ASTM G105-89(1997)e1
(Test Method)Standard Test Method for Conducting Wet Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Tests
Standard Test Method for Conducting Wet Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Tests
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers laboratory procedures for determining the resistance of metallic materials to scratching abrasion by means of the wet sand/rubber wheel test. It is the intent of this procedure to provide data that will reproducibly rank materials in their resistance to scratching abrasion under a specified set of conditions.
1.2 Abrasion test results are reported as volume loss in cubic millimeters. Materials of higher abrasion resistance will have a lower volume loss.
1.3 Values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. Inch-pound units are provided for information only.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information.
e1
Designation: G 105 – 89 (Reapproved 1997)
Standard Test Method for
Conducting Wet Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Tests
This standard is issued under the fixed designation G 105; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
e NOTE—Section 12 was added editorially in November 1997.
1. Scope protuberances forced against and moving along a solid surface
(Terminology G 40).
1.1 This test method covers laboratory procedures for de-
3.1.1 Discussion—This definition covers several different
termining the resistance of metallic materials to scratching
wear modes or mechanisms that fall under the abrasive wear
abrasion by means of the wet sand/rubber wheel test. It is the
category. These modes may degrade a surface by scratching,
intent of this procedure to provide data that will reproducibly
6,7
cutting, deformation, or gouging (1 and 2).
rank materials in their resistance to scratching abrasion under
a specified set of conditions.
4. Summary of Test Method
1.2 Abrasion test results are reported as volume loss in
4.1 The wet sand/rubber wheel abrasion test (Fig. 1) in-
cubic millimeters. Materials of higher abrasion resistance will
volves the abrading of a standard test specimen with a slurry
have a lower volume loss.
containing grit of controlled size and composition. The abra-
1.3 Values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the
sive is introduced between the test specimen and a rotating
standard. Inch-pound units are provided for information only.
wheel with a neoprene rubber tire or rim of a specified
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the
hardness. The test specimen is pressed against the rotating
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
wheel at a specified force by means of a lever arm while the
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
grit abrades the test surface. The rotation of the wheel is such
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
that stirring paddles on both sides agitate the abrasive slurry
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
through which it passes to provide grit particles to be carried
2. Referenced Documents across the contact face in the direction of wheel rotation.
2.1 ASTM Standards:
D 2000 Classification System for Rubber Products in Auto-
motive Applications
D 2240 Test Method for Rubber Property—Durometer
Hardness
E 11 Specification for Wire-Cloth Sieves for Testing Pur-
poses
E 122 Practice for Choice of Sample Size to Estimate a
Measure of Quality for a Lot or Process
E 177 Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and Bias in
ASTM Test Methods
G 40 Terminology Relating to Wear and Erosion
2.2 Other Standard:
SAE J200
FIG. 1 Schematic Diagram of the Wear Test Apparatus
3. Terminology
3.1 abrasive wear—wear due to hard particles or hard
4.2 Three wheels are required with nominal Shore A
Durometer hardnesses of 50, 60, and 70, with a hardness
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee G-2 on Wear
tolerance of 62.0. A run-in is conducted with the 50 Durometer
and Erosion and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee G02.30 on Abrasive
Wear.
Current edition approved Aug. 25, 1989. Published October 1989.
2 6
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vols 09.02. Available from Society of Automotive Engineers, 400 Commonwealth Dr.,
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 09.01. Warrendale, PA 15096.
4 7
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 14.02. The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.02. this standard.
Copyright © ASTM, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information.
G 105
FIG. 2 Wet Sand/Rubber Wheel Abrasion Test Apparatus
wheel, followed by the test with 50, 60, and 70 Durometer specific abrasive environment may, however, be compared
wheels in order of increasing hardness. Specimens are weighed with test data obtained from a material whose life is known in
before and after each run and the loss in mass recorded. The the same environment. The comparison will provide a general
logarithms of mass loss are plotted as a function of measured indication of the worth of the unknown materials if abrasion is
rubber wheel hardness and a test value is determined from a the predominant factor causing deterioration of the materials.
least square line as the mass loss at 60.0 Durometer. It is
6. Apparatus
necessary to convert the mass loss to volume loss, due to wide
differences in density of materials, in order to obtain a ranking 6.1 Fig. 2 shows a typical design and Figs. 3 and 4 are
photographs of a test apparatus. (See Ref (4).) Several elements
of materials. Abrasion is then reported as volume loss in cubic
millimetres. are of critical importance to ensure uniformity in test results
among laboratories. These are the type of rubber used on the
5. Significance and Use (1-7)
wheel, the type of abrasive and its shape, uniformity of the test
apparatus, a suitable lever arm system to apply the required
5.1 The severity of abrasive wear in any system will depend
force, and test material uniformity.
