Determination of gear tooth

friction by disc machine

K. L. Johnson* and D. I. Spence*

The friction between the teeth of a pair of hardened and ground spur
gears has been measured in a back-to-back test rig. The results are
compared with friction measurements using a disc machine under
comparable conditions of load, speed and temperature. Close agreement
was found with discs which had been transversely ground (like the gear
teeth); circumferentially ground discs to the same finish gave on average
23% higher friction.

Keywords: friction, gears, gear teeth, g r o u n d discs

Introduction in the gear rig. The lubrication conditions are also

The velocities of rolling and sliding, and the contact
stress between a pair of spur gear teeth at any point
in the meshing cycle can be reproduced at the contact
of two discs rotating about parallel axes. Such a 'disc
machine' was proposed by Merritt ~ as a test rig for
the study of materials, lubricants and surface finish on
the performance and endurance of gears, thereby
replacing expensive gear pairs by simple cheap cylindri-
cal test specimens. The obvious shortcoming of the
disc machine is that it replaces by steady conditions
the cyclic nature of gear meshing, in which the sliding
velocity varies in magnitude and changes in direction,
and the load is carried alternately by one or two pairs
of teeth. For this reason there has always been some
controversy about the extent to which the disc machine
can be used to make quantitative predictions of gear
performance.
In this paper we present a direct comparison between
gear friction measurements in a back-to-back test rig
having 90 mm centres and a 2:1 ratio with friction
measurements in a disc machine having 76 mm (3 inch)
centres.
These were both existing pieces of equipment and
there is a difference in scale between them. The critical
length dimension in a gear pair, from the point of view
of surface contact, is the relative radius of curvature
p between the teeth at the pitch point which, in our
rig, is 6.84 mm. The relative radius of curvature in the
disc machine, on the other hand, is 19 mm. From the
Hertz equations the contact width 2a is related to the
Hertz contact pressure p,, by
a/p = p,,/E* (1)
where E* = [(1-v~)/E~ + (1-vZ)/E2] ~ is the com-
bined plane-strain elastic modulus of the two materials.
Then, if the contact pressure is kept the same, a is
proportional to P, so that the contact width in the disc
machine is 19/6.84 = 2.8 times that between the teeth
* University Engineering Laboratory, Trumpington Street, Cam-
bridge, CB2 IPZ, UK.
TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 0301-679X/91/050269-7 © 1991 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd
influenced by the difference in relative curvature.
These questions will be addressed in the discussion of
the results.
Another aspect of the surface contact is important.
The test gears were hardened and round in the usual
way with the lay of the grinding across the width of
the tooth, ie transversely to the direction of motion
of the surfaces. The normal way of grinding cylindrical
discs, however, is circumferential, ie in the direction
of motion. For the purpose of this experiment,
therefore, it was necessary to grind a special pair of
discs transversely by use of a cup wheel. A pair of
discs ground circumferentially to the same finish were
also tested for comparison.
Gear friction tests
Gear rig
The gear test rig, used mainly for educational purposes,
is shown diagrammatically in Fig 1. Two identical 2:1
pairs of gears are mounted back-to-back in a box which
is trunnion mounted on bearings concentric with the
pinion shaft. The two pinions are coupled by a flexible
torque shaft which can be twisted through a controlled
angle to lock a torque into the loop, thereby loading
the teeth. When running, power circulates round the
loop and the motor drive to the pinion shaft supplies
the 'lost torque' arising from friction in the box. A
reaction to this torque is necessary to prevent the box
rotating about the trunnion axis and is measured by a
spring balance. The wheels dip into an oil bath
whose temperature is controlled by an electric heating
element. Thermocouples measure the temperature of
the oil bath and also that of two teeth on one of the
wheels (via slip rings).
In addition to the friction between the teeth which
is sought, losses occur in the bearings, the oil seals
and churning of oil round the box (desirable for
maintaining steady temperatures), With the exception
of the bearings, these parasitic losses should be
independent of the load torque, and hence a test at
269
K. L. J o h n s o n a n d D. I. S p e n c e - - D e t e r m i n a t i o n of gear tooth friction by disc machine

22 / / /
Table 2

Range At pitch
point

), Relative radius of
curvature (p) m m 7.68-3.34 6.84
Rolling (entraining)

XXX X ~, X x v v ~" x K v v v x v Y
If f
speed
6=½(ul+v2),mm s 1
Sliding speed
(~1-u2),mm S 1
11.74ool-8.65ml

8.87 ~Ol--9.68 ~o1

10.26 ~ol

0
Slide/roll ratio (6) 0.76 - - 1 . 1 2 0
II I
W 1 N.B. ~ol is the pinion speed in rad s

/ \

|L
= I The surface finishes of the tooth surfaces were
measured by a Ferranti Surfcom profilometer using
acrylic replicas. Examples of these measurements are
shown in Fig 2 and Table 3 where they are compared
with measurements of the disc surfaces. The gears
have been in service for about four years (150 h
Fig 1 Back-to-back, 2:1 ratio, gear test rig. The drive intermittent running) with the driving torque always
is to the pinion shaft and the box is trunnion mounted in the same direction. Roughness measurements of the
so that the lost torque can be measured by spring unloaded faces of the teeth are included in Fig 2 which,
balance by comparison, indicate the effect on surface finish of
running under load.
The gears and discs were lubricated with a mineral
zero load permits them to be calibrated out. An oil without additives: Shell Vitrea 68. The viscous
estimate of the increase in bearing friction with load characteristics at the temperatures of the experiments
suggested that it is within the experimental error and are given in Table 4.
can be neglected.

Test gears and l u b r i c a n t

The test gears are identical pairs of hardened and q
ground spur gears. Their geometry is given in Table 10 #m
1. Pinion tooth (unloaded face)

If vl and 102 denote the tangential peripheral velocities

of the pinion and wheel at their point of contact, from
the well-known kinematics of involute spur gears, the 10 #m
rolling or entraining velocity 6 is given by Pinion tooth (driven face)

~0= 1(101 + 102) = ~mr,sin * + ½(0.)1 -- (.02)X (2)

and the sliding velocity 10s by
10 #m
10s = 101 -- 102 = ((JOl -t- (X)2)X (3) Wheel tooth (driven face)
where to1 and ~o2 are the angular velocities of the E
pinion and wheel, and x is the distance between point
of contact and the pitch point. Values are given in 10/~m
Table 2. Tangentially ground disc (after running)

Table 1
10/~m
Circumferentially ground disc (before running)
Pinion (1) Wheel (2)
Number of teeth (N) 24 48
Pitch circle radius (r) m m 30 60 E

A d d e n d u m = module m = 2.50 m m ; pressure angle 4)= 20°; Circumferentially ground disc (after running) ~ 10 #m
face width = 5.84 ram; contact ratio rc = 1.67; base circle
pitch p~ = 7.38 m m Fig 2 Surfcom traces of gear teeth and discs
270 October 91 Vol 24 No 5
 K. L. Johnson and D. I. Spence--Determination of gear tooth friction by disc machine

Table 3 Surface roughness CLA/Ixm of gear teeth

and discs, 2.5 m m cut-off

Gear teeth Pinions Wheels 0.8

Driving face 0.50 0.45

Driven face 0.30, 0.375 0.45 E
z 0.4
Non-load face 0.70, 0.75 0.60
E
£
Discs Transversely Circumferentially
o, <
ground ground
0.2,

Before running 0.35, 0.35 0.385, 0.37

After running 0.37, 0.35 0.30, 0.32
0 I I I I I [
0 10 20 30
Transmitted torque, Nm
a
Table 4 Shell Vitrea 68

Temperature, Viscosity ~q, Pressure-viscosity

°C Pa s index ~ Pa 1

25 0.135 2.18 x 10 8
0.6
50 0.037 1.94 x 10 -8

E
z 0.4
G e a r t e s t results ~r

Friction measurements were carried out at steady 8 +

temperatures of 25°C and 50°C, and at pinion speeds 0
J
of 400, 800 and l l 7 0 r e v / m i n . The load torque 0.2 / / / x 800 rev/min
transmitted by the pinions, provided by the torque 0 1170 rev/min
shaft, was raised in steps from 0 to 33 Nm. The results
are plotted as lost torque against transmitted torque
in Fig 3. As explained previously, the lost torque at I I I
0
zero load is attributed to the parasitic losses in seals, 0 10 20 3O
bearings and oil churning which are assumed not to Transmitted torque, Nm
be dependent upon load torque. Thus the increase in b
lost torque with load torque is taken to be entirely
due to friction between the teeth. It can be seen from Fig3 Gear friction test results." (a) at 25°C, • (b) at 50°C
Fig 3 that, at zero transmitted torque, the parasitic
torque increases with speed and decreases with tem-
perature (ie increases with viscosity) which suggests
that it arises principally from oil churning. The parasitic where Pb = rr m cos + = the base pitch; Lt and L :
losses will not be considered further here since they are the lengths of the paths of approach and recess as
are very much dependent upon the detailed design of defined in the Appendix. Thus
the gear box.
T,
Since the contact ratio r~ lies between 1 and 2, the - Ktx (4(a))
load is carried by one pair of teeth near the centre of Tt
the path of contact and by two pairs at either end. If where K is a geometric constant = 0.143 for the gear
the coefficient of friction ~z is a constant, independent pair specified in Table 1. Examination of the results
of load, it is shown in the Appendix that the ratio of in Fig 3 shows that the tooth friction torque is
the friction torque to the load torque for a single pair proportional to the load torque to within experimental
of gears is given by error, implying that equation (4(a)) is satisfied with a
coefficient of friction which is independent of load. By
Dissipated power 7",- ~ ( ] t 1) sec+ measuring the gradient of the best straight lines drawn
Transmitted power = Tt = 2 + r2 Pb through each set of experimental points, the average
coefficient of friction g between the teeth over the
load range can be obtained from equation (4(a)). The
x [(L~ + L ~ ) - p ~ ( r ~ - 1 ) ] (4) values so obtained are presented in Table 5 for each
speed and temperature.

TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 271

K. L. Johnson and D. I. Spence--Determination of gear tooth friction by disc machine

Table 5 drive the discs and bearings under load, but without
transmitted torque. Half this measured torque is
Disc machine ascribed to each pair of bearings.
Gear
Circumferential Transverse test Test discs
Discs of 76 mm diameter and 12.7 mm track width
Temp, Rolling Contact We ~e We ~e were machined from tool steel hardened to ~ 800 VPH
°C s p e e d , pressure, and ground. One pair was ground transversely using
ms 1 MNm 2 a cup grinding wheel and a second pair was ground
circumferentially in the conventional way. Both pairs
were polished slightly to give approximately the same
25 0.43 683 0.087 CLA roughness as the gear teeth (see Fig 2 and Table
0,054 l
828 0.085 0.086 0.057 0,057 0.056 3).
940 0,087 0.060
0.86 683
828
0.065
0.069
0.049 ]
0,068 0.053 0.053 0.052
The same lubricant was used as in the gear tests.

940 0.070 0.056 Disc machine tests

1.25 683
828
0.056
0.056
0.044 ]
0,058 0.051 0.049 0.050 Traction tests were carried out on both transversely and
940 0.062 0.052 circumferentially ground discs at the same conditions of
50 0.43 683 0.092 rolling speed and temperature as in the gear tests. The
0.055 1 Hertz contact stress Po between gear teeth or discs is
828 0.090 0.090 0.057 0.059 0,055
940 0.088 0.064 given by
0.86 683 0.080 0.051 1 po = ( w ' E * / ~ p ) ~ (5)
828 O.084 0.081 0.050 0.052 0.053
940 0.079 0.055 where W' is the load per unit face width. In the case
1.25 683 0.073 of tooth contact the relative curvature varies during
0.045 1 the cycle as shown in Table 2. For purpose of
825 0.071 0.073 0.050 0.049 0.051
940 0.076 0.053 comparison with the disc machine it is assumed that p
for the teeth is constant and equal to its value at the
pitch point. It must also be remembered that W' varies
Disc machine experiments by a factor of 2 depending upon whether there are
one or two pairs of teeth in contact. In the gear tests
Disc machine reported above, the variation of load torque from
0-33 Nm corresponds to a variation in p,, of
The Cambridge University 3-inch centres disc machine
has been used over the years for a variety of rolling
0-1040 MN m-2
when one pair are in contact and
0-735 MN m 2 when two pairs are in contact. The
contact lubrication experiments. It is described in detail torque meter becomes insensitive "at light loads, so
by Jefferis and Johnson 2. The two discs, loaded into that disc machine tests were confined to values of
contact by a dead-weight loading lever, are driven by Po = 683, 828 and 940 MN m -2. The discs were run
separate dc electrical machines. The armatures of the at mean peripheral speeds 0.43, 0.86 and 1.26 m s -~
machines are electrically coupled in parallel to an corresponding to the rolling speeds at the pitch point
external dc voltage source. When mechanical power is (see Table 2) when the gear rig was running at pinion
transmitted between the discs, one machine acts as a speeds of 400, 800 and 1170 rev/min. The sliding speed
motor and the other as a generator recirculating power was varied from zero to a slide/roll ratio ~ of about
round the loop. The external source makes up the 0.5 (the machine maximum). Although this does not
losses. Rolling speed is controlled by the applied match the maximum value in a tooth contact cycle, it
voltage and sliding is introduced through the relative does cover the average value during the cycle.
strength of the externally excited fields. In this way
the sliding speed can be varied independently of the The disc machine results for transversely and circumfer-
rolling speed. The torque transmitted by the discs is entially ground discs tested at 25°C and 50°C are
measured by a strain-gauge torquemeter and the sliding plotted in Figs 4 and 5. In all cases the traction rises
velocity by counters attached to the two shafts. The rapidly from zero at zero sliding speed, reaching a
oil reservoir has a heating element to control the roughly constant value above a slide/roll ratio of
temperature of the oil sprayed onto the discs and 0.10. The slight fall at high sliding speeds is due to
their surface temperatures are measured by trailing frictional heating.
thermocouples.
Traction (ie friction) tests are carried out at a constant
Comparison of gear and disc friction
load, temperature and rolling speed. The sliding speed
is increased from zero to a maximum while measuring We have already noted that the linearity of friction
the transmitted torque, from which the friction force torque with load torque in the gear friction measure-
at the disc contact is deduced. A correction for the ments presented in Fig 3 suggests that the effective
friction torque in the bearings supporting the discs is coefficient of friction between the teeth is independent
made by disconnecting the shaft from the motor on of load. The values of 12 extracted from the results by
the output side and measuring the torque necessary to Eq (4) are given in Table 4.
272 October 91 Vol 24 No 5
 10

8
, + ] . 0060 =t
0.056
0052
~"

4~ 12
1o
K. L. Johnson and D. I. Spence--Determination of gear tooth friction by disc machine

+ I + I I . 0.087 C"
.9

_o~ :~ x)~ i 1 ~ ~ "U~ ° ° 7 ~

0057
I (30 ~ {3" 0J " 0.062
X ~ . 0.053 :_6
O ~ : ~ : .... 1 .0"069 "~
~6 0.051

0.054 '~
~4 x ~ 0044 ~j
E I! 0"43ms 1 ~- '~'
6 0.86 m s-1 ~;
£3 1.26 m s-1 c~
[ i 0.43m s 1 n~
2 0.86 m s-1 :~ 0 , r I
1.26 rn s-~ ~. 0 0.1 012 0.3 0.4 015
a Slide/roll ratio,

0 I I I I 1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
16
a Slide/roll ratio,
_ + + I i I
1~o~ " 0.088 =~
0.079
o- . ,~
12
~ 1 0.064 &
i }( 1q2o
03 oo76
o.o9o ~_
(3) ~ 0,055 ~3 O----O-- . 0.071
0.053 - 8 0.092 :-6
8
o.073 ~
~ " F+ 0.43ms 1
0050 ~ 4 " 6 I x 0.86ms 1
-S~ 6 /~ i a
Lo 1.26m5 1 & uJ

0.055
ol I I I
E 4 ~ 0.045 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 015
o Slide/roll ratio,
5
Fig 5 Circumferentially ground discs, tested at
° [iiii :!ii Po = 683, 828 and 940 M N m -z, and ~ = 0.43, 0.86
and 1.26 rn s z.. (a) at 25°C," (b) at 50°C

b Slide roll ratio,

Fig 4 Transversely g r o u n d discs, tested at po = 683, 828 We note first that these effective friction coefficients
and 940 M N m -2, a n d 9 = 0.43, 0.86 and l . 2 6 m s t. Ixe measured in the disc machine all show a small
(a) at 25°C, " (b) at 50°C increase with load: on average a 13% increase when
the load is roughly doubled from 241 N m ~ to
459 N m- ~. On the other hand, the linearity of friction
torque with load torque in the gear tests (Figs 3(a)
The derivation of Eq (4) also assumes that the friction and (b)) suggests a coefficient of friction which is
is independent of the velocity of sliding. If this is not independent of load. However it is doubtful whether
the case, the values of p~ obtained by Eq (4) should the small changes in gradient implied by the variations
be regarded as representative (constant) values which in We found in the disc tests ( ~ 13%) would have been
would give rise to the measured energy dissipation in clearly detectable in the gear tests. Accordingly the
a complete cycle. The experiments in the disc machine average value of ~e obtained for the three loads is
(Figs 4 and 5) show that the friction rises rapidly from tabulated for direct comparison with the values
zero with increasing sliding speed to a value which is obtained from the gear tests.
fairly constant up to the maximum speed in the test. Two conclusions are immediately apparent from this
Since frictional dissipation is proportional to the comparison (Table 4):
product of friction and sliding speed, the representative
friction is weighted towards the values at high sliding (i) The mean effective friction coefficients I~
speed near to the ends of the path of contact although obtained with the transversely ground discs
this effect may be countered to some extent by the agrees closely (within 2%) with the values
(unknown) tip relief. The effect of the low friction deduced from the gear tests at all speeds and at
close to the pitch point is therefore insignificant. If both temperatures.
disc machine data could have been obtained to the (ii) The mean effective friction obtained with the
maximum slide/roll ratio experienced in the gear, it circumferentially ground discs is appreciably
would have been possible to integrate the product of higher under all conditions (23% on average)
friction and sliding speed over the range to find the than that for the transversely ground discs or
true effective value of ~ . In the event these values the gears.
have been estimated. They are indicated in Figs 4 and This latter result is in line with accepted thinking on
5 and quoted in Table 5. micro-elastohydrodynamic (EHD) lubrication. Cir-
TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
273
K. L. Johnson and D. I. Spence--Determination of gear tooth friction by disc machine
cumferentiai roughness permits the oil to pass through
the contact in the grooves, leaving the crests of
the asperities starved of lubricant. Provided sliding
accompanies rolling, transverse asperities serve to
generate micro-EHD action.
In view of the satisfactory comparison stated above,
it is tempting to leave it at that. However, there are
questions which deserve further consideration.
Since tooth contacts are operating in the 'mixed'
lubrication regime, where the behaviour is strongly
influenced by the roughness parameter A (nominal
E H L film thickness divided by mean surface
roughness), it might be argued that the disc machine
tests should have been carried out at values of A which
were comparable with the gear experiments rather
than at comparable rolling speeds. In view of the
greater scale of the disc machine, mentioned earlier,
this would have necessitated running the disc machine
slower to obtain the same film thickness as achieved
between the gear teeth. If, as in our experiments, the
contact pressure Po is the same for gears and discs,
the Dowson-Higginson formula indicates that the film
thickness h is proportional to the product a3°-7 x 9".31
Thus, in our experiment, where ~5 was kept the same.
hdi.~c = (Paise)'"3= (19.()] °3
hg~,~ \ I~gc~i;/ ~6.84/ = 1.36
To maintain the same film thicknesses the above
relationship between h, 9 and p requires that the speeds
should be in the ratio (a3~,,/a3o~) = (,'Pdisc/'Pgcar)-'~3/7
= 1.6.
A second question concerns the influence of the
variation of traction with load, revealed by the disc
tests upon the gear behaviour where, for part of the
cycle, the load is shared by two pairs of teeth. If
different friction coefficients ~ and [,.L2 are ascribed to
contact between one pair of teeth and two pairs
respectively, the expression for lost torque becomes
(see Appendix):
T, 2ph r, + _ [~,(L~ + L~)
- (2~x, - ~2)(r~ - 1)pg]
For the test gear geometry this reduces to
Tf/T, = 0.143(0.091x, + 0.91tx2)
It is clear from this expression that the friction Ix2,
when there are two pairs of teeth in contact and the
sliding speed is greatest, makes the major contribution
to the overall loss. Assuming that the load is divided
equally between the two pairs, the contact stress in
the gear tests varied from 0 to 735 MN m 2. It would
seem most appropriate, therefore, to compare the gear
friction results with the disc results at the lightest load
(Po = 683 MN m 2).
Accordingly the friction coefficients deduced from
the gear tests are compared with the disc tests at
Po = 683 MN m -2 in Fig 6 on the basis of roughness
parameter A. This more refined comparison supports
the earlier conclusion: that the gear tooth friction can
be confidently predicted from the results of the
transversely ground disc tests. The circumferentially
274
0.10
0.08
.~ 0.06
g 0.04
~
,,=
o.o2
0 I I I I I I I I I I I
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.0 2.0
Roughness parameter (A)
Fig 6 Friction coefficient as a function of roughness
parameter A (= film thickness divided by combined
roughness). Circumferentially ground discs: ~ 25°C,
• 50°C;transverselygrounddiscs:© 25°C,• 50°C;gears:
A 25°C, • 50°C
ground discs exhibit a much greater coefficient of
friction and show greater sensitivity to the roughness
parameter. It is interesting to note that extrapolations
of the results to higher values of A show a convergence
towards A ~ 3. This is consistent with previous work
on the effect of roughness on traction 3' 4 which shows
that roughness effects become negligible at values of
A exceeding approximately 3.
Conclusions
Measurements of tooth friction in a back-to-back gear
test rig have been compared with friction measurements
in a disc machine. Discs were tested which had been
ground both transversely and circumferentially to
approximately the same R, roughness as the gears.
Both gears and discs were tested over a comparable
range of loads and speeds, and at two temperatures
(25°C and 50°C).
(5)
• The circumferentially ground discs showed a much
greater friction than either the transversely ground
discs or the gears (which are transversely ground).
(6)
• The transversely ground discs showed a modest
increase in friction with increasing load and a modest
decrease with increasing speed. The gear tests could
not resolve any variation of friction with load, but
also showed a decrease with speed.
A first-order comparison of gear and disc friction
at average loads and equal speeds showed good
agreement (within 2%).
• A more detailed comparison on the basis of the
roughness parameter A (film thickness divided by
combined surface roughness) gave further support
to the conclusion that tooth friction loss can be
predicted from disc machine tests provided that the
surface finish of the discs (in magnitude and
orientation) is representative of the gears.
October 91 Vol 24 No 5
 K. L. Johnson and D. I. Spence--Determination of gear tooth friction by disc machine

