Wear 476 (2021) 203690

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Wear
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/wear

Abrasive and adhesive wear behaviour of metallic bonds in a synthetic

slurry test for wear prediction in reinforced concrete
Stefan Fabbro a, *, Lucas Marra Araujo a, **, Jona Engel b, ***, Jens Kondratiuk c, Michal Kuffa a,
Konrad Wegener a
a
Institute of Machine Tools and Manufacturing, ETH Zürich, Leonhardstrasse 21, 8092, Zürich, Switzerland
b
Laboratory of Nanometallurgy, ETH Zürich, Vladimir-Prelogweg 1-5/10, 8093, Zürich, Switzerland
c
Hilti AG, Feldkircherstrasse 100, 9494, Schaan, Liechtenstein

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The understanding of the tribological system and the corresponding wear behaviour of metallic materials is,
Abrasive wear especially in wet condition and in presence of abrasive particles, of high importance. This particularly applies for
Adhesive wear construction applications, like core drilling and sawing in reinforced concrete, where the knowledge about ad­
Slurry test
hesive wear but also abrasive micro- and macro-mechanisms is limited. If it comes to material removal in
Impregnated diamond bits
reinforced concrete, adhesive wear between the metal matrix and the reinforcement steel is observed, besides
Mechanical microscopy
abrasive wear as a result of the metal matrix–concrete interaction. To differentiate adhesive and abrasive wear, a
new approach for testing metal materials with varying counter parts and different sliding speeds in a wet-slurry
test is presented. A for this work modified B611 - 13 test is used to test two different metal compositions to
investigate their change in mass, micro-hardness and the microstructure at the sliding interface zone. Addi­
tionally, the wear pattern is identified by optical microscope and under the scanning electron microscope. To
differentiate the main wear mechanisms, a S355 steel and a silicon carbide ceramic are used as a counterbody.
The results show that it is possible to separate the wear behaviour while testing in different conditions.

1. Introduction controlled way and adjusted to the diamond wear to guarantee

Impregnated diamond bits are used in many different applications
like in tools for the machining and manufacturing industry but also as
diamond core bits in construction applications. Franca et al. [1]
described a typical diamond core bit as composed out of a defined
number of segments which itself are a sintered powder-metal bond with
synthetic diamond grits distributed stochastically or in a defined pattern
over its volume. Moseley et al. [2] described the manufacturing routes as
a either cold pressing and free sintering or hot pressing process. The core
bits with joint diamond segments are used to core drill in reinforced
concrete. The segments contain synthetic diamonds of a typical size
between 300 and 600 μm with a concentration of 5–20 vol%. The di­
amonds wear and fracture while cutting through the reinforcement bars
and at the same time the diamond-binder system wears while cutting
through the inhomogeneous and highly abrasive concrete material. This
means that the segment matrix needs to wear simultaneously in a
self-sharpening, according to Miller [3]. However, the combination of
steel reinforcement (mild steel) with concrete, i.e. hard aggregates and
cement, results in a highly heterogeneous and aggressive environment,
which generates a significant amount of heat during the core drilling
process. In order to dissipate this heat, water at a flow rate ranging
between 1 and 4 l/min is required for cooling and flushing of the slurry
material, reported from Moseley et al. [2]. Observations made in
pre-studies for this work have shown that the wear pattern of a diamond
segment is mainly described by abrasive, adhesive and, at higher oper­
ational speeds, erosive wear. Fig. 1 shows a scanning electron micro­
scope (SEM) image of a diamond segment after a core drilling operation
in reinforced concrete. The surface is characterized by abrasive and
adhesive wear.
Buyuksagis and Goktan [4], Gupta [5] as well as Huang et al. [6]
investigated the erosive wear behaviour of different materials. They
described that the erosive wear behaviour in diamond tools like circular

* Corresponding author.
** Corresponding author.
*** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: fabbro@inspire.ethz.ch (S. Fabbro), marra@iwf.mavt.ethz.ch (L.M. Araujo), jona.engel@mat.ethz.ch (J. Engel).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2021.203690
Received 10 September 2020; Received in revised form 9 December 2020; Accepted 14 December 2020
Available online 17 February 2021
0043-1648/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
S. Fabbro et al. Wear 476 (2021) 203690

carbide ceramic.
The influence of the microstructure on the wear behaviour at varying
testing conditions is investigated and discussed in this work. Subse­
quently, the laboratory test results are verified in core drilling experi­
ments under real application conditions.

