Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study examines how aluminum oxide (Al₂O₃) powder in micrometer (µm) affects the mechanical characteristics, microstructural characteristics, and slurry erosion resistance of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) composites manufactured via pipe extrusion. Al₂O₃ particles with an average size of 5 µm were added to the HDPE matrix at weight percentages of 0.5 wt.%, 0.7 wt.%, and 1 wt.%. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to analyze the compound morphology, and tensile properties and resisting erosion were assessed in accordance with ASTM recommendations. The results show that the properties of HDPE composites are dramatically changed by the addition of Al₂O₃. The composite with 0.5 wt.% Al₂O₃ had the most stable particles dispersion and strong interfacial bonding when contrasted with unfilled HDPE, resulting in a about 13% increase in tensile strength. Tensile strength decreased but material stiffness increased due to particle agglomeration brought on by an increase in filler content. The composite with 1 wt.% Al₂O₃ demonstrated a 51% reduction in erosion rate when compared to pure HDPE. Erosion resistance gradually improved with higher Al₂O₃ loadings, according to slurry erosion tests. In essence, the study demonstrates that there is a trade-off between enhancing erosion resistance and optimizing mechanical properties, depending on the filler content. These findings provide valuable insights into the erosion behavior of extruded HDPE/Al₂O₃ composite pipes and demonstrate their suitability for fluid transport and sanitary applications that demand greater durability in erosive environment.

Keywords

high-density polyethylene aluminum oxide polymer composites extrusion tensile properties slurry erosion

1. Introduction

High-density polyethylene (HDPE) is indeed one of the most widely used thermoplastic. Which is readily available, reasonably priced, and has excellent processing qualities. HDPE is used in the manufacturing of items, instruments, films and pipelines. The impact of HDPE composites on scratching behavior and emphasize how important recovery qualities are.¹ A progressive increase in elastic modulus was reported with increasing aluminum oxide concentration in HDPE.^2,3 The thermal conductivity of high-density polyethylene was improved through the incorporation of aluminum oxide nanoparticles, as the ceramic filler promotes phonon transport and facilitates heat conduction within the polymer matrix.^4,5 The results indicate that, under optimized conditions, the developed composite shows potential as a low-cost material for automotive dashboard applications.⁶ Scanning electron microscopy was employed to examine the fracture surfaces of the specimens after impact testing.⁷ Zinc oxide addition has been reported to increase the complex stiffness of HDPE composites.⁸ The nucleation compounds in HDPE have been satisfactorily evaluated using segmented crystallization.⁹ Zinc oxide, reinforced HDPE composites have demonstrated better properties, indicating their potential use in biological implant elements.^10,11 Axial pressure experiments have been used to examine the impact of zinc oxide on HDPE containers.¹² The mechanical performance, including stiffness, maximum tensile strength, and yield stress, was enhanced as the loading of micro- and nano-ZnO powders increased to 20 wt.%.¹³ HDPE composites with 15 wt.% ZnO have been shown to have improved electromagnetic radiation shielding efficacy.¹⁴ It has been demonstrated that adding ZnO to HDPE at a weight percentage of about 6% greatly increases its shore hardness.¹⁵ Structural degradation of HDPE surfaces has been observed following exposure to aggressive chemical agents.¹⁶ The wear rate of HDPE increases at higher impact rates and lower pressure angles.^17,18 Cell wall structure plays a significant role in determining the elastic properties of HDPE/wood powder composites.¹⁹ Increased fiber–matrix interaction has been shown to limit fiber crystallinity development.²⁰ Tensile and torsional moduli were found to be higher than those of neat HDPE.^21,22 A reduction in filler antioxidant activity was observed after the tea-brewing procedure.²³ Liquefaction with plant powder addition and the properties of the generated gas have been investigated.²⁴ It has been reported that hydrogen abstraction results in the generation of hydrocarbon radicals composed of peroxide and aliphatic structures in HDPE composites.²⁵ Carbon nanotube addition has been shown to have a negligible effect on the melting point and oxidation temperature of the composites.²⁶ A minor increase in crystallization temperature has been noted for graphitic nanoplatelet composites.²⁷ Hybrid nanocomposites have shown potential to lower ballistic helmet weight and cost by roughly 7% and 40%, respectively.²⁸ Carbon-reinforced HDPE composites exhibit increased stiffness accompanied by decreased ductility.^29,30 Once nanoparticles were added, the elastic modulus significantly improved; in comparison to plain HDPE, 2.0 weight percent ZnO produced an increase of up to 237%. MgO nanoparticles, on the other hand, achieved a 160% rise at 4.0 weight percent loading, resulting in a lesser enhancement.³¹ Mechanical properties proved that larger filler loadings decreased tensile characteristics while 6.0 weight percent bentonite and dolomite raised HDPE modulus by 125% and 116%, respectively.³² Tensile strength, yield stress, and tensile strain values decreased when the nanocomposites filler content was increased from 2.0 to 8.0 weight percent.³³ Wear resistance improved with increasing TiC–TiB₂ content, with 20 wt.% fillers enhancing abrasion resistance by 86% and reducing friction.³⁴

