0031 | 0.774 |
| 10 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 1200 | 0.0045 | 0.695 |
| 11 | 5 | 12 | 1 | 800 | 0.0051 | 0.763 |
| 12 | 5 | 16 | 2 | 400 | 0.0068 | 0.79 |
| 13 | 7.5 | 4 | 4 | 800 | 0.0031 | 0.585 |
| 14 | 7.5 | 8 | 3 | 400 | 0.0039 | 0.493 |
| 15 | 7.5 | 12 | 2 | 1600 | 0.0048 | 0.521 |
| 16 | 7.5 | 16 | 1 | 1200 | 0.00501 | 0.566 |

Fig. 9.
Contour plot: wt% B4C vs. load

Fig. 10.
Contour plot: wt% B4C vs. sliding distance

Fig. 11.
Contour plot: wt% B4C vs. sliding velocity

Fig. 12.
Contour plot: wt% B4C vs. load

Fig. 13.
Contour plot wt% B4C vs. sliding distance

Fig. 14.
Contour plot wt% B4C vs. sliding velocity
Table 5.
Calculated S/N ratio as well as the normalized S/N ratio
| S/N ratio for wear | S/N ratio for COF | Normalization for wear | Normalization for COF |
|---|---|---|---|
| 41.5144 | 6.3391 | 0.874 | 0.000 |
| 42.3837 | 5.5803 | 0.786 | 0.177 |
| 41.2096 | 6.2138 | 0.905 | 0.029 |
| 40.2646 | 5.0207 | 1.000 | 0.307 |
| 46.1961 | 4.4805 | 0.401 | 0.433 |
| 42.4988 | 4.3505 | 0.775 | 0.463 |
| 43.4526 | 3.2862 | 0.678 | 0.711 |
| 42.0585 | 4.6272 | 0.819 | 0.399 |
| 50.1728 | 2.2252 | 0.000 | 0.959 |
| 46.9357 | 3.1603 | 0.327 | 0.741 |
| 45.8486 | 2.3495 | 0.436 | 0.930 |
| 43.3498 | 2.0475 | 0.689 | 1.000 |
| 50.1728 | 4.6569 | 0.000 | 0.392 |
| 48.1787 | 6.1431 | 0.201 | 0.046 |
| 46.3752 | 5.6632 | 0.383 | 0.157 |
| 46.0032 | 4.9437 | 0.421 | 0.325 |
Table 6.
Calculated deviation sequences for GRC and GRG
| Deviation sequence for wear | Deviation sequence for COF | GRC for wear | GRC for COF | GRG | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.126 | 1.000 | 0.799 | 0.333 | 0.566 | 9 |
| 0.214 | 0.823 | 0.700 | 0.378 | 0.539 | 11 |
| 0.095 | 0.971 | 0.840 | 0.340 | 0.590 | 7 |
| 0.000 | 0.693 | 1.000 | 0.419 | 0.710 | 2 |
| 0.599 | 0.567 | 0.455 | 0.469 | 0.462 | 12 |
| 0.225 | 0.537 | 0.689 | 0.482 | 0.586 | 8 |
| 0.322 | 0.289 | 0.608 | 0.634 | 0.621 | 5 |
| 0.181 | 0.601 | 0.734 | 0.454 | 0.594 | 6 |
| 1.000 | 0.041 | 0.333 | 0.924 | 0.628 | 4 |
| 0.673 | 0.259 | 0.426 | 0.658 | 0.542 | 10 |
| 0.564 | 0.070 | 0.470 | 0.877 | 0.673 | 3 |
| 0.311 | 0.000 | 0.616 | 1.000 | 0.808 | 1 |
| 1.000 | 0.608 | 0.333 | 0.451 | 0.392 | 15 |
| 0.799 | 0.954 | 0.385 | 0.344 | 0.364 | 16 |
| 0.617 | 0.843 | 0.448 | 0.372 | 0.410 | 14 |
| 0.579 | 0.675 | 0.463 | 0.426 | 0.444 | 13 |
Table 7.
Grey relational grade response table
| Level | Wt% | L (N) | SV (m/s) | SD (m) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.469 | 5.954 | 5.017 | 4.925 |
| 2 | 5.003 | 6.024 | 5.417 | 5.363 |
| 3 | 3.659 | 4.974 | 5.478 | 5.913 |
| 4 | 7.921 | 4.099 | 5.139 | 4.851 |
| Delta | 4.262 | 1.925 | 0.46 | 1.062 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 4 | 3 |

Fig. 8.
AZ61/B4C nanocomposites and the corrosion behavior of their relationship

Fig. 15.
Grey relational grade

Fig. 16.
Main effect plot for wear rate

Fig. 17.
Main effect plot for coefficient
Table 8.
ANOVA for Grey relational grade
| Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F Value | P Value | Contribution % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wt% | 3 | 0.148176 | 0.049392 | 16.67 | 0.022 | 67.19 |
| L (N) | 3 | 0.045723 | 0.015241 | 5.14 | 0.106 | 20.73 |
| SV (m/s) | 3 | 0.001433 | 0.000478 | 0.16 | 0.916 | 0.65 |
| SD (m) | 3 | 0.016302 | 0.005434 | 1.83 | 0.315 | 7.39 |
| Error | 3 | 0.008889 | 0.002963 | |||
| Total | 15 | 0.220523 |

Fig. 18.
Normal probability plot