2. Materials and test set up

2.1. Bond material (test specimen)

Materials tested in this study are two conventional diamond segment

Fig. 1. Adhered rebar material and abrasive wear visible on the surface after
reinforced concrete core drilling with conventional diamond segments (here
named Segment A).
alloys used in construction industry, here named Segment A and
Segment B. Both segments are binary iron-copper alloys. The alloy
system is descripted by Turchanin et al. [14]. Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 display
light optical microscope images of cross-sections as well as SEM images
with energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) element maps. Segment A is
copper rich maintaining the binary copper-iron structure with a porosity
of <0.2%. Segment B shows a higher porosity of approximately 5% and a
ferritic-pearlitic microstructure including sulphides and a bronze phase.

saw blades occurs when a slurry with hard abrasive particles is moving 2.2. Modified B611 - 13 test
along the metal binder surface. Tönshoff et al. [7] studied the swarf
formation and the contact characteristics between diamond segment The standard ASTM B611-13 (2018) [15] is a standard test method
and stone base material during diamond sawing experiments. He for determining the high stress abrasion resistance of hard materials.
divided diamond segment wear into bond wear and diamond wear, The ranking takes place by comparing either the volume loss in mm3
resulting in the conclusion that erosion has a major influence on the after a predefined time interval or the wear coefficient k in mm3/Nm.
segment wear. However, erosion wear decreases significantly when The wear coefficient is calculated with a modified Archard equation (1)
decreasing the sliding speeds. The commonly used rotational speeds in reported by Hutchings and Shipway [16]:
diamond core drilling are 30 times lower compared to diamond sawing. ΔV
k= (1)
Various studies in the past investigated the wear mechanism of diamond L *F
segments or diamond bond materials focusing on stone cutting and
With ΔV is the volumetric loss, L the sliding distance and F the
sawing or drilling in terms of abrasive wear. Ersoy et al. [8] studied the
contact force. The test is recapped in different publications by e.g. Gant
influence of stone properties on the segment wear characteristics at
et al. [17] in 2018 or Konyashin and Ries in 2014 [18]. However, the
different parameters and concluded that the main wear characteristics is
main test characteristics need to be described and compared to the
abrasive wear. The influence of different stone types on two-body and
modifications done in this work. The standard ASTM B611-13 (2018)
three-body-abrasion was investigated in 2013 by Petrica et al. [9]. It was
describes a flat rectangular test specimen, which is clamped in a verti­
found that the content of hard minerals within a rock composition is the
cally located lever with screws. To avoid damaging the counter body,
dominant factor in the expected abrasivity in case of three-body abra­
test specimens without diamonds are used. The aforementioned lever is
sion and the brittleness of the rock is the main factor in two-body
connected to a dead weight, pressing the specimen tangentially against a
abrasion. Özçelik et al. [10] developed regression models for diamond
steel wheel on its centre line. The water slurry is held in a slurry vessel
wire sawing to predict diamond bead wear and tested it on different
and the typical agitating vanes (curved or flat) are responsible for the
stone types. In 2018, Mostofi et al. [11] investigated the wear behaviour
slurry transport and ensure a sufficient amount of slurry with the pre­
of impregnated diamond bits examining core bit and segment drilling
defined concentration entering the contact zone at the sample. Ac­
experiments. It was observed that polishing, fracturing and sharpening
cording to Gant et al. [17] the agitating vanes are a key feature of this
are the three phases while drilling through a granite rock and that
test. They are not only responsible for the slurry transport to the spec­
two-body matrix/rock abrasion is dominant in the fracturing phase
imen, in addition these “stirring paddles” ensure a homogenous mixture
while a continuous three-body abrasion wear of the bond material is
by preventing particle sedimentation. With this test, it is possible to
responsible for the pull-out scenarios. This assumption was confirmed by
Konstanty et al. [12] in 2018, where he studied the suitability of new
iron based Mn–Cu–Sn bond material alloys. A statistically significant
inverse relationship between the matrix wear resistance to three-body
abrasion and the wear rate of the bond material was observed.
Recently in 2020, Wang et al. [13] studied the wear behaviour of two
different diamond segment alloys in rock sawing application. It was
concluded that the diamond retention forces are higher in cobalt-based
segments compared to iron-based segments. All these studies investi­
gated the effects of different stone and rock materials on the two-body
and three-body abrasion. Unfortunately, publications dealing with the
diamond segment wear while drilling and cutting through steel rein­
forced concrete materials are not present in literature. There is still a
lack of understanding of the adhesive and abrasive wear behaviour of
varying bond materials and their interaction with the rebar and the
concrete. In this study, the standard ASTM B611-13 test is modified to Fig. 2. Cross-section light optical microscope image in surface near regions of
achieve more realistic wear rates as well as wear patterns by using two Segment A, etched with 2% Nital. Corresponding SEM image and EDS element
different counterpart materials like a S355 steel and a sintered silicon mapping of Cu and Fe.

