Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the temperature dependence of transfer film formation and friction coefficients in NAO friction materials with four different abrasive components, ZrO2, ZrSiO4, Al2O3 and Fe3O4. Design/methodology/approach 8.5% SnS2 was added as a lubricating component to friction materials. Friction tests comprised 100 times of consecutive braking application for each friction material under constant temperature of 300 degrees C, 400 degrees C, 500 degrees C and 600 degrees C. After the friction tests, the friction surfaces of the counterpart disks were examined by scanning electron microscope to access the formation of transfer film. Findings Coefficients of friction depended on not only friction temperature but also friction history which is related to development of transfer film. The effect of the transfer film formation was to reduce the friction coefficients for most friction materials. Quantities of the transfer film formation varied with friction materials; at low temperature below 400 degrees the transfer film formation was most active in the Fe3O4 materials, while at 600 degrees it was the most active in the Al2O3 material. The effect of the lubricating component SnS2 was to suppress the formation of transfer film, thus enhancing friction coefficients. Originality/value Temperature was the controlling parameter in the present test. Under these test modes, transfer film could be fully developed to access the role of the transfer film. Peer review The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/ILT-10-2019-0427/


Authors

Chung, Jin Oh;  Go, Sang Ryul;  Choi, Hee Bum;  Son, Tae Kwan

Publons users who've claimed - I am an author

No Publons users have claimed this paper.

Contributors on Publons
  • 2 reviewers
  • pre-publication peer review (FINAL ROUND)
    Decision Letter
    2019/12/07

    07-Dec-2019

    Dear Chung, Jin Oh; Go, Sang; Choi, Hee; Son, Tae Kwan

    It is a pleasure to accept your manuscript ilt-10-2019-0427.R2, entitled "Temperature Dependence of Friction Coefficient and Transfer Film Formation in Organic Friction Materials Containing Different Abrasive Components" in its current form for publication in Industrial Lubrication and Tribology. Please note, no further changes can be made to your manuscript.

    Please go to your Author Centre at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ilt (Manuscripts with Decisions for the submitting author or Manuscripts I have co-authored for all listed co-authors) to complete the Copyright Transfer Agreement form (CTA). We cannot publish your paper without this.

    All authors are requested to complete the form and to input their full contact details. If any of the contact information is incorrect you can update it by clicking on your name at the top right of the screen. Please note that this must be done prior to you submitting your CTA.

    If you have an ORCID please check your account details to ensure that your ORCID is validated.

    By publishing in this journal your work will benefit from Emerald EarlyCite. As soon as your CTA is completed your manuscript will pass to Emerald’s Content Management department and be processed for EarlyCite publication. EarlyCite is the author proofed, typeset version of record, fully citable by DOI. The EarlyCite article sits outside of a journal issue and is paginated in isolation. The EarlyCite article will be collated into a journal issue according to the journals’ publication schedule.

    FOR OPEN ACCESS AUTHORS: Please note if you have indicated that you would like to publish your article as Open Access via Emerald’s Gold Open Access route, you are required to complete a Creative Commons Attribution Licence - CCBY 4.0 (in place of the standard copyright assignment form referenced above). You will receive a follow up email within the next 30 days with a link to the CCBY licence and information regarding payment of the Article Processing Charge. If you have indicated that you might be eligible for a prepaid APC voucher, you will also be informed at this point if a voucher is available to you (for more information on APC vouchers please see http://www.emeraldpublishing.com/oapartnerships

    Thank you for your contribution. On behalf of the Editors of Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, we look forward to your continued contributions to the Journal.

    Sincerely,
    Assoc. Prof. Mohd Fadzli Bin Abdollah
    Guest Editor, Industrial Lubrication and Tribology
    mohdfadzli@utem.edu.my, mohdfadzliabdollah@gmail.com

    Decision letter by
    Cite this decision letter
    Author Response
    2019/12/07

    Thank you for your valuable suggestions.

    Following the suggestion of the last reviewer’s comment, error bars for all the experiments were indicated in the modified figures, with corresponding explanation for the error bars in the revised manuscript. The detailed explanation for the error bars was described in the cover letter and the revised document.

    Also, some of the present tense were modified to the past tense following the previous suggestion of the reviewers.

    We appreciate all the referees who helped to make our manuscript better.

    Thank you.



