A PROJECT WORK ON

Tribological study of AISI 1040 steel on a Pin-on-disc setup

Submitted By
SAGUN MURMU
ROLL No. :- 001611201031
CLASS: B.ME IV
Under the guidance of
Prof. PRASANTA SAHOO,
Department Of Mechanical Engineering,
JADAVPUR UNIVERSITY

1
 Acknowledgment
I am feeling pleasure introducing My project “TRIBOLOGICAL
STUDY OF AISI 1040 STEEL ON A PIN-ON-DISC SETUP” result of
my new radical ideas to significant windup my studies during in course
“BACHELOR OF MECHANICAL ENGG.” Jadavpur University,
Kolkata. Suggestion to improve quality of product are always well come
many hands have given their active support & contributed for design &
development of “TRIBOLOGICAL STUDY OF AISI 1040 STEEL ON
A PIN-ON-DISC SETUP”. I would like to thank our head of the
department Prof. G. Majumdar And special thank to Prof. P. Sahoo &
Research Scholar Devi Prasanna Mahanty for their kind co-operation &
excellent help in the making of the project.
Date:

Signature

2
 ABSTRACT
The technological age has complex machines used in the industries as well
as in daily life. The problem of wear is likely occur whenever there is
relative motion between two mating surfaces resulting the dimensions of
machines components are lost leading and finally failure of components.
This causes hazardous effect on surfaces and breakdown of machine.
Micro machined smooth and rough parts have high coefficient of friction
in elasto hydrodynamic area. It requires micro level of roughness. It
contains fluids which reduces friction. Through chemical etching the micro
dimples are produces on the component which reduces the metal to metal
contact and thus decreasing wear rate. Here, The wear test is performed by
varying load and sliding speed on the disc. It is shows in the study that the
Wear rate increases. Co-efficient of Friction and the friction force has been
determined and appropriate graph is obtained during relative motion
between two mating surface.
Keywords:Tribological Analysis, Wear Test,

3
TABLE OF CONTENT

CHAPTER SL NAME OF THE TOPIC PAGE

NO. NO.
1 TRIBOLOGICAL STUDY OF AISI 1040
STEEL ON A PIN-ON-DISC SETUP
1.1 Defination and History of Tribology
1.2 Engineering Surfaces
Chapter1: 1.3 Surface Texture
1.4 Surface Roughness
1.5 Roughness Parameter
1.6 Friction
1.7 Wear
2. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
2.1 Experimentation steps
Chapter 2: 2.2 Specimen
2.3 Wear Test
Chapter 3: 3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Chapter 4: 4. CONCLUSION
Chapter 5: 5. REFERENCE

4
CHAPTER 1

5
 TRIBOLOGICAL STUDY OF AISI 1040 STEEL ON
A PIN-ON-DISC SETUP
1.1 Definition and History Of Tribology
Tribology is the science and technology of friction, wear, lubrication, derived from the
greek work “tribos”. Formally, it is defined as science and technology of interacting
surfaces in relative motion and of related subjects and practices related to
therto.Webster’s dictionary defines tribology as “a study that deals with the design,
friction, wear, lubrication of interecting surface in relative motion (as in bearings and
gears)”.

The study of tribology perhaps most commonly associate with bearing design. The term became most
widely used following a British study in 1966 (The Josh Report) in which huge sums of money wear
reported to have been lost in the UK annually due to the consequence of friction and wear. Since, the the
term has diffused into the international engineering field and a number of specialists now claim to be
tribologist.

Why ‘tribology’ is important?

It has been estimated that approximately one-third of the world’s energy resources, in
present use, appear as friction on one form or the other. Friction and wear usually cost
money in the form of energy loss and material loss; can decrease national productivity and
quality of life. Thus the knowledge of tribology can lead to various substantial and
significant savings without deployment of large capital investment .Tribology course is very
useful for industries related to power, steel, cement, oil etc. Practicing such knowledge in
problems ranging from household appliances to large size ships or aircraft earns great
economic benefits. By taking advantage of the new technologies for friction reduction and
wear protection, energy losses due to friction and wear in vehicles, machin ery and other
equipment worldwide could be reduced by 40% in the long term (15 years) and 18% in the
short term (8 years). On a global scale, these savings would amount to 1.4%
of GDP annually and 8.7% of total energy consumption in the long term.