2
S. Fabbro et al.
Fig. 3. Cross-section light optical microscope image in surface near regions of
Segment B, etched with 2% Nital. EDX mapping showing the presence of sul­
phides at grain boundaries.
achieve high wear rates and to investigate and rank the wear pattern of
different materials with a low scatter under laboratory conditions. In
this study, changes in the wheel material as well as slurry mixture are
tested in the described modified diamond segment B611 test. Addi­
tionally, to the steel wheel, a sintered silicon carbide (SSiC) is used to
ensure pure abrasive test conditions. In order to meet more realistic core
drilling conditions the slurry concentration is increased to 7.5 g/ml
abrasive sand compared to the concentration used in the standard test
set up [15]. The total slurry volume was 1.5l to fully cover the tribo­
logical system during the test. To achieve a better comparability with
diamond segments used in construction industry, samples with similar
geometry and identical sintering conditions are used for the modified
test. For this reason and for the fact that in certain testing conditions the
wear scar exceeds the sample dimension after 120 s testing time, it is
decided to exclude the running-in period to avoid damaging the spec­
imen holder.
A full overview of all test parameters is listed in Table 1, where a
normal force of 200 N and a velocity of 4 m/s represents application-
related conditions.
The gravimetric wear loss is recorded after each test and is converted
to the wear coefficient in mm3/Nm.
2.3. Core drilling experiments
To validate the modified B611 laboratory test results, core drilling
experiments with both segment types are performed and investigated
according to their wear behaviour in pure concrete and reinforced
concrete. The parameters used for this test are 670 rpm and a torque of
32 Nm, which is recommended for the core bit diameter of 102 mm. A
concrete (strength class C50/60) made from two different sand types
and two different gravel fractions is used. Reinforcement bars with a
diameter of 26 mm are moulded at the upper and lower third of the
concrete block. The wear and subsequently the wear coefficient is
calculated by the volumetric loss of the segments after the test to ensure
Table 1
Normal force and velocity combinations tested in the modified B611-13 test.
Normal Force [N] Velocity [m/s] Nomenclature [/]
200 2 200/2
200 4 200/4
59 2 59/2
59 4 59/4
3
Wear 476 (2021) 203690
the comparability to the laboratory tests.
To guarantee sufficient wear in the pure concrete test, five holes are
drilled with one core bit. The depth of each hole is 90 cm. For the
reinforced concrete test it was decided to drill 224 cm in pure concrete
and two rebar with the diameter of 26 mm after the pure concrete
section.
2.4. Particle size and shape analysis
In general, only a few publications can be found investigating the
wear behaviour of metal materials by changing the abrasive particle
shape. According to Williams [19] and Stachowiak and Stachowiak
[20], the particle size distribution as well as the particle shape and the
hardness have a significant influence on the abrasivity of a slurry
mixture. Hamblin and Stachowiak [21] investigated the influence of the
spike parameter which is describing the particle shape. They concluded
that this parameter shows a good alignment with their abrasive wear
observations but mentioned deviations when other wear mechanisms
like adhesive wear take place. In 2015, Walker and Hambe [22] inves­
tigated the influence of the particle shape on slurry wear at white cast
iron materials and discussed a variety of the most important publica­
tions on the influence of the particle shape. According to them the
particle shape can simply be represented by using the circularity factor
(CF), developed by Riley and is shown in equation (2)
4πA
CF = (2)
P2
where P is the particle perimeter and A the projected area. They found
that the wear rate of ductile steels increases by a decreasing CF. Desale
et al. [23] described three particle types with different CF at 3 m/s for
erosive wear testing in a pot tester. They concluded that the erosive wear
decreased linearly by increasing CF. Desale et al. confirmed the obser­
vations from Levy and Chik [24] when they performed an erosive wear
test in an air jet with the velocity of 80 m/s and said that sharp particles
are more aggressive to metal materials than round ones. Woldman et al.
[25] used a dry sand rubber wheel wear test to study the influence of
sand particles with different mechanical as well as shape properties
using the CF. He showed that different sand varieties result in different
wear rates of the steel specimen. He recommended further work on the
particle shape description due to the fact that he was not able to explain
these differences with the factor CF in detail. The focus in this work is
therefore not to describe the abrasive particle in full detail, but rather
guarantee a comparable size distribution and particle shape of abrasive
particles from real core drilling experiments with the synthetic slurry
particles used for the modified B611-13 test.
Therefore, a variety of concrete slurries are extracted during core
drilling in concrete and reinforced concrete at different parameters. An
overview of all drilling parameters is shown in Table 2:
The measurement of the slurry particle size distributions is carried
out by laser diffraction with a Coulter LS230 (Beckman Coulter, Inc.)
Table 2
Different drilling parameters for slurry extraction and particle size analysis
drilled with a core bit ⌀102 mm.
Notation Rpm [min− 1] Torque [Nm] Comment
Slurry 1 670 35 Pure concrete
Slurry 2 360 65 Pure concrete
Slurry 3 670 22 Pure concrete
Slurry 4 670 32 Pure concrete
Slurry 5 670 32 Reinforced concrete
S. Fabbro et al. Wear 476 (2021) 203690