    Cite this author response
  • pre-publication peer review (ROUND 3)
    Decision Letter
    2019/11/25

    25-Nov-2019

    Dear Prof. Chung:

    Manuscript ID ilt-10-2019-0427.R1 entitled "Temperature Dependence of Friction Coefficient and Transfer Film Formation in Organic Friction Materials Containing Different Abrasive Components" which you submitted to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, has been reviewed. The comments of the reviewer(s) are included at the bottom of this letter.

    The reviewer(s) have recommended major revisions to the submitted manuscript, before it can be considered for publication. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)' comments and revise your manuscript.

    Editorial comments:

    • Please include error bars for all experimental results.

    To revise your manuscript, log into https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ilt and enter your Author Centre, where you will find your manuscript title listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions." Under "Actions," click on "Create a Revision." Your manuscript number has been appended to denote a revision.

    You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of the manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer. Please also highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text.

    Once the revised manuscript is prepared, you can upload it and submit it through your Author Centre. The deadline for uploading a revised manuscript is 23-Feb-2020 from receiving this email. If it is not possible for you to resubmit your revision within this timeframe, we may have to consider your paper as a new submission.

    When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided. You can use this space to document any changes you make to the original manuscript. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the reviewer(s).

    IMPORTANT: Your original files are available to you when you upload your revised manuscript. Please delete any redundant files before completing the submission.

    Please note that Emerald requires you to clear permission to re-use any material not created by you. If there are permissions outstanding, please send these to Emerald as soon as possible. Emerald is unable to publish your paper with permissions outstanding.

    Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology and I look forward to receiving your revision.

    Sincerely,
    Assoc. Prof. Mohd Fadzli Bin Abdollah
    Guest Editor, Industrial Lubrication and Tribology
    mohdfadzli@utem.edu.my, mohdfadzliabdollah@gmail.com

    Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

    Decision letter by
    Cite this decision letter
    Author Response
    2019/11/25

    Thank you for your valuable suggestions.
    We are happy that our manuscript turned out to be satisfactory except for some English expressions. In the revised manuscript, some of the present tense were modified to the past tense. We appreciate all the referees who helped to make our manuscript better.
    Thank you.



    Cite this author response
  • pre-publication peer review (ROUND 2)
    Decision Letter
    2019/11/17

    17-Nov-2019

    Dear Prof. Chung:

    Manuscript ID ilt-10-2019-0427 entitled "Temperature Dependence of Friction Coefficient and Transfer Film Formation in Organic Friction Materials Containing Different Abrasive Components" which you submitted to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, has been reviewed. The comments of the reviewer(s) are included at the bottom of this letter.

    The reviewer(s) have recommended revisions to the submitted manuscript, before it can be considered for publication. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)' comments and revise your manuscript.

    To revise your manuscript, log into https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ilt and enter your Author Centre, where you will find your manuscript title listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions." Under "Actions," click on "Create a Revision." Your manuscript number has been appended to denote a revision.

    You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of the manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer. Please also highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or coloured text.

    Once the revised manuscript is prepared, you can upload it and submit it through your Author Centre. The deadline for uploading a revised manuscript is 17-Dec-2019 from receiving this email. If it is not possible for you to resubmit your revision within this timeframe, we may have to consider your paper as a new submission.

    When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided. You can use this space to document any changes you make to the original manuscript. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the reviewer(s).

    IMPORTANT: Your original files are available to you when you upload your revised manuscript. Please delete any redundant files before completing the submission.

    Please note that Emerald requires you to clear permission to re-use any material not created by you. If there are permissions outstanding, please send these to Emerald as soon as possible. Emerald is unable to publish your paper with permissions outstanding.

    Once again, thank you for submitting your manuscript to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology and I look forward to receiving your revision.

    Sincerely,
    Assoc. Prof. Mohd Fadzli Bin Abdollah
    Guest Editor, Industrial Lubrication and Tribology
    mohdfadzli@utem.edu.my, mohdfadzliabdollah@gmail.com

    Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:
    Reviewer: 1

    Comments to the Author
    The work is good. The revision is done in better way. Thus it can be accepted in the current stage.

    Reviewer: 2

    Comments to the Author
    (There are no comments.)
    Reviewer: 1

    Recommendation: Accept

    Comments:
    The work is good. The revision is done in better way. Thus it can be accepted in the current stage.

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: Yes

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: Yes. it is adequate.

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: Yes. it is appropriate.