In this study, a novel composite material is developed by incorporating varying amounts of Al₂O₃ into HDPE through an extrusion process to fabricate composite pipes. While previous studies have mainly focused on the mechanical and thermal behavior of HDPE reinforced with micro- or nano-sized Al₂O₃, limited research has addressed the slurry erosion performance of such composites, particularly in extruded pipe geometries. The present study fills this gap by systematically investigating the relationship between microstructure, mechanical properties, and slurry erosion resistance of HDPE/Al₂O₃ composite pipes, providing application-oriented insights for fluid transport and sanitary systems.

2. Materials

Two materials are used to make the novel composites in this work such as HDPE and aluminum oxide powder.

2.1. High density polyethylene (HDPE)

HDPE was chosen primarily because it is one of the most widely available polymers used in water distribution systems. Moreover, its widespread application and recyclability make it a suitable material for the present investigation. HDPE is extensively used in applications including soil pipes, tower risers, domestic plumbing systems, and agricultural installations. Key properties of HDPE are summarized and listed in Table 1.

Table 1.

Mechanical and physical characteristics of HDPE.¹⁶

Property	Value
Density	$\geq$ 930 kg/m³
% black carbon	2-2.55 %
Melt Flow Index	0.2-1.41 g/10 min
Yield Stress	20-29 MPa
Young’s Modulus	0.5 - 1 GPa
Shore Hardness	61-68
Strain at failure	$\geq$ 350 %
Toughness	2_5 MPa. m1/2
Environmental Resistance Stress Cracking	$\leq$ 16 mm/day

2.2. Aluminum oxide (Al₂O₃₎

White aluminum oxide (Al₂O₃) powder with an average particle size of 5 µm was used as the reinforcing filler. The compositions of the fabricated samples are detailed in Table 2. The reference sample, designated S₀, was composed of neat high-density polyethylene (HDPE) only. The remaining samples were produced by adding three different weight fractions of Al₂O₃ powder to the HDPE matrix. For each filler concentration, six specimens were manufactured and evaluated, and the values reported in Table 2 correspond to the mean results obtained from these six specimens. This approach was used to guarantee the reproducibility, consistency, and dependability of the experimental results.

Table 2.

Four different sample compositions.

Sample	HDPE (wt. %)	Al₂O₃ (wt. %)
$S_{0}$	100	0
$S_{1}$	99.5	0.5
$S_{2}$	99.3	0.7
$S_{3}$	99	1

3. Sample preparation

To remove moisture and humidity, HDPE and Al₂O₃ powder were first combined and then dried for three hours at 80 °C in a furnace. In order to achieve high-quality pipe construction, this preheating phase is essential. Three distinct weight fractions of aluminum oxide were added to the HDPE matrix: 0.5 wt.%, 0.7 wt.%, and 1.0 wt.%. After dried process both materials were mixed in a mixer, then a suction pipe pull them from the mixer to the extrusion machine to create composite pipes, As a result, three different composite pipe samples were produced, each containing different Al₂O₃ content. These samples were subsequently prepared for various morphological, mechanical and erosion testing. Figure 1 illustrates the extrusion process used in the production of the composite pipes.

Figure 1.

Extrusion process to produce HDPE composite pipes.