laser diffractometer. It is equipped with a 750 nm laser and can detect

particles with a diameter of 0.4 μm–2000 μm. The slurry sample is
placed in a liquid carrier medium in the instrument, which is circulated
through a pump. Before each measurement, the detectors are calibrated
and a background measurement is made. The abrasive particles are
dispersed in ethanol using a pipette and a sufficient quantity is added to
the measuring circuit. The measurement is carried out at a pump speed
of 90 revolutions per minute. Additionally to the particle size distribu­
tion, the abrasive particle shape is investigated qualitatively with a SEM.
For that reason, small portions of each slurry are first dissolved in 99.9%
ethanol, dried and treated with 60% hydrochloric acid to remove the
cement phase. This is necessary to avoid charging effects and micro­
scopic artefacts during the SEM investigation. The influence of the hy­
drochloric acid on the particle shape is considered as insignificant.
Fig. 4. Size distributions and the comparison of the synthetic slurry in blue.
(For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is
2.5. Mechanical microscopy
referred to the Web version of this article.)

Indentations are performed on girds of 200 × 300 indents using the

method of Oliver and Pharr [26,27] on an iNano (NanoMechanics, Oak
Ridge, USA) using a Berkovich tip with a maximum force of 1 mN and a
lateral indent spacing of 1 μm. The poisson’s ratio is a remaining un­
known in the material system. There is no practical method at hand to
determine it. According to the Oliver and Pharr method of instrumented
indentation, it only affects the Young’s modulus. In fact, its effects in the
material systems are small enough to be generalized and a poisson’s
ratio of 0.3 is used for all phases.

3. Results and discussion Fig. 5. Comparison of the abrasive particle shape. Synthetic slurry left, Con­
crete slurry right.
3.1. Slurry analysis

The d10, d50 and d90 values are shown in Table 3. The d50 size of the
slurry extracted from reinforced concrete is less than half the size of the
slurries extracted from pure concrete. The fact that there is a change in
the concrete block by changing from pure concrete to reinforced con­
crete suggests that the main influencing factor on the size distribution
are the different concrete blocks.
With these results a synthetic slurry based on Silverbond M10
(Euroquarz Germany) is used for the B611-13 wear tests. The chemical
analysis according to the product information states a SiO2 of 99.6%.
The particle size distributions for the extracted slurries is shown in
Fig. 4. The blue line represents the synthetic slurry (Silverbond M10)
with a clear shift to smaller particle sizes.
Fig. 5 displays an abrasive particle from the synthetic slurry (left)
and from a reinforced concrete slurry (right). Sharp edges can be
observed on all particles. The fine particles sitting on the Silverbond
M10 slurry are particles from the d10 fraction. The fraction of fine par­
ticles cannot be observed on the reinforced concrete particles since they
are removed during the cleaning and acid treatment process.
Fig. 6. Wear coefficients of both segment types with the corresponding stan­
dard deviations obtained at different testing parameters.