Ex- (i)There are more than 700 million vehicles in world. Average power of engine is
estimated as 30 BHP and with tribological knowledge this can be increased by 2 to 5%. If
we assume 2% improvement in BHP, then 420 million HP can be saved .

(ii) Average Iron and Steel industry allots Rs. 3 -5 million for maintenance / Replacement of
bearings. A rough estimation indicates that 10% percent of bearing life can be improved by
better lubricant, lubricant additive, proper bearing installation. Implementation of
tribological knowledge in iron and steel industries of India can save 3 to 5 million rupees
per year.

6
1.2 Engineering Surfaces
Tribology is the science of interacting surfaces. So, it is necessary to have a clear idea
about what is meant by ‘surface’. In general, surface of a solid body is the geometrical
boundary between the solid and the environment. But in tribological term, su rface includes
the near-surface material to a significant depth. The boundary of solid with some amount of
depth is called surface depth which is approximately 100 microns. The atoms at the
surface/boundary are more alert to the different losses (Friction/ Wear) or different loads
than the atom in bulk of the body. The surface of a typical metal consists of several layers
is shown in Fig.1.

Fig 1. Typical surface layers

The top layer, known as Bielby layer, results from the melting and surface flow during the
machining of molecular layers that are subsequently hardened by quenching as they are
deposited on the cool underlying material. This layer is of amorphous or microcrystalline
structure. The thickness typically ranges from 1 to 100 nm.

The top layer is followed by a compound oxide layer, which is produced from the chemical
reaction of metal with the environment. Besides this, there may be absorbed films that are
produced either by physisorption or chemisorptions of oxygen, water vapour and
hydrocarbons. The thickness of oxide and chemically reacted layer ranges from 10 to 100
nm. Below this lies the deformed layer of the material containing some entrapped lubricants
and contaminants followed by the bulk material. The thickness of deformed layer ranges
from 1 to 100 microns.

Surface interactions are dependent both on the contacting materials and the shape of the surface. The
shape of the surface of an engineering material is a function of both production process and the nature of
parent material. On a very fine scale, all solid surfaces are found to be rough. The roughness is
characterized by asperities of varying amplitudes and spacing as shown below in Fig.2. The asperity tip
angle is approximately 160 to 170 degrees. The distribution of the asperities are found to be directional
when the finishing process is direction dependent such as turning, milling, etc. and homogeneous for the
non-directional finishing process like lapping, electro-polishing etc.

7
 Fig2. Surface asperities and valleys

1.3 Surface Texture

The surface texture may include:

Roughness (Nano and Micro-roughness) – Roughness is produced by fluctuations of short

wavelengths characterized by asperities (local maxima) and valleys (local minima) of
varying amplitudes and spacing. This include s the features intrinsic to the production
process.

Longer wavelengths may result from the factors such as machine or workpiece deflections,
vibration, chatter, heat treatment or warping

Waviness (Macro-roughness) – It is the surface irregularities of strains.

Lay- It is the principal direction of the predominant surface pattern, usually determined by
the production process as shown in table below:

Production Process Lay

Shaping Parallel
Planing Perpendicular
Facing Circular
Grinding Multidirectional
Knurling Crossed

Flaw – Flaws are unexpected and unintentional interruptions in the Surface texture.

8
 Fig. 3: Outlines of Surface Texture

1.4 Surface Roughness

Surface roughness is a component of surface texture. Surface roughness basically refers to
the variations in the height of the surface relative to a reference plane. It is in general
measured either along a single line profile or along a set of parallel line profiles as in the
case of a surface map.