3.1. Sample characterization techniques

After the extrusion process of the composite pipes, tensile strength tests were conducted using an electronic universal tensile testing machine. This machine supports work pieces with a maximum diameter greater than (3200) mm and has a production capacity of (300) sets per year. The tests were carried out in accordance with ASTM D638 standards. All tensile test samples had a uniform width of (6.4) mm and thickness of (2.2) mm. For each case involving the addition of Al₂O₃ to HDPE, six samples were fabricated using a CNC machining device. For the erosion tests, six square-shaped samples were prepared, each with sides measuring 3 cm. These tests were conducted using a slurry impingement water jet device conforming to ASTM G76 standards. The test parameters were held constant, including silica abrasive particle size (250 µm), and impact velocity (4 m/s) with different impact angle (45°, 90°). Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM) was conducted using a TESCAN MIRA3 (Czechia) to analyze the surface morphology of the prepared samples. The instrument is equipped with a Schottky field emission gun, providing high-resolution imaging. Samples were cut into small pieces and mounted on aluminum stubs using conductive carbon tape, then coated with a thin gold layer (∼5–10 nm) to reduce charging. Imaging was performed at an accelerating voltage of 15 kV with a working distance of 8–12 mm. Figure 2 illustrates field emission SEM instrument, the preparation of samples for the tensile, and erosion tests. Figure 3 shows the components of the slurry erosion test setup, in which a pump circulates sand-water slurry through a filter flume. The HDPE samples are fixed at a constant impact angle of (45°, 90°) to evaluate their erosion resistance.³¹

Figure 2.

(a) SEM instrument (b) Tensile strength sample, (c) Erosion samples.

Figure 3.

Erosion test device parts and angle of impact.³¹

4. Results

4.1. Comparison study

The comparison highlights the mechanical properties of the tested samples against reference values as shown in Table 3. In terms of tensile strength, the present results generally fall below the reference values, with measurements ranging from 21.2 to 24.3 MPa, compared to 22.6 to 33.5 MPa in the reference data. This indicates a noticeable reduction in tensile strength and elastic modulus especially in the higher range. The reported reference values, which rise within 1470 and 1574 MPa, and elastic modulus increased from 1139 to 1247 MPa in this study. Al₂O₃ nanoparticles significantly enhanced the mechanical characteristics of HDPE. The main reason for this improvement is because the nanoparticles and other fillers, which act as efficient nucleating agents inside the polymer matrix, encourage an increase in crystallinity. The mechanical properties exhibited their greatest enhancement at an Al₂O₃ content of 4 wt.%, suggesting this concentration as the optimal level for reinforcement.³⁵ Overall, the comparison indicates that although the tensile strength of the present samples is lower, the elastic modulus is lower if compared to the reported reference values. It should be noted that the Al₂O₃ particles employed in this study are in the microscale range, whereas the particles used in the referenced work differ in particles size of Al₂O₃ with other additions.³

Table 3.

Comparison of elastic modulus and tensile strength.

Sample	Tensile strength (MPa)		Elastic modulus (MPa)
Sample	Present	Ref. 3	Present	Ref. 3
$S_{0}$	21.2±2.5	22.6 ± 2.5	1139±28	1470 ± 35
$S_{1}$	24.3±2.1	31.5 ± 1.6	1247±33	1542 ± 44
$S_{2}$	22.4±2.7	33.5 ± 2.3	1189±31	1574 ± 45
$S_{3}$	21.6±2.2	32 ± 2.6	1154±29	1556 ± 51

4.2. Morphology

The surface morphology of pure HDPE and HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites with different aluminum oxide loadings can be seen in detail in the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) pictures displayed in Figure 4. The distribution of Al₂O₃ particles, the efficiency of interfacial bonding, and the presence of particle-related characteristics were evaluated using SEM observations. Agglomeration plays a critical role in determining the mechanical performance of the composites. A rather smooth and uniform surface with ductile characteristics like fibrillation and plastic flow can be seen in the SEM micrograph of clean HDPE (Figure 4(a)). The lower tensile strength and elastic modulus for pure HDPE can be explained by the absence of reinforcing fillers. The uniform structure on the surface suggests that deformation is mostly controlled by polymer chain mobility, resulting in moderate mechanical strength but high ductility. Conversely, the composite with 0.5 wt.% (Figure 4(b)) shows a uniform microstructure with the particles implanted in the HDPE matrix that are evenly and finely dispersed. The particles' strong adhesion to the neighboring polymer and the absence of obvious gaps or particle pull-out are indicators of effective interfacial bonds. The observed increase in tensile strength and elastic modulus at this filler concentration is partly due to this uniform dispersion, which improves load transfer from the polymer matrix to the stiff ceramic particles. Particle dispersion is largely homogeneous for the composite with 0.7 wt.% (Figure 4(c)); nonetheless, localized particle agglomeration starts to show. Strong interfacial attachment between Al₂O₃ and HDPE is maintained, but the efficiency of stress transfer is reduced by increased particle-particle interactions. While still surpassing pure HDPE, this microstructural change explains the small decline in mechanical performance when compared to the 0.5 wt.% composite. Particle agglomeration and unequal dispersion are clearly seen at the greatest filler level of 1 wt.% (Figure 4(d)). Large Al₂O₃ aggregates weaken the polymer–filler contact and provide stress concentration zones. Tensile strength and elastic modulus are decreased as a result of this agglomerate facilitation of surface initiation and progression under applied stresses. The reduced elongation at break seen in the mechanical testing is also a result of the presence of stiff ceramic clusters, which limit polymer chain mobility. SEM confirms that the microstructural integrity of HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites is significantly affected by the filler content. Improved mechanical properties result from uniform particle dispersion and strong interfacial adhesion at low Al₂O₃loading (0.5 wt%). Strength and ductility are negatively impacted by increasing the filler content because it causes particle agglomeration and increased microstructural non-uniformity. The results of tensile and erosion assessments closely match these microstructural findings, highlighting the critical role that microstructure plays in determining the overall performance of HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites. According to the majority of research on how to spread of aluminum oxide powder, HDPE composites with comparatively modest filler percentages often show efficient particle dispersal inside the polymer matrix.³