Table 3
Particle size measurements. Each value is the average out of three single test
runs. 3.2. Modified B611-13 test
Notation d10 [μm] d50 [μm] d90 [μm]
Fig. 6 illustrates the different wear coefficients examined in the
Slurry 1 1.73 27.56 123.27 modified B611-13 test for the two counterpart materials. The results
Slurry 2 1.67 23.91 102.37
indicate a clear change in the wear behaviour at higher speeds as well as
Slurry 3 1.75 26.81 119.67
Slurry 4 1.68 24.66 104.94 normal forces. The wear coefficient for both segment types ranges be­
Slurry 5 1.33 11.75 67.58 tween 1.4 mm3/Nm tested at 59 N with 2 m/s (Segment A) and 0.1
Synthetic slurry 3.6 21.7 60.60 mm3/Nm tested at 200 N with 4 m/s (Segment A) against the steel
wheel. The results obtained at lowest load and circumferential speed
with Segment A is at least by the factor of two higher compared to all

4
S. Fabbro et al.
other results. On the contrary, the wear coefficients range between 0.02
mm3/Nm tested at 59 N with 2 m/s (Segment A) and 0.07 mm3/Nm
tested at 59 N with 2 m/s (Segment B), when testing against SSiC. The
wear coefficients obtained when testing against the sintered silicon
carbide wheel are by an order of magnitude lower than those against the
S355 steel wheel. In general, the wear rates increase significantly using
the steel wheel. This can be explained by the different mechanical
properties of the S355 steel compared to the SSiC wheel. The hardness of
the S355 steel wheel is with 1.5–1.8 GPa [28] lower than the hardness of
the segment material with 2–4 GPa (see 3.6). This facilitates adhesive
wear (see 3.4) during the wear test using the steel wheel. By using the
SSiC wheel instead of the steel wheel not only the relative hardness but
also chemical affinity is changed. SSiC shows with approx. 23 GPa [29] a
higher hardness compared to the hardness of the segment material. Due
to the diamond like tetrahedral crystal structure of SiC with its pre­
dominantly covalent character, it reveals a low chemical affinity to
metallic alloys. This can explain the differences in the wear coefficient
observations and shift in wear mode from adhesive to predominantly
abrasive wear.
3.3. Core drilling experiments
Table 4 lists the wear coefficients obtained in the core drilling ex­
periments. The wear coefficients found in the steel wheel experiment
(see 3.2) and examined while drilling in reinforced concrete deviate
significantly from each other. For instance, Segment A shows with 0.05
mm3/Nm drilled in reinforced concrete half of the wear compared to the
modified B611 test against the steel wheel (0.10 mm3/Nm at 4 m/s and
200 N). The similar trend holds true for Segment B. The observed wear
coefficient of 0.49 mm3/Nm in the modified B611 test against steel
wheel, is more than double compared to the drilling results in the
reinforced concrete drilling. Compared to that, the results found when
drilling in pure concrete do not reveal a significant offset to the exper­
iments when the SSiC wheel is used. The deviations between the wear
coefficients in the modified B611 steel wheel test and reinforced con­
crete drilling experiments, can be explained by the absence of diamonds,
which results in pure metal-metal contact and therefore an increase of
the wear coefficient due to excessive adhesive wear. The diamonds
present in segments when core drilling create a gap between the bond
surface and the rebar. This reduces severe adhesive wear and the wear
coefficient by approximately a factor of two compared to steel wheel
test. This influence is less significant in pure concrete applications.
In general, Segment A shows a higher lifetime compared to Segment
B, which correlates for near application testing conditions (200 N and 4
m/s) with the observations from the modified B611 laboratory test.
3.4. Microscopic investigation of wear tracks
The worn surfaces are examined by light and scanning electron
Table 4
Wear coefficients of Segment A and Segment B drilled in reinforced concrete and
pure concrete.
Segment Type Reinforced concrete [mm3/Nm] Pure concrete [mm3/Nm]
A 0.05 0.03
B 0.22 0.06
5
Wear 476 (2021) 203690
Fig. 7. Stereomicroscopy of the worn surfaces (AD = adhesive wear; AB =
abrasive wear). Each sample is 10 mm wide.
microscopy. Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 show stereomicroscopic and SEM images of
the upper and the lower test limit of the two segment types after the
modified B611 tests. Segment A is characterized by significant adhesive
wear with snout formation and areas with abrasive wear caused by
micro-ploughing when tested against the steel wheel (see Fig. 8 a/b).
Additionally, particle indentations due to 3-body-abrasion at low ve­
locity and force are visible. Moreover, large areas of seizure can be
observed for both test conditions in Fig. 7.
In Fig. 8c predominantly abrasive wear caused by micro-cutting can
be observed. In addition to the aforementioned abrasive wear, adhesive
wear is visible in Fig. 8d on the worn surface of Segment A tested against
the SSiC wheel, owing to high contact force as well as the increased
velocity.
Segment B tested against the steel wheel is shown in Fig. 8e/f and is
characterized by abrasive wear and multiple particle indentations due to
3-body-abrasion. Additionally, a similar adhesive wear pattern with
smaller seizure areas compared to Fig. 8a/b is observed at higher
magnifications. However, the adhesive wear observed is less compared
to Segment A at similar testing conditions.
Abrasive wear mainly caused though mico-cutting with additional
plastic surface deformation is shown in Fig. 8g/h. Moreover, embedded
SiO2 particles (partly in sub-micron size) from the slurry can be observed
on the worn surface of Segment B tested against SSiC wheel. The amount
of embedded SiO2 particles is higher when tests with low normal force of
59 N are conducted.
The cross-sections of Segment A displayed in Fig. 9 indicate plastic
deformation of the sub-surface microstructure. A highly deformed zone
is visible, caused by severe adhesive wear. These highly deformed zones
are not present on Segment B. They can also be found in Segment A
tested against the SSiC wheel, however less pronounced and only at
specimens tested at application near conditions with 200 N and 4 m/s.
This means that material is removed and sheared on the surface at
higher normal forces and velocities. That differs in case of Segment B,
where the pores act as primary point of failure. Therefore, it is possible
to remove more segment material during the test. In combination with
the different mechanical properties and microstructure (high volume
fraction of primary Cu phase) of the segment this reduces the adhesion
S. Fabbro et al. Wear 476 (2021) 203690

