Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Revision 1 – Tribology in Mechanical Engineering (MAE 493N/593T) – Fall 2010
Konstantinos A. Sierros (kostas.sierros@mail.wvu.edu)
Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Definition of tribology
1.2 History of tribology
1.3 Bearings and lubricants
2. Surfaces
2.1 Surface parameters
2.2 Examination of surfaces
2.3 Statistical nature of surfaces
2.4 Statistical treatment of surfaces
2.5 Metallic surfaces
2.6 Tribology and surface engineering
2.7 Surface treatments
3. Contact between surfaces
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Single asperity deformation model
3.3 Multiple asperity contact
3.4 Hertzian contacts
3.5 Non‐conforming surfaces in contact
3.6 Surface and subsurface stresses
3.7 Experimental measurements of contact
3.8 Elastoplastic contact
4. Further reading
2
1. Introduction
1.1 Definition of tribology
One possible definition of tribology can be given as follows; “Tribology is the science and technology
studying the interaction of surfaces which are in contact and moving relatively to each other”. Tribology
is a very old subject, as we will see later in section 1.2, dealing with friction, wear and lubrication. Wear
is the damage to one or both surfaces, involved in the relative motion, involving in most cases
progressive loss of material. Friction is the resistance encountered by one body in moving over the
other. Finally, lubrication is the action taken to reduce the frictional force between surfaces by using
lubricants.
However, it was not until 1966 when Prof. Peter Jost coined the word tribology in his famous ‘Jost
report’. Tribology is the product of the Greek words τριβή and λόγος. Τριβή means rubbing and λόγος
means study. The concept could be also called triboscience and tribotechnology.
1.2 History of tribology
Tribological activity is already observed 5000 years ago in Mesopotamia (currently the region covering
Iraq) were wheeled carriages were used often. The development of such carriages involved bearing
design and development. Bearings are viewed primary as tribological components. Another example of
early tribological activity is shown in Figure 1. A stone colossus (Ancient Egypt 4000 years ago) is moved
by Egyptians with the aid of lubrication.
Figure 1: Transport of Egyptian stone colossus (4000 years ago). (From Williams‐Engineering Tribology)
Early tribological progress was mostly achieved in the area of bearings. Lubricated bronze bearings, used
in war chariots, were designed and developed 2400 years ago in China. Design and development of
pivots, bearings and prototype mechanical devices took place in Ancient Greece 2000 years ago. The
development of lathe also took place around this time. A Roman engineer and architect, Marcus
Vitruvius Polio, worked on the ballista as well as other tribological ideas. During the Middle Ages China
was leading the technological race and Europe was following. The use of animal fats as lubricants was
explored.
Leonardo da Vinci, Figure 2, contributed a lot of ideas and designs to the field of tribology. He
recognized the importance of lubrication and he was also one of the first to comment on three‐body
abrasive wear. His notebooks were kept in a private collection for 200 years inhibiting the rapid
development of the subject at that stage.
3
During the 15th century, bearings started to employ metals rather than wood and stone. Large‐scale
machinery was also developed and the use of rolling element bearings was introduced.
Figure 2: Leonardo da Vinci (Anno Domini 1452‐1519)
The Middle part of 17th century marked the beginning of the ‘Age of Reason’. The scientific method was
developed along with the formation of the Royal Society (England) and the Academie Royale des
Sciences (France). It should be mentioned that by the end of the 17th century the laws of friction were
stated and we still use them!
Milestones in the development of lubrication theory were set by Isaac Newton and Claude Navier. The
later defined the coefficient of viscosity in fluid motion equations. Leonhard Euler (1707‐1783) provided
the first mathematical approach to tribology by defining and calculating the static and dynamic
coefficient of friction.
The 18th century marked the start of the industrial revolution. Bearings and tribological elements of
machines based on brass, steel and tin alloys were developed and used. Charles Coulomb was the
pioneer for developing theoretical insights for explaining friction. He stated that the mechanical
interlocking of surface asperities is the mechanism responsible for causing friction between surfaces in
contact and relative sliding. The adhesion and deformation components of friction were also addressed.
Coulomb also investigated the effect of load and area on the frictional resistance for a range of material
combinations.
Furthermore, lubrication issues were addressed during the 18th century by Nikolai Petrov and
Beauchamp Tower. Friction at high velocities was investigated and the concept of hydrodynamic
lubrication was born. Theoretical analyses of lubricated bearings were conducted by Osborne Reynolds.
In addition, great advancements in the field of contact mechanics took place during that period. Heinrich
Hertz worked on the analysis of dry contact between surfaces. He analyzed the contact stresses an d the
deformation between elastic solids.
During the early 19th century the fields of gas and vapour lubrication were initiated. A number of
researchers worked in this area including Sommerfield, Michell, Kingsbury and Lord Rayleigh. The late
19th century marked the evolution of bearing design. Also, the effects of stiffness and stability of
bearings as well as the introduction of boundary lubrication took place during the early 20th century.
Bowden and Tabor (Cavendish Lab, Cambridge University) worked on the fundamental mechanisms of
friction during the 1950s and 1960s. 1966 was the year when the word tribology was coined by Prof. Jost
in his report.
4
Currently, research in tribology is moving towards smaller scales and single asperity contact cases.
There is a need to understand individual tribological events at the nanoscale. The development of the
Scanning Tunneling Microscope (STM) by Binnig and Rohrer (IBM Research – Zurich) marked a new era
which led to concentrated research efforts for understanding single asperity tribological contacts.
1.3 Bearings and lubricants
A bearing is a device which permits 2 components in a mechanism to move relative to one another in
either 1‐dimension or 2‐dimensions while constraining their movement in the remaining dimension(s).
In practice most tribo‐systems involve bearings of some sort or another. Three types of important
engineering bearings are shown in Figure 3 below.
Figure 3: Three types of engineering bearings :(a) linear bearing carrying a normal load; (b) journal
bearing sustaining a radial load; (c) thrust bearing carrying an axial load. (From Williams – Engineering
Tribology)
There is a number of bearing systems used to solve tribological problems. Figure 4 present such systems.
Figure 4: (a) Dry rubbing bearing; (b) hydrodynamic fluid film bearing; (c) hydrostatic fluid film bearing;
(d) rolling element bearing; (e) Magnetic/electrostatic bearing and (f) elastomeric‐based oscillation
bearing. (From Williams – Engineering Tribology)
5
Until the middle of the 19th century animal fats were used as the lubricating medium between high
friction surfaces. Then, due to the growth of oil drilling, mineral oils became available as lubricants. They
are mostly made from hydrocarbons (C and H compounds). Hydrocarbons can be paraffinic, naphthenic
and aromatic. Paraffinic hydrocarbons contain no ring structures whereas naphthenic and aromatic
hydrocarbons have ring structures. The difference between naphthenic and aromatic hydrocarbons is
that the later contains single and double bonds between the carbon and hydrogen atoms. Also, the
aromatic oils can be found in much smaller quantities than the other two types.
Finally, the viscosity of a fluid is a very important parameter in lubrication science and technology. The
dynamic or absolute viscosity (n) of a fluid is a measure of the resistance it offers to relative shearing
motion.
τ
n= .
γ (Equation 1)
The shearing force or absolute viscosity (n) is equal to the ratio of the shear stress (τ) over the velocity
gradient (γ dot). The kinematic viscosity is equal to the ratio of the absolute viscocity over the density of
the fluid and is a property describing the flow due to self‐weight or gravity.
2. Surfaces
2.1 Surface parameters
It is known that no real surface can pocess perfect geometry. All surfaces exhibit surface roughness and
waviness. Surface roughness is described by surface variations with very short wavelengths wereas
waviness is described by undulations with relatively long wavelengths in the mm scale. The roughness
parameter is important when defining contact between surfaces since when two surfaces contact each
other, the surface asperities (tips of the surface roughness) must first carry the load as shown in Figure 5
below.
Figure 5: Two surfaces in contact. Some surface asperities are first carrying the load.
6
2.2 Examination of surfaces
Microscopical methods at different scales are used in order to examine tribological surfaces. Optical
microscopy (up to 1000 times magnification), scanning electron microscopy (up to 300000 times
magnification) and transmission electron microscopy (up to 750000 times magnification) are all used.
Additionally, atomic force microscopy and surface profilometry are used extensively to characterize the
topography of various surfaces.
2.3 Statistical nature of surfaces
There is not a single numerical parameter that can adequately describe the geometry of a surface. The
simplest parameters that describe surface geometry are centre line average roughness (Ra) and the root
mean square roughness (Rq).
L
1 ⎛1 L 2 ⎞
Rα = ∫ y dx Rq = ⎜⎜ ∫ y dx ⎟⎟
L0
(Equation 2a) ⎝L 0 ⎠ (Equation 2b)
Equations 2 and b are showing the expressions for Ra and Rq. L is the length of the surface profile and y is
the height of the surface measured above the mean level.
However, there is an issue when quantifying surfaces using the surface roughness Ra. The issue is that
different topographies may have the same Ra value as sown in Figures 6b and 6c. Using Rq can lead to
quantifying the surface variation with greater significance.
Figure 6: (a) Ra value of a surface over a sampling length L. The shaded areas are equal. Both profiles (b)
and (c) have the same Ra value of 0.64a. (From Williams – Engineering Tribology)
7
2.4 Statistical treatment of surfaces
We can define a distribution function Φ(z) of the z‐axis. For real surfaces a ‘bell‐shaped’ curve is
observed and the probability distribution function is described by a Gaussian distribution which denotes
a large number of randomly occurring events. However, in practice it is not always easy to determine if
any given surface deviates from Gaussian distribution. In order to overcome this problem one can plot
the number of times a particular value of z occurs in the data versus the value of z on normal probability
axes. We will then observe that a truly random distribution falls on a straight line.
We can use the moments of the distribution on a further statistical treatment in order to attempt to
quantify the shape of the distribution curve. Moments in statistics are a set of numbers that describe
various properties of a distribution. The square root of the 2nd moment gives the root mean square
roughness as shown in the equation 3 below.
m2 = σ = Rq (Equation 3)
Using the 3rd moment we can determine the skewness (Sk) of the surface. When Sk=0, the distribution is
symmetrical. If a surface modification process starts removing the peaks, then Sk<0 as shown in Figure 7
below.
Figure 7: Skewness shift because of removal of surface peaks by a surface modification process. (a)
Surface before modification and (b) surface after modification. (From Williams – Engineering Tribology)
The use of the 4th moment leads to another parameter which his used in determining how surfaces are
deviating from the Gaussian distribution. This parameter is called kurtosis (K). A Gaussian distribution
has K=3 and distributions with sharper peaks than Gaussian have K<3.
However, the above statistical parameters are all based on random data and thus they are subject to
random statistical variations. Therefore, it is still challenging to tell if a given value of Sk or K represents a
true property of the surface or it has been influenced by the sampling procedure. This is because there is
still a lack of information considering the horizontal and spatial distributions.
8
Taking into account the horizontal dimension, one should consider the number of peaks per unit length
of the surface profile and the number of crossings per unit length with the mean measurement level.
However, both the peak density and the zero‐crossing density are highly dependent on the sampling
interval. The use of autocorrelation functions, ρ(t), is aiming towards including information on the
spatial variations of surfaces.
⎛ ⎞
1 ⎜ ⎟
L
1
ρ (t ) = 2 ⎜ lim ∫ z ( x) × z ( x +
τ )dx ⎟ (Equation 4)
σ ⎜ L →∞ L 0 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Figure 7: Some examples of surface profiles their distribution functions and their autocorrelation
functions.
2.5 Metallic surfaces
When metal surfaces are exposed to air they absorb O2 and H2O vapor and they consequently form
metal oxide layer(s). Noble metals such as Pd, Au and others are not very reactive and they form
monolayers which are 1‐2 atoms thick. The rate of growth of metal oxide films depends on the
crystallographic orientation of the underlying substrate and the temperature. High temperatures lead to
increased growth rates and rougher surfaces. Some examples of metal oxide formation include the
9
formation of various iron oxides on iron surfaces in atmosphere and the formation of 2 or more
different layers of copper oxides on a copper surface upon exposure to air.