upon the abrasive particle size, shape and hardness, the
magnitude of the stress imposed by the particle, and the
frequency of contact of the abrasive particle. In this test
Present users of this practice may have constructed their own equipment.
method these conditions are standardized to develop a uniform
Rubber wheel abrasion testing equipment is commercially available. Rubber wheels
condition of wear which has been referred to as scratching
or remolded rims on wheel hubs can be obtained through the manufacturer(s).
abrasion (1 and 2). Since the test method does not attempt to An apparatus design that is commercially available is depicted both schemat-
ically and in photographs in Figs. 1-4. Although it has been used by several
duplicate all of the process conditions (abrasive size, shape,
laboratories (including those running interlaboratory tests) to obtain wear data, it
pressure, impact or corrosive elements), it should not be used
incorporates what may be considered a design flaw. The location of the pivot point
to predict the exact resistance of a given material in a specific
between the lever arm and the specimen holder is not directly in line with the test
specimen surface. Unless the tangent to the wheel at the center point of the area or
environment. The value of the test method lies in predicting the
line of contact between the wheel and specimen also passes through the pivot axis
ranking of materials in a similar relative order of merit as
of the loading arm, a variable, undefined, and uncompensated torque about the pivot
would occur in an abrasive environment. Volume loss data
will be caused by the frictional drag of the wheel against the specimen. Therefore,
obtained from test materials whose lives are unknown in a the true loading of specimen against the wheel cannot be known.
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information.
G 105
FIG. 3 Test Apparatus with Slurry Chamber Cover Removed
FIG. 5 Rubber Wheel
6.2.3 The 70 Durometer wheel will be in accordance with
2BC715K11Z1Z2Z3Z4
where:
Z1, Z3, and Z4 are the same as for 6.2.1, and
Z2—Type A Durometer hardness 70 6 2.
6.2.4 The compounds suggested for the 50, 60, and 70
Durometer rubber wheels are as follows:
Content (pph)
Ingredient 50 60 70
Neoprene GW 100 100 100
A
Magnesia 222
B
Zinc Oxide 10 10 10
Octamine 2 2 2
Stearic Acid 0.5 0.5 0.5
C
SRF Carbon Black 20 37 63
ASTM #3 Oil 14 10 10
A
Maglite D (Merck)
B
Kadox 15 (New Jersey Zinc)
C
ASTM Grade N762
FIG. 4 Test Apparatus in Operation
6.2.5 Wheels are molded under pressure. Cure times of 40
to 60 min at 153°C (307°F) are used to minimize “heat-to-
6.2 Rubber Wheel—Each wheel shall consist of a steel disk heat’’ variations.
with an outer layer of neoprene rubber molded to its periphery. 6.3 Motor Drive—The wheel is driven by a 0.75-kw (1-hp)
The rubber is bonded to the rim and cured in a suitable steel electric motor and suitable gear box to ensure that full torque
mold. Wheels are nominally 178 mm (7 in.) diameter by 13 is delivered during the test. The rate of revolution (245 6 5
mm ( ⁄2 in.) wide (see Fig. 2 and Fig. 5). The rubber will rpm) must remain constant under load. Other drives producing
conform to Classification D 2000 (SAE J200). 245 rpm under load are suitable.
6.4 Wheel Revolution Counter—The machine shall be
6.2.1 The 50 Durometer wheel will be in accordance with
2BC515K11Z1Z2Z3Z4 equipped with a revolution counter that will monitor the
number of wheel revolutions as specified in the procedure. It is
where:
Z1—Elastomer—Neoprene GW, recommended that the incremental counter have the ability to
Z2—Type A Durometer hardness 50 6 2, shut off the machine after a preselected number of wheel
Z3—Not less than 50 % rubber hydrocarbon content, and revolutions or increments up to 5000 revolutions is attained.
Z4—Medium thermal black reinforcement. 6.5 Specimen Holder and Lever Arm—The specimen holder
6.2.2 The 60 Durometer wheel will be in accordance with is attached to the lever arm to which weights are added so that
2BC615K11Z1Z2Z3Z4 a force is applied along the horizontal diametral line of the
where: wheel. An appropriate weight must be used to apply a force of
Z1, Z3, and Z4 are the same as for 6.2.1, and 222 N (50 lbf) between the test specimen positioned in the
Z2—Type A Durometer hardness 60 6 2. specimen holder and the wheel. The weight has a mass of
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or discontinued.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information.