Figure 4.

SEM images of every sample’s surface x3000 (a) Base HDPE, (b) HDPE + 0.5 wt.% Al₂O₃, (c) HDPE + 0.7 wt.% Al₂O₃, (d) HDPE + 1 wt.% Al₂O₃.

4.3. Tensile strength test

The tensile performance of neat HDPE and HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites with different weight percentages of aluminum oxide is shown in Figure 5. The findings unequivocally show that the addition of Al₂O₃ significantly affects HDPE’s tensile performance, especially in terms of ultimate tensile strength and deformation properties. Because neat HDPE is a ductile thermoplastic, it exhibits the lowest tensile strength and relatively significant elongation. Tensile strength increases noticeably when 0.5 wt.% Al₂O₃ is added. This improvement suggests that a small quantity of uniformly dispersed Al₂O₃ particles can effectively reinforce the HDPE matrix. Strong interfacial bonds and even particle dispersion allow for effective stress transfer from the polymer matrix to the stiff ceramic particles at this filler percentage, boosting resistance to tensile deformation. In comparison to the composite with 0.5 wt.% filler, tensile strength steadily drops as the Al₂O₃ content increases to 0.7 and 1 wt.%. The morphological analysis confirms that the primary cause of this decrease is particle agglomeration at larger filler loadings. During tensile deformation, agglomerate formation produces stress concentration areas that hinder load transfer efficiency and encourage early fracture start. As a result, the reinforcing effect of Al₂O₃ is reduced for larger amounts of Al₂O₃. In addition to variations in strength, Figure 5 illustrates variations in deformation behavior. The elongation steadily diminishes as the Al₂O₃ content rises, suggesting that the polymer chain’s mobility has been diminished by the addition of hard ceramic particles. This pattern indicates that the very ductile behavior of plain HDPE is giving way to a stiffer and slightly more brittle reaction in the composites, particularly at increasing filler levels. It is clear from Figure 5 that the tensile performance of HDPE is significantly influenced by the concentration of Al₂O₃. The best tensile properties are shown by the composite with 0.5 wt.%, which strikes the perfect balance between strengthening and preserving flexibility. These results corroborate the morphological data and demonstrate that minimum Al₂O₃ loading is the most effective strategy for enhancing the tensile performance of HDPE composites. Table 4 summarizes the elongation at break and elastic modulus of neat HDPE and Al₂O₃ reinforced composites. The results demonstrate that when Al₂O₃ is added, the elastic modulus first rises, reaching Conversely, better interfacial bonding between the ceramic filler and the HDPE matrix results from uniform dispersion of Al₂O₃ particles at moderate filler values (0.5–0.7 wt.%). The reinforcing value of well-distributed Al₂O₃ powders is confirmed by this excellent dispersion, which enhances stress transfer and results in a significant rise in tensile modulus. Under tensile loading circumstances, there is a decrease in elongation at break, showing increased stiffness at the expense of ductility. The mechanical properties of HDPE composites like the ultimate strength and modulus of elasticity are improved by adding aluminum oxide powder compared to pure HDPE.²

Figure 5.

Comparison of tensile properties of pure HDPE and HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites with different Al₂O₃ contents.

Table 4.

Tensile strength properties of the samples.

Samples	Ultimate strength (MPa)	Elastic modulus (MPa)	Elongation at break (mm)
$S_{0}$	21.2±2.5	1139±28	5.73±0.13
$S_{1}$	24.3±2.1	1247±33	5.5±0.18
$S_{2}$	22.4±2.7	1189±31	5.34±0.16
$S_{3}$	21.6±2.2	1154±29	4.65±0.21

4.4. Erosion test

The erosion rate of the target materials was determined based on the weight loss measured during testing. For accurate assessment, each samples were achieved from the average of six samples to get high accuracy, all specimens were weighed before and after the erosion test using a digital scale with a precision of 10^-4 g. The slurry erosion behavior of both pure HDPE and HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites was investigated by monitoring the weight loss under controlled conditions. The test results are shown in Figure 6, which demonstrates how adding Al₂O₃ significantly increases the composites' resistance to erosion. Because of the ceramic particles' stabilizing effect inside the polymer matrix, durability against erosion, in particular, gradually rises with greater Al₂O₃ content. All experimental parameters, such as room temperature, an hour-long erosion time, impact angles of 45° and 90°, and a water flow velocity of 4 m/s, were maintained throughout testing to guarantee the consistency and dependability of the results. According to the data shown in Table 5, the highest erosion rate was observed in the base HDPE sample, which exhibited a weight loss of 6.5 mg/hr. In contrast, the HDPE composite containing 1 wt.% Al₂O₃ at 90° demonstrated the lowest erosion rate of 1.22 mg/hr, while in angle of 45° is 4.3 mg/hr highlighting the superior resistance. An investigation¹⁸ shows that the HDPE has less erosion resistant to abrasion, and the orientation of the material surface and variations in residual stresses are two potential manufacturing-related contributing elements that could be in charge of this behavior.

Figure 6.

Variations in the samples degradation rate and (45°, 90°) impact angle.

Table 5.

Erosion rate of HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites under different impact angles.

Samples	Erosion rate mg/hr	Erosion rate mg/hr
Samples	Impact angle 45°	Impact angle 90°
$S_{0}$	6.5±0.09	2.47±0.11
$S_{1}$	5.1±0.1	2.18±0.13
$S_{2}$	4.8±0.12	1.67±0.1
$S_{3}$	4.3±0.13	1.22±0.12

Figure 6 compares the slurry erosion behavior of pure HDPE and HDPE/Al₂O₃ composites tested at impact angles of 45° and 90°. For all samples, the erosion rate at 45° is significantly higher than that at 90°, indicating a dominant ductile erosion mechanism. The addition of Al₂O₃ consistently reduces the erosion rate at both impact angles, with the lowest values observed for the 1 wt.% Al₂O₃ composite (S₃). The inclusion of standard deviation error bars indicates limited data scatter, confirming good repeatability of the erosion measurements. One-way ANOVA analysis confirmed that the reductions in erosion rate for Al₂O₃-reinforced composites are statistically significant compared to pure HDPE at both impact angles. The addition of hard Al₂O₃ ceramic fragments, which increase surface hardness and reduce material loss upon particle impact, is responsible for the increase in erosion resistance.

5. Conclusion

It was discovered that Al₂O₃ powder has a substantial impact on the mechanical properties, microstructure, and durability against slurry erosion of HDPE. The rate of powder dispersion within the polymer matrix and the filler content both significantly affected the reinforcing effect. SEM tests show that low Al₂O₃ levels facilitate strong interfacial bonding with HDPE and homogenous particle dispersion, enabling effective stress transmission under mechanical loading. Consequently, composites with lower filler loadings demonstrated the optimal balance of stiffness, strength, and ductility. Higher Al₂O₃ levels were associated with increased particle agglomeration, which led to the development of stress concentration regions and a decline in tensile performance. On the other hand, slurry erosion resistance continued to improve as the Al₂O₃ powder increased. Hard ceramic particles decreased material removal under erosive circumstances and improved surface durability, especially at lower impact angles where ductile erosion mechanisms are more prevalent. At greater filler loadings, this trend suggests a trade-off between erosion resistance and mechanical optimization. Overall, when evenly distributed, Al₂O₃ is proven to be in efficient reinforcing filler for HDPE composites. When improved mechanical integrity and erosion resistance are needed, the developed extruded HDPE/Al₂O₃ composite pipes show great promise for transporting fluids and sanitary operations.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The University of Salahaddin-Erbil provided support for this work, for which the authors are thankful.