A surface is composed of a large number of len gth scales of superimposed roughness that
are generally characterized by three different types of roughness parameters, via; amplitude
parameters, spacing parameters and hybrid parameters. Amplitude parameters are measures
of the vertical characteristics of the surface deviations and examples of such parameters are
centre line average roughness, root mean square roughness, skewness, kurtosis and peak -to-
valley height.

Spacing parameters are measures of the horizontal characteristics of the surface deviation s
and examples of such parameters are mean line peak spacing, high spot count, peak count
etc.

On the other hand, hybrid parameters are a combination of both the vertical and horizontal
characteristics of the surface deviations and examples of such parameters are root mean
square slope of profile, root mean square wavelength, core roughness depth, reduced peak
height, valley depth, material ratio, peak area and valley area. Hybrid parameters are
considered more powerful than a parameter solely based on amplitude or spacing to
characterize the surface topography.

Roughness is usually characterized by either of the two statistical height descriptors advocated by the
International Standardization Organization (ISO) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
(Anonymous, 1985). These are CLA (Centre-line average, Ra) and RMS (Root mean square, Rq). Two
other statistical height descriptors are rarely used – skewness (Sk) and kurtosis (K).

9
1.5 Roughness Parameters

(a) Centre Line Average (CLA)

It is defined as the arithmetic mean deviation of the surface height from the mean line
through the profile. It is also termed as average roughness ( R a). Here the mean line is
defined so as to have equal areas of the profile above and below it. It may also defined by
the given equation-

1 𝐿
𝑅𝑎 = ∫ |𝑍(𝑥)| 𝑑𝑥
𝐿 0

where 𝑍(𝑥) is the height of the surface above the mean line at a distance 𝑥 from the origin
and 𝐿 is the measurement length of the profile.

Fig 4. Centre Line Average of a surface over sampling length L

The Ra value of a surface profile depends on its manufacturing method and some typical
Ra (μm) values are: rough casting – 10, coarse machining – 3 to 10, fine machining – 1 to
3, grinding and polishing – 0.2 to 1 and lapping – 0.02 to 0.4. The disadvantage of using
the Ra value is that this fails to distinguish between a sharp spiky profile and a gently wavy
profile. It is possible for surfaces of widely varying profiles with different frequencies and
shapes to have the same Ra value.

Fig5. Various surface profile having same Ra value

(b) Root Mean Square (RMS) Roughness

It’s defined as the root mean square deviation of the profile from the mean line. it is
denoted as the symbol Rq . The equation is given as –
10
 1 𝐿
𝑅𝑞 = √ ∫ |𝑍(𝑥)|2 𝑑𝑥
𝐿 0

(c) Skewness & Kurtosis

The skewness is a measure of the departure of a distribution curve from its

symmetry and kurtosis is the measure of the bump on a distribution curve. The
skewness and kurtosis in the normalized form may also be given as shown
below in Eq 3 and 4 respectively.
1 𝐿
𝑆𝑘 =
𝜎3𝐿
∫0 𝑍 3 𝑑𝑥 (3)

1 𝐿
𝐾= ∫ 𝑍 4 𝑑𝑥
𝜎4𝐿 0
(4)

Where, σ is the standard deviation of the distribution of asperity heights.

1.7 Friction
Every machine consist of a system of piece or lines connected together in such a manner
that if one is made to move, they all receive a motion. So, there may either –

(i) Sliding of the moving element upon the surface of the fixed element in directional to
the points of restraint.

(ii) Rolling of the moving element upon the surface of the fixed element.

(iii) a combination of both Rolling and Sliding.

Friction is defined as the force of resistance to motion that occurs when a solid body
moves tangentially with respect to the surface of another body that it touches. The friction
force acts in a direction opposite to that of motion. The friction force required to initiate
the sliding is called the static friction force, and that required t o maintain sliding is called
kinetic friction force, the value of which is usually lower than the former for the same

11
 combination of material and other parameters. Experimental observation on friction has led
to formulation of three entirely empirical laws of sliding friction.

