Tribological performance evaluation of fused mullite-reinforced hybrid composite brake pad for defence application

  • V. Vineeth Kumar
  • S. Senthil KumaranEmail author
  • S. Dhanalakshmi
  • R. Sivaramakrishnan
Technical Paper


The current study deals with the replacement of existing sintered bronze brake pad using hybrid composite brake pads for armour vehicle application. In the present work, fused mullite was added in three different weight percentages which was compensated by synthetic barites. The pads were produced by conventional manufacturing procedure. The physical and mechanical properties were measured as per industrial standards. The tribological performance was evaluated using Chase test following IS2742 Part-4 standards. The test results showed that 3 wt% of mullite abrasive in hybrid brake pad formulation produced reduced density, less squeal, less frictional undulations with the minimum wear of 0.887 g for 100 brake applications. Worn surface characteristics were analysed using scanning electron microscopy.


Fused mullite Brake pad Hybrid composite Chase test Sintered bronze 



Authors sincerely thank Mr. Habib Rahamathullah, Fricmart, New Delhi, for extending the testing facilities. Authors would like to record their gratitude to Mr. Venkataswamy, M.D. of Pyramid Precision Engineering, Chennai, for guiding us in knowing about technical details of testing, and authors also would like to extend their hearty thanks to Ms. J. Jesintha Princy, Research Scholar, School of Social Science and Languages, VIT, Vellore, for helping us in finding grammatical errors in this research paper.


  1. 1.
    Pye AM (1973) A review of asbestos substitute materials in industrial applications. J Hazard Mater 3:125–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ramazzini C (1999) Call for ban: call for an international ban on asbestos. Scand J Work Environ Health 25(6):633–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sato T, Hirai Y, Fukui T, Akiyama K, Usami H (2015) Effects of dispersed sulfides in bronze under line contact conditions. In: Proceedings of Malaysian international tribology conference, pp 84–85Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gilardi R, Alzati L, Thiam M, Brunel J-F, Desplanques Y, Dufrénoy P, Sharma S, Bijwe J (2012) Copper substitution and noise reduction in brake pads. Materials 5:2258–2269. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liew KW, Nirmal U (2013) Frictional performance evaluation of newly designed brake pad materials. Mater Des 48:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kovacik J, Emmer S, Bielek J, Kelesi L (2008) Effect of composition on friction coefficient of Cu–graphite composites. Wear 265:417–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Samal CP, Parihar JS, Chaira D (2013) The effect of milling and sintering techniques on mechanical properties of Cu–graphite metal matrix composite prepared by powder metallurgy route. J Alloys Compd 569:95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chan D, Stachowiak GW (2004) Review of automotive brake friction materials. Proc Inst Mech Eng D J Automob Eng 218:953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ertan R (2016) Synergistic effect of organic- and ceramic-based ingredients on the tribological characteristics of brake friction materials. Mater Technol 50:223–228. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Longley JW, Gardner R (1988) Some compositional effects in the static and dynamic. Properties of commercial vehicle disk brakes. ImechE C 453(88):31–38Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jang H, Kim SJ (2000) The effects of antimony trisulfide (Sb2S3) and zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) in the automotive brake friction material on friction characteristics. Wear 239(2):229–236. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Handa Y, Kato T (1996) Effect of Cu powder BaSO4 and cashew dust on the wear and friction characteristics of automotive brake pads. Tribo Trans 39:346–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jang H, Yoon JH, Kim SJ, Lee JY, Park HD (2003) The effect of the composition and microstructure of gray cast iron on preferential wear during parasitic drag and on intrinsic damping capacity. SAE technical papers 2003-01-3313, pp 57–64Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Doi K, Mibe T, Matsui H, Tamasho T, Nakanish H (2000) Brake judder reduction technology–brake design technique including friction material formulation. JSAE Rev 21:497–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Manoharan S, Vijay R, Singaravelu DL, Kchaou M (2019) Experimental investigation on the tribothermal properties of brake friction material containing various forms of graphite: a comprehensive study. Arab J Sci Eng 44(2):1459–1473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Justin Antonyraj I, Vijay R, Lenin Singaravelu D (2018) Influence of WS2/SnS2 on the tribological performance of copper-free brake pads. Industrial lubrication and technology, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mahale V, Bijwe J, Sinha S (2019) A step towards replacing copper in brakepads by using stainless steel swarf. Wear. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kolluri DK, Ghosh AK, Bijwe J (2010) Performance evaluation of composite friction materials: influence of nature and particle size of graphite. J Reinf Plast Compos 29(18):2842–2854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lenin Singaravelu D, Vijay R, Rahul Ragh M (2015) Influence of crab shell on tribological characterization of eco-friendly product based non asbestos brake friction material. SAE technical paper, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cai P, Wang Y, Wang T, Wang Q (2016) Improving tribological behaviours of friction material by mullite. Tribol Int 93:282–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thiyagarajan V, Kalaichelvan K, Vijay R, Lenin Singaravelu D (2015) Influence of thermal conductivity and thermal stability on the fade and recovery characteristics of non asbestos semi metallic disc brake pad. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Manoharan S, Krishna Raj S, Vijay R, Lenin Singaravelu D, Suresha B (2017) Development and characterization of novel fiber reinforced hybrid friction composites. In: Paulo Davim J (ed) Green composites, materials, manufacturing and engineering. De Gruyter, Berlin, pp 69–114Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bijwe J, Kumar M (2007) Optimization of steel wool contents in non-asbestos organic (NAO) friction composites for best combination of thermal conductivity and tribo-performance. Wear 263(7–12):1243–1248. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lenin Singaravelu D, Vijay R, Rahul M (2015) Influence of crab shell on tribological characterization of eco-friendly products based non-asbestos brake friction materials. SAE technical paper, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dhanalakshmi S, Sivakumar P, Anil Kumar VN, Raghavendra Bhat R (2007) Development and characterisation of copper based brake pads for armoured fighting vehicles. In: National conference on automotive manufacturing, held at PSG College of Technology, Coimbatore, Organised by SAE India Southern SectionGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ravikiran A, Jahanmir S (2001) Effect of contact pressure and load on wear of alumina. Wear 251:980–984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Satapathy BK, Bijwe J (2002) Analysis of simultaneous influence of operating variables on abrasive wear of phenolic composites. Wear 253:787–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2019
​corrected ​publication ​2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Vineeth Kumar
    • 1
  • S. Senthil Kumaran
    • 2
    Email author
  • S. Dhanalakshmi
    • 3
  • R. Sivaramakrishnan
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringVellore Institute of Technology, VITVelloreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Manufacturing Engineering, School of Mechanical EngineeringVellore Institute of Technology, VITVelloreIndia
  3. 3.Combat Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (CVRDE)ChennaiIndia
  4. 4.Department of Production Technology, MIT CampusAnna UniversityChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations