3.2.1. Experimental Results
The pin-on-disk tribological tests of rGO-Al
2O
3 nanofluids were conducted as per the design illustrated in
Table 5, and the output in terms of the three response values were listed. The obtained friction coefficient (
μ), wear rate (
Wr, calculated by Equation (1)) and surface roughness (
Ra) were imported into the Design Expert 13.0 software for the subsequent data analysis. The analysis of the variance (ANOVA) of response results was carried out with the objective of analyzing the influence of test conditions and nanoparticle concentration on the obtained results.
Table 6,
Table 7 and
Table 8 show the ANOVA results of
μ,
Wr and
Ra values, respectively. These analyses were carried out at the significance level of 5% meaning that when the
p-values were less than 0.05 (or 95% confidence), the corresponding factors were considered to be statistically significant to the response value.
Table 6 and
Table 7 show that all three factors had significant influence on the
μ and
Wr values of the nanofluids. Testing force (
F), nanoparticle concentration (
Nc) and its interaction with speed (
V) were significant to the Ra value of the steel disk, as illustrated in
Table 8.
The images in
Figure 4 are externally studentized residuals of the three response values. It was obvious that all the data closely followed a straight line, which indicated that the data distribution law was normal [
23]. It further demonstrated that the models proposed were adequate and reasonable. In addition, this judgement can also be derived from
Table 6,
Table 7 and
Table 8 as the lack of fit items was not significant.
3.2.2. Quadratic Models and Response Surface Analysis
The initial analysis of the response values obtained from RSM included all input variables and their interactions. The regression models obtained according to the quadratic model for the
μ,
Wr and
Ra response values are given in Equations (3)–(5). According to Equation (3), the coefficient of
F was positive and the coefficient of
V and
Nc was negative, indicating that the
μ value increased with the increase in testing force and decreased with the increase in nanoparticle concentration and speed. Whereas the coefficient of the secondary term
Nc2, which also had a significant influence, was positive, indicating that the
μ value decreased first and then increased with the increase in concentration. As a result, there was a value of optimal concentration in the range of 0.1~0.3 wt.%. Similarly, according to Equations (4) and (5), the influence of concentration on
Wr and
Ra was consistent with its relationship with the
μ value. With regards to the influencing factors of wear rate, the primary term (
F,
V and
Nc) and the quadratic term (
F2,
V2 and
Nc2) were significant; however, the positive and negative values of the coefficients (in the primary term and the quadratic term) were completely opposite. Therefore, the influence of these factors on
Wr need to be further analyzed using the 3D response surface plots. The coefficient of determination (R
2) and adjusted R
2 of these three values were 0.9937, 0.9908, 0.9975 and 0.9824, 0.9743, 0.9930, respectively. These values are much higher than the results of the previous studies by Bouacha [
23] and Sharma et al. [
17]. Furthermore,
Figure 5 shows the parity plots between the actual and predicted values, and the points clustered near to the diagonal line of the plot indicate that the predicted data by models were very close to the actual test results [
24]. Hence, it was concluded that these quadratic mathematical models are highly accurate and persuasive and can be used to analyze the effect of input variables on response results to obtain optimal solutions.
To intuitively investigate the interaction effects of experimental variables including A-
F, B-
V and C-
Nc with the response values (
μ,
Wr and
Ra), 3D response surface plots with contour lines were obtained as shown in
Figure 6. At one time, two of them were flexible within the experimental ranges, while the others were kept constant at the middle level. The change in the shape of the surface plots reflects the interaction between input variables. It can be seen from
Figure 6a–c that a higher testing force and rotation speed contributed to lower
μ value. For the purpose of reducing friction coefficient, the optimal concentration of rGO-Al
2O
3 nanofluid was about 0.20 wt.%. From
Figure 6d–f, the lowest
Wr value was obtained using the combination of the lowest testing force and the appropriate speed (about 350 rpm) at the optimal concentration of about 0.19 wt.%. Regarding surface roughness, it can be deduced from
Figure 6g–i that the lowest
Ra value was achieved with the lowest testing force and an optimum concentration of about 0.20 wt.%. In the studies of Du [
25] and He et al. [
26], the best tribological performance was achieved when the nanofluid concentration was 0.5 wt.% and 2.0 wt.%, respectively. In contrast, in our study, the optimum tribological performance was obtained by only adding 0.2 wt.% of rGO-Al
2O
3 nanoparticles, which had a significant advantage.
Through the analysis and discussion above, it is worth mentioning that as the nanoparticle concentration increased above 0.20 wt.%, the
μ,
Wr and
Ra values all became higher, which indicated that the antiwear and antifriction performance of nanofluids were weakened. The general reasons for this phenomenon are as follows. As the nanoparticle concentration increased, the stability of the nanofluids in the process of friction was destroyed, so the nanoparticles were more likely to agglomerate and therefore the μ value rose. This was consistent with the results of our previous study [
16]. At the same time, the defect degree of nanoparticles increased after friction, which was also one of the reasons for the deterioration of the lubrication effect with the progress of the friction process. In addition, the abrasive wear caused by agglomerated large-size nanoparticles led to the sharp rise in
Wr and
Ra values [
27]. Furthermore, for the
μ and
Wr values, the change in testing force had a contrasting opposite effect. The friction coefficient was negatively correlated with the testing force, which is contrary to the conventional tribological lubrication process [
28]. This is mainly due to the fact that with the increase in pressure during friction, the rolling effect, interlayer sliding effect and polishing effect became stronger, as did the antifriction effect of the nanofluids. This was based on our conclusions derived from simulating the motion of nanoparticles using nonequilibrium molecular dynamics [
29]. The movement form of MoS
2-Al
2O
3 nanoparticles during the friction process was reproduced, and it was found that layered MoS
2 and spherical Al
2O
3 occurred during interlayer sliding and rolling, transferring the friction of the Fe surface to the internal friction of nanoparticles, thus playing the role of antifriction [
29]. However, the increase in force can increase the wear rate, thus the
Wr value was positively correlated with the testing force. However, it was difficult to control conditions such as velocity and force to achieve the optimal tribological performance in the actual metalworking processes, which creates challenges for the application of the research results. In the early stages of our research, we tried our best to control the force and velocity conditions to keep them close to the actual parameters, hoping to provide theoretical guidance for the actual production process.