Fig. 8. SEM images of wear surfaces for Segment A and Segment B tested in the modified B611 test with synthetic slurry. (a)–(b): Segment A against steel wheel with
(a) 59/2 and (b) 200/4 – significant adhesive wear with snouts formation and areas with abrasive wear and particle indentations. (c)–(d) Segment A against SSiC
wheel with (c) 59/2 and (d) 200/4– predominantly abrasive wear in (c) and indications of adhesive wear in (d). (e)–(f) Segment B against the steel wheel with (e) 59/
2 and (f) 200/4– wear is characterized by abrasive and adhesive wear and significant particle indentation due to 3-body-abrasion. (g)–(h) Segment B against the SSiC
wheel with (g) 59/2 and (h) 200/4– abrasive wear and plastic surface deformations. Additional self-reinforcing effects due embedded SiO2 particles (partly in sub-
micron size) from the slurry. (a)–(h) sliding direction is from bottom to top.

6
S. Fabbro et al.
Fig. 9. Metallographic cross sections through the worn surface of segments
tested at 200 N and 4 m/s, etched with 2% Nital.
Fig. 10. EDS mapping in worn zone after wear test with 200 N and 4 m/s of
Segment A against the steel wheel.
tendency and results in the observed wear behaviour.
An EDS mapping of the highly deformed shear zone on Segment A is
used to analyse the chemical composition qualitatively. Fig. 10 displays
the map after a wear test performed at 200 N normal force and 4 m/s.
The high intensities of copper and iron in the worn zone supports the
hypothesis for a highly deformed sheared segment material, which is
removed and subsequently sheared on the worn surface during the test.
3.5. Nanoindentations and nanoindentation mapping
The indentations mapping over both segments show the material as a
binary composite. Fig. 11 shows the sheared material on Segment A with
hardness of over 7 GPa, compared to the bulk material with a hardness
between 3 and 4 GPa.
Fig. 12 shows the structure of Segment B. The white rows result from
7
Wear 476 (2021) 203690
Fig. 11. Segment A tested at 200 N and 4 m/s against the steel wheel. Top left:
Two-dimensional histogram. The colour bar represents counts per bin. Top
right: Hardness over Young’s modulus quotient. (For interpretation of the ref­
erences to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version
of this article.)
Fig. 12. Segment B tested at 200 N and 4 m/s against the steel wheel. Top left:
Two-dimensional histogram. The colour bar represents counts per bin. Top
right: Hardness over modulus quotient. (For interpretation of the references to
colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of
this article.)
measurement failures in large pores after which the instrument stops
indentations in the current row and continues in the next row. The
quotient of hardness over Young’s modulus indicates the presence of
hard phases at the grain boundaries but no work hardening of the sub-
surface.
In fact, with a hardness of 7 GPa, this shear zone is comparable to the
8.8 GPa hardness of fused Silica [30]. The large increase in hardness in
the shear zone could origin from a combination of apparent grain
refinement, by smearing the immiscible iron and copper grains along
each other, and work hardening of the copper phase.
4. Conclusion
Microscopic observations of worn segments (Segment A) used in core
drilling experiments showed, that the proportion of adhesive wear is
significantly lower compared to abrasive wear. For that reason, the first
step in modifying the standard B611 test was to implement a new
counter body material like sintered silicon carbide. The conducted tests
reduce adhesive wear effects significantly compared to the steel wheel.
Additionally, the abrasive slurry was customized in particle
S. Fabbro et al.
concentration as well as size distribution, to guarantee a similar slurry
compared to the slurries extracted from core drilling experiments. Two
commonly used segment alloys, one ferritic-pearlitic and one copper-
based were tested in varying conditions and compared to core drilling
experiments. Both segment alloys show a distinct wear behaviour tested
against different counter bodies. The copper based segment tested