Acknowledgement
T h e authors wish to a c k n o w l e d g e their debt to Mr m-- i B
G a r e t h R y d e r for his care in preparing the discs to
the prescribed surface finish.

References
1. Merritt H.E. Worm gear performance. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs
London, 1935, 129, 127
2. Jefferis J.J. and Johnson K.L. Sliding friction between lubricated
rollers. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs. London, 1968, 182, 281
3. Evans C.R. and Johnson K.L. The influence of surface roughness
on EHD traction. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engrs, London, 1980, 201,
145
4. Bair S. and Wirier W.O. Regimes of traction in concentrated
contact lubrication. Trans. ASME, Ser. F. J. Lab. Tech. 1982, Fig 7 Path o f contact A P B . T w o pairs o f teeth are in
10, 382 contact f r o m A to E and f r o m D to B, one pair f r o m
EtoD
Appendix
Friction losses in involute spur gears when one pair are in contact
The path of contact A P B is shown in Fig 7, where P
is the pitch point. I n s t a n t a n e o u s contact b e t w e e n the vc rl + r2 sec+ P I P
teeth is at C, distance x f r o m P. T w o pairs of teeth
are in contact f r o m A to E and from D to B; one pair
is in contact from E to D, where A D = EB = base × Ixl0x + Ixl
circle pitchph. W e d e n o t e A P = L~; PB = L2; E P = a; tat )

P D = b. The total t o o t h load W = Tt/r~cos+ where

T~ is the pinion torque and r~ the pitch circle radius. =2
1(2, 1)
+ r2 see+ t*,P (a 2 + 62)
C o n s i d e r one cycle, ie a m o t i o n of C t h r o u g h one base
pitch Pal, and assume that two pairs of teeth share the Total dissipation = ~ + sec~b P
load equally.
x [ ~ : ( L 2 + L 2) + (2p~, - P-2) (a 2 + b2)]
Frictionaldissipation=f FM[dt=f FIW~'dx W o r k transmitted = P p ,
where the sliding velocity u~ = (~o~ + ~02)x and Putting a = Pb -- L l , b = Pb -- L2 and rc = (L~ +
vc = ~olr~cos+ = ~o2r2cos+. W h e n two pairs are in L2)/ph
contact, the frictional dissipation
Therefore:

Fly I dx = + sec¢ 1~2(P/2) P o w e r dissipated 1(~ 1 12) sec +

P o w e r transmitted = 2 + r Pb

x
If L1
Ixla +
;?]I.la
X [ I J . I ( L 2 + L2~) - (21~, - P.2)p~(rc -

I f I ~ = 1~2 = It, this r e s u l t r e d u c e s t o

1)]

P o w e r dissipated _ ~ ( 1 )2) secqb

= 4 + s e c ¢ ~L2 P [(L~ + L ~ )
P o w e r transmitted 2 rI + Pb
- ( a 2 + b2)] X[(L { + L 2)-p2(rc- 1)].

TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL 275