First law of friction:

The first law states that the friction force F between a pair of loaded sliding surfaces is
proportional to the normal load W, that is, the tangential force required to slide a body
along a surface is proportion al to the weight of the body. The proportionality constant
between F and W is known as the coefficient of friction, μ.

The first law can be expressed by the simple equation : F = μW

Where μ is called the coefficient of friction. This expression also implie s the second law.

Second law of friction:

The second law of friction is derived from the first: The friction force is independent of the
apparent area of contact. Once sliding stops, the force needed to initiate sliding (static
friction) is greater than th e force needed to sustain sliding (kinetic friction). The
dependence of friction force with sliding velocity is very small.

Third law of friction:

Kinetic friction is independent of sliding velocity, which is really an approximation.

The first two laws are known as Amontons laws. The third law is due to Coulomb.

Static & Kinetic Friction:

When considering how friction originates at the atomic level, it is convenient to separate
the problem into two regimes:

1. Static friction: The force needed to overcome the potential energy barriers between
atoms in order to initiate sliding.

2. Kinetic friction: the mechanisms for dissipating energy as atoms slide over each other.

Fig.9 shows a friction curve as a function of sliding displacement. The maximum friction value appears after a short
sliding distance from the origin.

1.8 Wear
The Removal of material from one or both of two solid surfaces in relative motion (sliding,
rolling or impact) is termed as wear. Surface damage due to material displacement with no
net change in volume or weight is also called wear. It occurs as natural consequence and

12
 mostly through surface interactions or asperities. Wear can be desi rable or undesirable.
Desirable wear is such cases like wear in machining , polishing, grinding, shearing, even
writing with pencil whereas undesirable case are all the machine application in bearings,
gears, cams and seals. Sometimes we assumes that high frictions means high wear rate. But
it is not true. Solid Lubricants and polymers show relatively low friction but high wear
while ceramics show moderate friction with extremely low wear. In some isolated case,
frictions and wear may be co-related.

Types of Wear
Adhesive Wear –It is takes place when two nominally solid surfaces are in sliding contact
or they are pressed into one another, which promotes material transfer between the two
surface. Adhesive wear can be described by the Archard model. Accordin g to the Archard’s
theory of sliding wear, shearing of the asperity junctions can occur in one of the two bodies
depending upon the relative magnitude of interfacial adhesion strength and the breaking
(shearing) strength of surrounding local regions.Fig.10 shows plastic deformation of wear
debris.

Fig.10 Model for adhesion, transference of material & plastic deformation of wear debris.

Abrasive Wear- The term ‘abrasive wear’ includes two types of wear situation, known as
two-body abrasion and three body abrasion, respectively. In both the cases, a soft surface is
ploughed by a relatively hard material. In two -body abrasion, a rough hard surface slides
against a relatively soft mating surface. In three -body abrasion rough hard particles trapped
between the two sliding surfaces cause one or both of them to undergo abrasive wear.
Examples of two-body abrasion are grinding, cutting & machining whereas those of three -
body abrasion are free abrasive lapping & polishing. In abrasive wear, material may be
removed from the surface by several plastic deformation modes. These include ploughing,
wedge formation & cutting as shown below in Fig11.(a,b,c)

13
 Fig.11.a Ploughing Fig.11.b Wedge Formation

Fig.11.c Cutting
Corrosive Wear- Corrosive (or chemical) wear takes place when sliding occurs in a
corrosive environment. Corrosive wear in the air is generally called oxidative wear as the
most dominant corrosive medium in the air is oxygen. The corrosive products (oxides ) form
a micrometer thick film on the surface and sliding action wears it away. In absence of
sliding, the film tends to arrest the corrosion. Thus corrosive wears requires both corrosion
(chemical action) and rubbing (sliding action).

Fatigue Wear- Surface Fatigue Wear of the surface is a process by which the surface is
weakened by cyclic loading, which is one type of general material fatigue. Fatigue wear is
produced when the wear particles are detached by cyclic crack growth of micro cracks on
the surface. These micro surface are either super ficial cracks or subsurface cracks. It is
extremely important to improve the resistance of the material against fracture in aerospace
application.

14
Friction-Wear Relationship
Friction and wear are closely related but are distinct phenomena. Wear mechanisms
contribute to friction because wear processes require the application of force and consume
energy. At the same time, wear mechanisms are affected by the shear loading resulti ng from
friction and by the increase in temperature caused by frictional heating, so friction can
influence wear behavior. In addition, friction behavior can be influenced by the changes to
a surface caused by wear.

There is no general correlation between the coefficient of friction and the normalized wear
rates. However, changes in the coefficient of friction with time or sliding distance are often
associated with changes in wear behavior. In some cases, a reduction in the coefficient of
friction with continued sliding (transition from running -in to steady-state) can be
associated with the formation of a stable transfer film.

The friction coefficient–wear rate relationship under sliding conditions is a function of the mechanism of
kinetic energy conversion and dissipation processes. The same values of friction coefficient can be
obtained for different wear mechanisms due to a different mechanism of friction work dissipation. More
energy must be dissipated from the contact as the sliding frictional work increases.

15
CHAPTER 2

16
 EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
Procurement of samples

Select different combinations of Loads according to given

Sliding Speed

Cleaning of Disc and

Samples with Acetone

Measurement of Weight of
samples before test

COF
Perform Tribological Tests Results
on each samples.
Wear Test

Measurement of Weight e COF Results

after the test
sults

COF Results
Calculate The Weight Loss & Plotting The relevant
Graphs showing the responses of the material to the
variation of given Load & Sliding Speed

Conclusion

Fig.12 Flow chart of the steps in the experiment

17
2.2 Specimen
AISI 1040 steel specimens of 30mm length and having the same pin diameters 6mm are
used as the material for observing the effect o f variation in load and sliding speed on wear
results. The cross-sectional ends of each sample were ground and polished to ensure similar
surface finish on each of the samples. These specimens are referred to here as ‘pin’
specimens and their dimensions are chosen corresponding to the specification of specimen
holder/collet of the tribo-tester.

Fig.13 Test Specimen (AISI 1040)

2.3 Friction and Wear Test

Sliding wear tests in continuous motion were carried out using a Trio - Tester machine with
the pin-on disc configuration under dry sliding conditions. The load was applied on pin by
deadweight through pully string arrangement. The counter disc with 200 mm diameter was
driven by an electric motor. The speed of the electric motor is changed by means of an A.C.
speedcontrol converter. The pin specimen (stationary) was mounted in a holder so that it
could make contact with the disc during the wear test. Friction occurred continuously along
a single track over which the abrasive ability gradually deteriorated. The radius of a single
track was 60 mm. Wear was determined over a friction path of 500 m during the wear test.

Before starting the friction and wear test all the samples were weighed in a digital weight
balance (Fig.12). After the completion of each tribo -test of all samples the weight is again
measured in order to measure wear by weight loss.

Fig.14a Digital Weight balance

18
The tribological tests of the specimens are carried out on a pin -on-disc type tribological
test setup (TR-208-M2) (Fig.13) at room temperature (25°C).

Fig.14 shows the detailed & labelled picture of Wear and friction monitor.

Time
Regulator

Speed Regulator
Power
Start/ Stop
Switch
Switch

Fig14b. Wear and Friction Monitor Controller

Graduated Scale
Weight LVDT Test Chamber

Pully String
Counter Face Disc
Specimen Holder
Loading Lever

Fig.14c Labelled Picture of Wear and Friction Monitor (TR-208-M2)