ORCID iD

Ahmed Aziz Ahmed

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The paper is founded by Salahaddin University, Erbil.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

This study does not have any data.*

References

Balobanov

Verho

Heino

, et al. Micromechanical performance of high-density polyethylene: Experimental and modeling approaches for HDPE and its alumina-nanocomposites. Polymer Testing 2021; 93: 106936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106936

Mahmoud

Khalifa

El-Sharkawy

, et al. Effects of Al2O3 and BaO nano-additives on mechanical characteristics of high-density polyethylene. Materials Chemistry and Physics 2021; 262: 124251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2021.124251

Shahrajabian

Sadeghian

. The investigation of alumina nanoparticles’ effects on the mechanical and thermal properties of HDPE/rPET/MAPE blends. International Nano Letters 2019; 9(3): 213–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40089-019-0273-7

Fan

. Aluminum oxide particles/silicon carbide whiskers’ synergistic effect on thermal conductivity of high-density polyethylene composites. Iranian Polymer Journal 2018; 27(5): 339–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13726-018-0614-9

Weingrill

Resch‐Fauster

Lucyshyn

, et al. Thermally conductive high‐density polyethylene as novel phase‐change material: Application‐relevant long‐term stability. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 2019; 137(2): 48269. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.48269

Sadik

El-Demerdash

Abokhateeb

AEA

, et al. Innovative high-density polyethylene/waste glass powder composite with remarkable mechanical, thermal and recyclable properties for technical applications. Heliyon 2021; 7(4): e06627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06627

Awad

El-Gamasy

Abd El-Wahab

, et al. Assessment of mechanical properties of HDPE composite with addition of marble and granite dust. Ain Shams Engineering Journal 2020; 11(4): 1211–1217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.02.001

Vahidi

Bajwa

Shojaeiarani

, et al. Experimental investigation into the direct feeding of coupling agent, cellulose nanocrystals, and nano zinc oxide in high-density polyethylene. Composites Part C: Open Access 2022; 8: 100287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomc.2022.100287

Carmeli

Fenni

Dziza

, et al. A method for studying nucleating additives in high-density polyethylene via crystallization of micro-droplets in immiscible blends. Polymer 2023; 279: 126017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2023.126017

10.

Rajan

Marimuthu

Balaji Ayyanar

, et al. In-vitro cytotoxicity of zinc oxide, graphene oxide, and calcium carbonate nano particulates reinforced high-density polyethylene composite. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 2022; 18: 921–930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.03.012

11.

Roy

Joshi

Butola

. Antimicrobial performance of polyethylene nanocomposite monofilaments reinforced with metal nanoparticles decorated montmorillonite. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2019; 178: 87–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2019.02.045

12.

Klapiszewski

Bula

Dobrowolska

, et al. A high-density polyethylene container based on ZnO/lignin dual fillers with potential antimicrobial activity. Polymer Testing 2019; 73: 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.11.018

13.

Alsayed

Awad

Badawi

. Thermo-mechanical properties of high density polyethylene with zinc oxide as a filler. Iranian Polymer Journal 2020; 29(4): 309–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13726-020-00796-7

14.

Alshipli

Altaim

Aladailah

, et al. High-density polyethylene with ZnO and TiO2 nanoparticle filler: Computational and experimental studies of radiation-protective characteristics of polymers. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 2023; 16(4): 100720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2023.100720

15.

Dong

Yuan

Bai

, et al. A novel approach to reduce deformation behaviors of HDPE polymer during friction. Applied Surface Science 2020; 503: 144311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.144311

16.

Ghabeche

Alimi

Chaoui

. Degradation of Plastic Pipe Surfaces in Contact with an Aggressive Acidic Environment. Energy Procedia 2015; 74: 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.625

17.

Shahapurkar

Darekar

Banjan

, et al. Factors affecting the solid particle erosion of environment pollutant and natural particulate filled polymer composites—A review. Polymers and Polymer Composites 2020; 29(9): 1587–1598. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967391120971411

18.

Koskela

Lindgren

Serna-Guerrero

. Slurry erosion resistance of polyethylene under conditions relevant for mineral processing. Wear 2017; 392-393: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2017.09.008

19.