A critical question arises at this stage. Is metal oxide formation beneficial? The answer is yes and no. In
some cases they are beneficial since the underlying metal surfaces become passivated and further
chemical activity, such as corrosion, in inhibited. Such examples include Al and Ti surfaces. However, in
some other cases metal oxides on top of metal surfaces is not beneficial because the oxide
microstructure is open and does not protect the underlying metal. Iron oxides are a prime example.
2.6 Tribology and surface engineering
During surface engineering surfaces become mechanically abraded, polished and machined. The
formation of a Beilby layer is observed. A Beilby layer is a layer of parent material that is heavily
deformed as a result of surface engineering. It may consist of a smeared layer of metal, a metal oxide,
polishing powder and other residues.
Figure 8: Cross‐section of a typical polished metal surface. (From Williams – Engineering Tribology)
Surface engineering is dealing with the application of both traditional and innovative surface
technologies in order to produce a composite material unattainable in either the base or surface
materials individually. Surface engineering is divided in two main branches. The surface modification of
an existing surface and the deposition of additional material in the form of a thin layer on the existing
surface.
2.7 Surface treatments and coatings
Table 1 summarizes the surface treatments and the coating deposition methods available to the surface
engineer.
10
Table 1: Surface treatments and overlay coating techniques. (From Williams – Engineering Tribology)
3. Contact between surfaces
3.1 Introduction
When two surfaces that are plane and parallel to each other are brought to contact each other, contact
will initially occur at only few asperities. If the load is increased, more asperities will come into contact
(see Figure 5). It is necessary to understand the contact conditions between asperities and
macroscopically for understanding wear and friction mechanisms.
3.2 Single asperity deformation model
Modeling a single asperity (roughness tip) contact on a flat rigid surface is an ideal case since it provides
a simple geometrical problem to work on. It is true that real surface asperities have blunt surface
profiles and their slopes do not exceed 10o. It is therefore convenient to model asperities as perfectly
smooth surface protuberances with spherical, conical or pyramidal shape.
The simplest scenario is to press a totally elastic sphere of radius r on a rigid plane surface under a load
w. The radius of the contact circle will be equal to α.
Figure 9: Elastic deformation of a sphere pressed against a rigid plane. (From I. Hutchings – Tribology of
Engineering Materials)
11
The area of contact between the elastic sphere and the rigid flat is equal to πα2. The mean contact
pressure or normal stress is given by equation 5 below.
w
Pmean =
πα 2 (Equation 5)
Figure 10: The distribution of contact pressure for a purely elastic sphere loaded against a rigid flat
surface.
As shown in Figure 10, the distribution of contact pressure is zero at the edge of the contact and is
observed to be a maximum at the center of the contact.
As the normal load increases, either the sphere or the plane will start deforming plastically. Therefore,
there are two distinct cases. The first case is that the sphere is rigid and thus the plane will deform
plastically and the second case is that the plane is rigid and plastic flow will therefore be confined in the
sphere. Both cases provided that the extent of deformation is not too large, yield similar results. Plastic
flow will start occurring at a depth around 0.47α and as the load increases the mean pressure over the
contact area will be about 3Y. Y is the uniaxial tensile yield stress of the soft material.
3.3 Multiple asperity contact
For real surfaces the Greenwood – Williamson theory (1966) is used as the base theoretical
consideration for multiple asperity contact. It assumes that all contacting asperities have spherical tips
of the same radius r. It also assumes that the asperities deform elastically upon application of a load,
following Hertzian relations.
Figure 11: Contact model for a rough surface on a smooth rigid plane (From I. Hutchings – Tribology of
Engineering Materials)
∞
4
W = NEr 1 / 2 ∫ ( z − d ) 3 / 2ϕ ( z )dz
(Equation 6)
3 d
12
Equation 6 gives the load W according to Greenwood‐Williamson theory. N is the total number of
asperities, E is the Young’s modulus of the two materials, r is the asperity tip radius, z is the height of an
individual asperity above the reference plane (see Figure 11), d is the distance between the smooth
surface and the reference plane and Φ(z) is the distribution function (discussed in chapter 2).
Greenwood and Williamson derived the theory for purely elastic contact but also included calculations
to allow for predicting the onset of plastic flow at the contacting asperities. The proportion of asperity
contacts at which plastic flow occurs depends on the plasticity index ψ. For ψ<0.6 plastic flow is caused
by extremely high pressures whereas for ψ>1 most asperities are deforming plastically under light
loading.
3.4 Hertzian contacts
In Hertzian contacts, deformation taking place in the elastic regime and therefore small strains
dominate. If viewed from the macroscale the radii of curvature of bodies in Hertzian contact is much
larger than the contact area. The surfaces are non‐conforming and they are continuous. Frictional
effects are not considered during Hertzian contacts.
3.5 Non‐conforming surfaces in contact
A long deformable cylinder in contact with a flat rigid surface can be viewed from the macroscale as a
non‐conforming contact geometry. The analysis of such a system can be extended to cases where both
surfaces are curved and deformable but still long in the 3rd dimension. There are some equations that
describe this type of contact.
Figure 12: A deformable cylinder is pressed against a rigid plane (From Williams – Engineering Tribology)
As shown in Figure 12, a load per unit length W/L is applied and the center of the cylinder moves a
vertical distance δ towards the rigid surface. The size of the contact patch 2α needs to be related with
the normal load W/L and the geometry and material properties of the cylinder. The gap h between the
two surfaces is given by the following equation 7.
2
x
h= + w −δ
z
2R
(Equation 7)
13
Where; wz is the vertical displacement of the cylinder surface and R is the radius of the cylinder.
The 3 –dimensional case is the contact between two deformable spheres and the contact patch is now
circular in shape and its radius is equal to α.
The vertical displacement of each sphere wz1 and wz2 (Figure 13) is given by equations 8a and 8b for the
contact region and for outside the contact region respectively.
Figure 13: Two purely elastic spheres are pressed against each other (From Williams – Engineering
Tribology)
r2 r2
w z1 + w z 2 = Δ −
(Equation 8a) w z1 + w z 2 >Δ− (Equation 8b)
2R 2R
Where; Δ is the total relative distance of approach of the centers of the two spheres, R is equal to
(1/R1+1/R2) and r2 is equal to x2+y2.
3.6 Surface and subsurface stresses
Figure 14: Line loading of an elastic half space (From K. L. Johnson – Contact Mechanics)
14
As shown in figure 14, the line loading of an elastic plane produces stresses on the surface and the
subsurface. The usual procedure to solve such problems is to first find the stresses and strains in order
to satisfy the equilibrium equations and the compatibility condition. Then we can use the boundary
conditions and we can arrive at analytical solutions by using the finite element method or the boundary
element method. Stresses can be expressed in Cartesian or Polar coordinates.
3.7 Experimental measurements of contact
Figure 15: 2‐dimensional photoelastic fringe patterns for various loadings (From Williams – Engineering
Tribology)
As shown in Figure 15 photoelasticity is a great experimental tool for visualizing contact stresses under
static or dynamic loading. Contours of constant maximum shear stress are clearly visible.
3.8 Elastoplastic contact
Loading beyond the elastic limit between a rigid indenter in contact with a deforming surface is shown in
Figure 16. The size and shape of the elastic‐plastic boundary is not known a priori. Within the core the
material is under pure hydrostatic compression. The elastoplastic zone can be located further out from
the incompressible core.
Figure 16: Elastic plastic contact between a rigid indenter pressing against a deforming flat surface
(From Williams – Engineering Tribology)
15
4. Further reading
J. Williams, Engineering Tribology, Cambridge University Press, 2005
B. Bhushan & B. K. Gupta, Handbook of Tribology, McGraw‐Hill, New York, 1991
D. Dowson, History of Tribology, Longman, London, 1979
F. P. Bowden & D. Tabor, The Friction and Lubrication of Solids, Oxford University Press, Part I, 1950 and
Part II, 1964
I. M. Hutchings, Tribology, Edward Arnold, London, 1992
K. L. Johnson, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, 1985
Tribology International (Journal)
Wear (Journal)
NOTE: Next Revision (no 2) will cover friction and wear and their relation