System
Wear and Friction
Monitor Controller

Test Chamber

Fig.14d Wear and Friction Monitor and controller, system

19
First for all load variation (0.5 kgf,1.0 kgf, 1.5 kgf, 2 kgf) all the samples were rubbed
against the top of the rotating disc (EN31) and the test was carried out For different values
of under different speed (100rpm, 150rpm, 200rpm, 250rpm). during the wear test and the
wear track diameter was fixed to 60 mm. While conducting the test the sample were
properly mounted on to the tribo tester so that there was no gap betw een the specimen and
the counter disc. After the test, weight loss of the samples were calculated and from the
frictional force data obtained, the co efficient of friction was calculate as per the equation
F=µN;

where F=Frictional Force, N=Normal Reaction to the Applied Load and

µ= Coefficient of Friction

Fig14d. Autocad Schematic diagram Of Pin-on-Disc Set Up

Table 1: Tribo-testing parameters

Sl. No. Tribological Values

Parameters
1. Track Diameter 60
(mm)
2. Speed (RPM) 100,150,200,250
3. Duration (Sec) 1592.36,1061.57,796.18,636.94
4. Load(kgf) 0.5,1,1.5,2
5. Test Condition Dry

20
CHAPTER 3

21
 RESULT & DISCUSSION
3.1 Theoretical calculation:-
8 samples are used in this work, the method of wear calculation were used in this work is given below---

Wear rate by weight (W.R.W) = (W1-W2)*t/W1

Where, W1=weight of the sample before friction action.

W2= weight of the sample after friction action.

t= sliding duration which is depend upon sliding speed N.

Given, Track Diameter=D= 60 mm

Distance Travel=S= 500m

For The 1st Run, N=200rpm; W1=6.6288 ; W2=6.628

So, Sliding Velocity= V= (ПDN)/60= (3.14 * 60 *10-3 *200)/60= 0.628 m/s.

We know, S=Vt

or, t= S/V= 500/0.628=796.18 s

So, W.R.W= (0.008*796.18)/ 6.6288= 0.096087≈0.0961

Similarly, for N=250 rpm , t=636.94s ;N=150 rpm, t=1061.57s;N=100 rpm, t=1592.36 s

3.2 Wear behaviour

In order to understand the response of the specimen to variation in load and sliding speed continuous
motion wear test were carried out at varying load and speeds for sliding distance of 500 m. The detailed
parameters are provided in the Table 1. Table No. 2, Table No. 3, Table No. 4, Table No. 5 shows the
weight loss and wear rates by weight for the specimen at speeds of 100rpm,150rpm,200rpm and 250rpm,
repectively.

Fig. 16-Fig18 shows the graphical representation of the variation of weight loss against Load . As it can
be observed from the graphs weight loss due to wear increases more or less linearly as load increases.
Hence, it maybe assumed that the wear resistance of the specimen( AISI1040) decreases with increasing
load. During these tests, the sliding speed was constant.

Fig19- Fig22 depicts the wear response of the specimen to variation in sliding speed at constant loads. It
can be observed that the weight loss increases linearly as Sliding speed increases.

22
Table2. Load Variation With Constant Sliding Speed N=100rpm
Sl Initial Final Track Load Sliding Weight Wear Mean Co-
No. Weight Weight Diameter (kgf) Speed Loss Rate By efficient
(gm) (gm) (mm) (rpm) (gm) Weight Of
Friction
1 6.636 6.6354 60 0.5 100 0.0006 0.144 0.785
2 6.635 6.6342 60 1 100 0.0008 0.192 0.486
3 6.6256 6.6242 60 1.5 100 0.0014 0.3365 0.455
4 6.6242 6.6222 60 2 100 0.0020 0.481 0.594

Table3. Load Variation With Constant Sliding Speed N=150rpm

Sl Initial Final Track Load Sliding Weight Wear Mean Co-
No. Weight Weight Diameter (kgf) Speed Loss Rate By efficient
(gm) (gm) (mm) (rpm) (gm) Weight Of
Friction
1 6.6163 6.6156 60 0.5 150 0.0007 0.1123 0.709
2 6.6156 6.6147 60 1 150 0.0009 0.1444 0.457
3 6.6132 6.6116 60 1.5 150 0.0016 0.257 0.641
4 6.6116 6.6094 60 2 150 0.0022 0.3532 0.659