against the steel wheel is prone to a coupled adhesive-abrasive wear
behaviour similar to the ferritic-pearlitic segment but with courser de­
tachments. The same segment tested against the SSiC wheel shows
predominantly abrasive wear with a tendency to an adhesive wear
behaviour by changing the tribological system to higher contact force
and increased velocity. The sheared material observed on the copper
rich segment consists mainly of the binary copper-iron alloy of the bulk
material. Nano indenations reveal a significant work hardening in the
shear zone. This zone acts as a protective layer against adhesive and
abrasive wear and therefore further material removal which decreases
the wear coefficient at increasing operational forces and sliding speeds.
In contrary, the ferritic-pearlitic segment shows less adhesive effects.
This segment material reveals a combination of abrasive and adhesive
wear tested against the steel wheel and an abrasive wear behaviour with
plastic deformations tested against the SSiC wheel.
For both, the copper-based and the ferritic-pearlitic segment the
influence of the diamonds present during core drilling applications in
rebar cause a by the factor of two reduced wear coefficient compared to
the obtained values in modified B611-13 steel wheel test. This must be
considered when using the test for future segment development.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge Hilti AG for supporting this
work by providing the ASTM B611-13 test equipment, diamond segment
specimens and the synthetic slurry. The work was supported by the
Innosuisse Research Project (No. 27558.1) funded by the Swiss
government.
References
[1] L.F.P. Franca, M. Mostofi, T. Richard, Interface laws for impregnated diamond tools
for a given state of wear, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 73 (2015) 184–193, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2014.09.010.
[2] S.G. Moseley, K.P. Bohn, M. Goedickemeier, Core drilling in reinforced concrete
using polycrystalline diamond (PCD) cutters: wear and fracture mechanisms, Int. J.
Refract. Metals Hard Mater. 27 (2009) 394–402, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijrmhm.2008.11.014.
[3] D. Miller, Rock Drilling with Impregnated Diamond Microbits:1-277, University of
Cape Town, 1986. Ph.D. thesis, http://open.uct.ac.za/handle/11427/4962.
[4] I.S. Buyuksagis, R.M. Goktan, Investigation of marble machining performance
using an instrumented block-cutter, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 169 (2005)
258–262, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.03.014.
[5] R.K. Gupta, R.K. Gupta, Cutting tool for marble & granite: a review, IOP Conf. Ser.
Mater. Sci. Eng. 377 (2018), 012126, https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/377/1/
012126.
[6] H. Huang, G. Huang, X. Xu, H. Huang, An experimental study of machining
characteristics and tool wear in the diamond wire sawing of granite, Proc. Inst.
Wear 476 (2021) 203690
Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 227 (2013) 943–953, https://doi.org/10.1177/
0954405413478262.
[7] H.K. Tönshoff, B. Denkena, H.H. Apmann, J. Asche, Diamond tools in stone and
civil engineering industry - cutting principles, wear and applications, Key Eng.
Mater. 250 (2003) 103–109. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/ke
m.250.103.
[8] A. Ersoy, S. Buyuksagic, U. Atici, Wear characteristics of circular diamond saws in
the cutting of different hard abrasive rocks, Wear 258 (2005) 1422–1436, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2004.09.060.
[9] M. Petrica, E. Badisch, T. Peinsitt, Abrasive wear mechanisms and their relation to
rock properties, Wear 308 (2013) 86–94, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wear.2013.10.005.
[10] Y. Özçelik, S. Kulaksz, M.C. Çetin, Assessment of the wear of diamond beads in the
cutting of different rock types by the ridge regression, J. Mater. Process. Technol.
127 (2002) 392–400, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00429-6.
[11] M. Mostofi, T. Richard, L. Franca, S. Yalamanchi, Wear response of impregnated