G 105
approximately 9.5 kg (21 lb) and must be adjusted so that the surface. A test surface without square (90°) edges, having a
force exerted by the rubber wheel on the specimen with the level surface at least 50.8 mm (2.00 in.) long and 19.1 mm
rubber wheel at rest has a value of 222.4 6 3.6 N (50.0 6 0.8 (0.75 in.) wide, is acceptable if it can be positioned to show the
lbf). This force may be determined by calculation of the full length and width of the wear scar developed by the test.
moments acting around the pivot point for the lever arm or by 8.5 Coatings—This test may be unsuitable for some coat-
direct measurement, for example, by noting the load required ings, depending on their thickness, wear resistance, bond to the
to pull the specimen holder away from the wheel, or with a substrate, and other factors. The criterion for acceptability is
proving ring. the ability of the coating to resist penetration to its substrate
6.6 Analytical Balance—The balance used to measure the during conduct of the test. Modified procedures for coatings
loss in mass of the test specimen shall have a sensitivity of may be developed based on this procedure.
0.0001 g. A150 g capacity balance is recommended to accom- 8.6 Finish—Test specimens should be smooth, flat and free
modate thicker or high density specimens. of scale. Surface defects such as porosity and roughness may
bias the test results, and such specimens should be avoided
7. Reagents and Materials
unless the surface itself is under investigation. Excepting
coatings, the last 0.3 mm (0.01 in.) of stock on the test surface
7.1 Abrasive Slurry—The abrasive slurry used in the test
(or surfaces in cases where both major surfaces are to be tested)
shall consist of a mixture of 0.940 kg of deionized water and
should be carefully wet ground to a surface finish of about 0.5
1.500 kg of a rounded grain quartz sand as typified by AFS
to 0.75 μm (20 to 30 μin.) arithmetic average as measured
50/70 Test Sand (−50/ +70 mesh, or −230/ +270 μm) furnished
across the direction of grinding. The direction of the grinding
by the qualified source.
should be parallel to the longest axis of the specimen. The
7.2 AFS 50/70 test sand is controlled by the qualified source
finished surface should be free of artifacts of specimen heat
to the following size range using U.S. Sieves (Specification
treatment or preparation such as unintentional carburization or
E 11).
decarburization, heat checks, porosity, slag inclusions, gas
U.S. Sieve Size Sieve Opening %Retained on Sieve
40 425 μm (0.0165 in.) None
voids, etc.
50 300 μm (0.0117 in.) 5 max
8.6.1 Thin coatings may be tested in the as-coated condition
70 212 μm (0.0083 in.) 95 min
since surface grinding, especially of those less than about 0.3
100 150 μm (0.0059 in.) None Passing
mm (0.01 in.) thick, can penetrate the coating or cause it to be
7.2.1 Multiple use of the sand may affect the test compari-
so thin that it will not survive that test without penetration. The
sons.
finish of the substrate test surface prior to coating should be
such to minimize irregularities in the coated surface. Grinding
8. Sampling, Test Specimen, and Test Units
of this surface as directed in 8.6 is suggested for coatings less
8.1 Test Unit—Use any metallic material form for abrasion
than 0.15 mm (0.005 in.) thick.
testing by this method. This includes wrought metals, castings,
8.6.2 The type of surface or surface preparation shall be
forgings, weld overlays, thermal spray deposits, powder met-
stated in the data sheet.
als, electroplates, cermets, etc.
9. Procedure
8.2 Test Specimen—The test specimens are rectangular in
shape, 25.4 6 0.8 mm (1.00 6 0.03 in.) wide by 57.2 6 0.8
9.1 Thoroughly rinse the slurry chamber before the test to
mm (2.256 0.03 in.) long by 6.4 to 15.9 mm (0.25 to 0.625 in.)
eliminate any remnants of slurry from a previous test.
thick. The test surface should be flat within 0.125 mm (0.005
9.2 Install the rubber wheel of nominal 50 Durometer and
in.) maximum.
measure and record its hardness.
8.2.1 For specimens less than 9.5 mm thick (0.375 in.), use
9.2.1 Take at least four (preferably eight) hardness readings
a shim in the specimen holder to bring the specimen to a height
at equally spaced locations around the periphery of the rubber
of 9.5 mm.
wheel using a Shore A Durometer tester in accordance with
8.3 Wrought and Cast Metal—Specimens may be machined
Test Method D 2240. Take gage readings after a dwell time of
to si
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.