Xie

Wolcott

, et al. Effect of wood cell wall composition on the rheological properties of wood particle/high density polyethylene composites. Composites Science and Technology 2014; 93: 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2014.01.001

20.

Araújo

Waldman

De Paoli

. Thermal properties of high density polyethylene composites with natural fibres: Coupling agent effect. Polymer Degradation and Stability 2008; 93(10): 1770–1775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2008.07.021

21.

Arrakhiz

El Achaby

Kakou

, et al. Mechanical properties of high density polyethylene reinforced with chemically modified coir fibers: Impact of chemical treatments. Materials & Design 2012; 37: 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.01.020

22.

Pardalis

Xanthopoulou

Zamboulis

, et al. Olive stone as a filler for recycled high-density polyethylene: A promising valorization of solid wastes from olive oil industry. Sustainable Chemistry for the Environment 2024; 6: 100090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scenv.2024.100090

23.

Barczewski

Ortega

Piaskowski

, et al.

A case study on the rotomolding behavior of black tea waste and bio-based high-density polyethylene composites: Do active compounds in the filler degrade during processing?

Composites Part C: Open Access 2024; 13: 100437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomc.2024.100437

24.

Garcia-Bacaicoa

Mastral

Ceamanos

, et al. Gasification of biomass/high density polyethylene mixtures in a downdraft gasifier. Bioresour Technol 2008; 99(13): 5485–5491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.11.003

25.

Zhao

Guo

Cao

, et al. Thermal and thermo-oxidative degradation of high density polyethylene/fullerene composites. Polymer Degradation and Stability 2013; 98(10): 1953–1962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2013.07.020

26.

Kanagaraj

Varanda

Zhil’tsova

, et al. Mechanical properties of high density polyethylene/carbon nanotube composites. Composites Science and Technology 2007; 67(15-16): 3071–3077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2007.04.024

27.

Lin

Anwer

MAS

Zhou

, et al. Evaluation of the thermal, mechanical and dynamic mechanical characteristics of modified graphite nanoplatelets and graphene oxide high-density polyethylene composites. Composites Part B: Engineering 2018; 132: 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.08.010

28.

Costa

da Costa Garcia Filho

Gómez-del Río

, et al. Characterization and ballistic performance of hybrid jute and aramid reinforcing graphite nanoplatelets in high-density polyethylene nanocomposites. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 2024; 28: 1570–1583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.12.093

29.

Cheng

, et al. Morphology and physical properties of composites based on high-density polyethylene/propylene-ethylene random copolymers blends and carbon black. Polymer Testing 2023; 123: 108050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2023.108050

30.

Kang

G-H

Joung

Kim

, et al. Novel method of mechanical alignment for chopped carbon fiber/high density polyethylene composites: Processing, modeling, and characterization. Composites Part C: Open Access 2023; 12: 100400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomc.2023.100400

31.

Mahmoud

Khalifa

Youssef

, et al. Influence of MgO and ZnO as nano‐additives on the mechanical, microstructural and thermal performance of high‐density polyethylene. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 2022; 139(31): e52705. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.52705

32.

Mahmoud

Khalifa

Youssef

, et al. Comparative morphological, thermal, and mechanical characteristics of doped bentonite and dolomite natural clay fillers into high‐density polyethylene. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 2024; 141(34): e55875. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.55875

33.

Mahmoud

Khalifa

El-Sharkawy

34.

Kazemi

Shahrajabian

Rafiei

. Experimental analysis of effect of TiC+ TiB2 particles on mechanical properties, wear, and erosion behavior of epoxy/glass fiber. Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance 2024; 33(12): 5948–5962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-023-08361-y

35.

Costa

ILM

Zanini

Mulinari

. Thermal and Mechanical Properties of HDPE Reinforced with Al2O3 Nanoparticles Processed by Thermokinectic Mixer. Journal of Inorganic and Organometallic Polymers and Materials 2020; 31(1): 220–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10904-020-01709-0

Effect of adding aluminum oxide powder on high-density polyethylene’s mechanical,morphological,and erosion properties

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Materials

2.1. High density polyethylene (HDPE)

2.2. Aluminum oxide (Al2O3)

3. Sample preparation

3.1. Sample characterization techniques

4. Results

4.1. Comparison study

4.2. Morphology

4.3. Tensile strength test

4.4. Erosion test

5. Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

ORCID iD

Funding

Declaration of conflicting interests

Data Availability Statement

References

2.2. Aluminum oxide (Al₂O₃₎