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: Yes. it is appropriate.

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Yes.

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: Yes. It clearly expresses all the way.

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?: Yes.

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: Yes, I would like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Reviewer: 2

    Recommendation: Minor Revision

    Comments:
    (There are no comments.)

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: Yes. The work studied how the tranfer films of some common friction matereials are affected by temperature. People can understand how to use them effectively.

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: Yes, the paper cited enough literatures.

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: The test method has been described deliberatelly.

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: The results are fully discussed.

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Yes.

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: English expression is still a problem, For instance, grammer tense.

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?: No.

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: No, I would not like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Decision letter by
    Cite this decision letter
    Reviewer report
    2019/10/14

    The work is good. The revision is done in better way. Thus it can be accepted in the current stage.

    Cite this review
  • pre-publication peer review (ROUND 1)
    Decision Letter
    2019/09/24

    24-Sep-2019

    Dear Prof. Chung:

    Manuscript ID ilt-08-2019-0325 entitled "Temperature Dependence of Friction Coefficient and Transfer Film Formation in Organic Friction Materials Containing Different Abrasive Components" which you submitted to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, has been reviewed. The comments from reviewer(s) are included at the bottom of this letter.

    In view of the criticisms of the reviewer(s), I must decline the manuscript for publication in the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology at this time. However, a new manuscript may be submitted which takes into consideration these comments.

    Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not guarantee eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission will be subject to re-review by the reviewer(s) before a decision is rendered.

    You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of your manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer.

    Once you have revised your manuscript, go to https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ilt and login to your Author Center. Click on "Manuscripts with Decisions," and then click on "Create a Resubmission" located next to the manuscript number. Then, follow the steps for resubmitting your manuscript.

    Because we are trying to facilitate timely publication of manuscripts submitted to the Industrial Lubrication and Tribology, your revised manuscript should be uploaded as soon as possible. If it is not possible for you to submit your revision within a reasonable amount of time, we will consider your paper as a new submission.

    I look forward to a resubmission.

    Sincerely,
    Prof. Carsten Gachot
    Editor, Industrial Lubrication and Tribology
    carsten.gachot@tuwien.ac.at

    Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

    Reviewer: 1

    Comments to the Author
    The work is good and can be accepted for publication upon incorporation of following comments.
    1) Figures 2, 5 and 6 the legends and values are too tiny, make it to bigger size. Clarity of the images should also be enhanced
    2) Figure 1 it will be good if the test apparatus schematic is also given alone with the present diagram
    3) Table 1 lubrication, in organic filler and fiber category “Etc” specify the materials
    4) What is the reinforcing and fiber category explain? It should be merged and renamed as reinforcing material category (or) fiber with additives category
    5) There is only functional and inert filler category, what is this inorganic and organic filler category? Change it.
    6) Is the values are in weight % or volume % specify in the table
    7) Table 2, there are only two cycles why it is too specific. There is no other cycles as per JASO C 406 explain
    8) The work deals with the synergetic effect of abrasive and lubrication it would be better if some new articles related to it are cited
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.11.006
    https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aafd5a
    9) Also some more articles related to lubricants has to be added for better study
    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218625X19500859
    https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab366f
    10) The manufacturing methodology has to be discussed in detail with suitable references refer the literatures given below
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2018.12.036
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ILT-08-2018-0313

    Reviewer: 2

    Comments to the Author
    1. According to section 2.1, the temperatures fluctuate around their desired value in four tests. Please indicate the fluctuation ranges for the tests because the relationship between temperature and friction coef./transform film was studied in this paper.

    1. It is better to convert the units of the disc speed, the velocity, into r/min units in Table II.

    2. Some graphs can be improved with the comparison of standards.

    Reviewer: 3

    Comments to the Author
    (There are no comments.)
    Reviewer: 1

    Comments:
    The work is good and can be accepted for publication upon incorporation of following comments.
    1) Figures 2, 5 and 6 the legends and values are too tiny, make it to bigger size. Clarity of the images should also be enhanced
    2) Figure 1 it will be good if the test apparatus schematic is also given alone with the present diagram
    3) Table 1 lubrication, in organic filler and fiber category “Etc” specify the materials
    4) What is the reinforcing and fiber category explain? It should be merged and renamed as reinforcing material category (or) fiber with additives category
    5) There is only functional and inert filler category, what is this inorganic and organic filler category? Change it.
    6) Is the values are in weight % or volume % specify in the table
    7) Table 2, there are only two cycles why it is too specific. There is no other cycles as per JASO C 406 explain
    8) The work deals with the synergetic effect of abrasive and lubrication it would be better if some new articles related to it are cited
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.11.006
    https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aafd5a
    9) Also some more articles related to lubricants has to be added for better study
    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218625X19500859
    https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab366f
    10) The manufacturing methodology has to be discussed in detail with suitable references refer the literatures given below
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2018.12.036
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ILT-08-2018-0313

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: Yes the work is original.