diamond bits, Wear 410–411 (2018) 34–42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wear.2018.04.010.
[12] J.S. Konstanty, E. Baczek, A. Romanski, D. Tyrala, Wear-resistant iron-based
Mn–Cu–Sn matrix for sintered diamond tools, Powder Metall. 61 (2018) 43–49,
https://doi.org/10.1080/00325899.2017.1379737.
[13] S. Wang, J. Zhang, P. Dong, Comparison of wear characteristics of diamond
segments under different sawing modes in sawing hard stone, Int. J. Refract. Metals
Hard Mater. 87 (2020) 105149, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2019.105149.
[14] M.A. Turchanin, P.G. Agraval, I.V. Nikolaenko, Thermodynamics of alloys and
phase equilibria in the copper-iron system, J. Phase Equil. 24 (2003) 307–319,
https://doi.org/10.1361/105497103770330280.
[15] ASTM International, Standard Test Method for Determining the High Stress
Abrasion Resistance of Hard Materials, vol. 13, 2018, pp. 1–6, https://doi.org/
10.1520/B0611-13R18. Copyright.
[16] I. Hutchings, P. Shipway, Tribology: Friction and Wear of Engineering Materials,
second ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, 2017.
[17] A.J. Gant, I. Konyashin, B. Ries, A. McKie, R.W.N. Nilen, J. Pickles, Wear
mechanisms of diamond-containing hardmetals in comparison with diamond-
based materials, Int. J. Refract. Metals Hard Mater. 71 (2018) 106–114, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2017.10.013.
[18] I. Konyashin, B. Ries, Wear damage of cemented carbides with different
combinations of WC mean grain size and Co content. Part I: ASTM wear tests, Int. J.
Refract. Metals Hard Mater. 46 (2014) 12–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijrmhm.2014.04.021.
[19] J. Williams, Engineering Tribology, Cambridge University Press, 2005, https://doi.
org/10.1017/CBO9780511805905.
[20] G.B. Stachowiak, G.W. Stachowiak, The effects of particle characteristics on three-
body abrasive wear, Wear 249 (2001) 201–207, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-
1648(01)00557-9.
[21] M.G. Hamblin, G.W. Stachowiak, A multi-scale measure of particle abrasivity,
Wear 185 (1995) 225–233, https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(95)06624-1.
[22] C.I. Walker, M. Hambe, Influence of particle shape on slurry wear of white iron,
Wear 332–333 (2015) 1021–1027, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2014.12.029.
[23] G.R. Desale, B.K. Gandhi, S.C. Jain, Effect of erodent properties on erosion wear of
ductile type materials, Wear 261 (2006) 914–921, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wear.2006.01.035.
[24] A.V. Levy, P. Chik, The effects of erodent composition and shape on the erosion of
steel, Wear 89 (1983) 151–162, https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(83)90240-5.
[25] M. Woldman, E. van der Heide, D.J. Schipper, T. Tinga, M.A. Masen, Investigating
the influence of sand particle properties on abrasive wear behaviour, Wear
294–295 (2012) 419–426, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2012.07.017.
[26] W.C. Oliver, G.M. Pharr, An improved technique for determining hardness and
elastic modulus using load and displacement sensing indentation experiments,
J. Mater. Res. 7 (1992) 1564–1583, https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.1992.1564.
[27] W.C. Oliver, G.M. Pharr, Measurement of hardness and elastic modulus by
instrumented indentation: advances in understanding and refinements to
methodology, J. Mater. Res. 19 (2004) 3–20, https://doi.org/10.1557/
jmr.2004.19.1.3.
[28] V. Läpple, Einführung in die Festigkeitslehre, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-658-10611-9.
[29] P. Barick, A. Chatterjee, B. Majumdar, B.P. Saha, R. Mitra, Comparative
evaluations and microstructure: mechanical property relations of sintered silicon
carbide consolidated by various techniques, Metall. Mater. Trans. A Phys. Metall.
Mater. Sci. 49 (2018) 1182–1201, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-018-4486-6.
[30] B.D. Beake, J.F. Smith, High-temperature nanoindentation testing of fused silica
and other materials, Philos. Mag. A Phys. Condens. Matter, Struct. Defects Mech.
Prop. 82 (2002) 2179–2186, https://doi.org/10.1080/01418610208235727.