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: Yes good discussion with the literature is done, but some more references needs to be added which are given in the below comments.

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: Yes it is done in better way

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: It is analyzed and presented clearly

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Yes the conclusions clearly identifies the implications

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: Good

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?:

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: Yes, I would like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Reviewer: 2

    Comments:
    1. According to section 2.1, the temperatures fluctuate around their desired value in four tests. Please indicate the fluctuation ranges for the tests because the relationship between temperature and friction coef./transform film was studied in this paper.

    1. It is better to convert the units of the disc speed, the velocity, into r/min units in Table II.

    2. Some graphs can be improved with the comparison of standards.

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: Yes. But the work is insufficient, including the details of the experiment and the dissicusion, etc.

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: More references on this relative topic need to be included.

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: I do not understand how the temperatures can be controlled and the position where they were tested.

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: Some conclusions are a little rash, need to delibrate.

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: No. The discussion should relate more fully to the practical applications.

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: The written English needs to be carefully revised to improve the quality.

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?: No.

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: No, I would not like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Reviewer: 3

    Comments:
    (There are no comments.)

    Additional Questions:
    Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication?: OK

    Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?: OK

    Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?: Yes

    Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: No, more analysis is required.

    Practicality and/or Research implications: Does the paper identify clearly any implications for practice and/or further research? Are these implications consistent withthe findings and conclusions of the paper?: Yes

    Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.: OK

    Reproducible Research: If appropriate, is sufficient information, potentially including data and software, provided to reproduce the results and are the corresponding datasets formally cited?:

    This journal is participating in Publons Transparent Peer Review. By reviewing for this journal, you agree that your finished report, along with the author’s responses and the Editor’s decision letter, will be linked to from the published article to where they appear on Publons, if the paper is accepted. If you have any concerns about participating in the Transparent Peer Review pilot, please reach out to the journal’s Editorial office. Please indicate below, whether you would like your name to appear with your report on Publons by indicating yes or no: Yes, I would like my name to appear with my report on Publons

    Decision letter by
    Cite this decision letter
    Reviewer report
    2019/09/24

    This reviewer report was submitted to the journal as an attached file and cannot be displayed at this time.

    Cite this review
    Reviewer report
    2019/09/11

    1. According to section 2.1, the temperatures fluctuate around their desired value in four tests. Please indicate the fluctuation ranges for the tests because the relationship between temperature and friction coef./transform film was studied in this paper.

    2. It is better to convert the units of the disc speed, the velocity, into r/min units in Table II.

    3. Some graphs can be improved with the comparison of standards.

    Reviewed by
    Cite this review
    Reviewer report
    2019/08/28

    The work is good and can be accepted for publication upon incorporation of following comments.
    1) Figures 2, 5 and 6 the legends and values are too tiny, make it to bigger size. Clarity of the images should also be enhanced
    2) Figure 1 it will be good if the test apparatus schematic is also given alone with the present diagram
    3) Table 1 lubrication, in organic filler and fiber category “Etc” specify the materials
    4) What is the reinforcing and fiber category explain? It should be merged and renamed as reinforcing material category (or) fiber with additives category
    5) There is only functional and inert filler category, what is this inorganic and organic filler category? Change it.
    6) Is the values are in weight % or volume % specify in the table
    7) Table 2, there are only two cycles why it is too specific. There is no other cycles as per JASO C 406 explain
    8) The work deals with the synergetic effect of abrasive and lubrication it would be better if some new articles related to it are cited
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.11.006
    https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aafd5a
    9) Also some more articles related to lubricants has to be added for better study
    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218625X19500859
    https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab366f
    10) The manufacturing methodology has to be discussed in detail with suitable references refer the literatures given below
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2018.12.036
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ILT-08-2018-0313

    Cite this review
All peer review content displayed here is covered by a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license.