Table4. Load Variation With Constant Sliding Speed N=200rpm

SL Initial Final Track Load Sliding Weight Wear Mean Co-
No. Weight Weight Diameter (kgf) Speed Loss Rate By efficient
(gm) (gm) (mm) (rpm) (gm) Weight Of
Friction
1 6.6288 6.628 60 0.5 200 0.0008 0.0961 0.69
2 6.6025 6.6015 60 1 200 0.0010 0.121 0.56
3 6.6015 6.599 60 1.5 200 0.0025 0.3015 0.541
4 6.6279 6.6244 60 2 200 0.0035 0.4204 0.421

Table5. Load Variation With Constant Sliding Speed N=250rpm

SL Initial Final Track Load Sliding Weight Wear Mean
No. Weight Weight Diameter (kgf) Speed Loss Rate By Co-
(gm) (gm) (mm) (rpm) (gm) Weight efficient
Of
Friction
1 6.6201 6.6192 60 0.5 250 0.0009 0.0866 0.776
2 6.6192 6.6174 60 1 250 0.0018 0.1732 0.718
3 6.5996 6.5969 60 1.5 250 0.0027 0.261 0.644
4 6.5969 6.5921 60 2 250 0.0048 0.4634 0.622

23
 Weight Loss Vs. Load Weight Loss Vs. Load
0.0025 0.0025
Weight Loss (g)

Weight Loss (g)

0.0020 0.0020

0.0015 0.0015

0.0010 0.0010
100 rpm 150 rpm
0.0005 0.0005

0.0000 0.0000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Load (kgf) Load (kgf)

Fig15.Weight Loss Vs. Load With Constant Sliding Speed N=100rpm Fig16. Weight Loss Vs. Load With Constant Sliding Speed N=150rpm

Weight Loss Vs. Load Weight Loss Vs. Load

0.0040 0.0060
0.0035
0.0050
Weight Loss (g)

0.0030
Weight Loss (g) 0.0040
0.0025
0.0020 0.0030
0.0015
0.0020
0.0010 250 rpm
200 rpm 0.0010
0.0005
0.0000 0.0000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Load (kgf) Load (kgf)

Fig17. Weight Loss Vs. Load With Constant Sliding Speed N=200rpm Fig18. Weight Loss Vs. Load With Constant Sliding Speed N=250rpm

Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed
0.0010 0.0020
0.0009 0.0018
0.0008 0.0016
Weight Loss (g)

Weight Loss (g)

0.0007 0.0014
0.0006 0.0012
0.0005 0.0010
0.0004 0.0008
0.0003 0.5 kgf 0.0006 1 kgf
0.0002 0.0004
0.0001 0.0002
0.0000 0.0000
0 100 200 300 0 100 200 300
Sliding Speed (rpm) Sliding Speed (rpm)

Fig19. Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed With Load W=0.5 kgf Fig20. Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed With Load W= 1 kgf

24
 Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed
0.0030 0.0060

0.0025 0.0050
Weight Loss (g)

Weight Loss (g)

0.0020 0.0040

0.0015 0.0030

0.0010 1.5 kgf 0.0020 2 kgf

0.0005 0.0010

0.0000 0.0000
0 100 200 300 0 100 200 300
Sliding Speed (rpm) Sliding Speed (rpm)

Fig21. Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed With Load W=1.5 kgf Fig22. Weight Loss Vs. Sliding Speed With Load W= 2 kgf

25
3.3 Co-Efficient Of Friction
As observed from Fig.23-Fig.38 the CoF follows the same patterns as suggested by the literature. The
range of CoF is found to be 0.421-0.785. At some position in the graph during continuous running the
CoF is observed to have dropped instantaneously, this is due to the inhomogenetic of the testing
specimen. As suggested by the literature, also observed from the conducted experiment there’s no direct
correlation between the CoF and the wear results.

COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration

1.2 0.60
Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

1 0.50

0.8 0.40

0.6 0.30

0.4 CoF COF

0.20

0.2 0.10

0 0.00
0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 500 1000 1500 2000
Sliding Duration (s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.23 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.785 at 0.5kgf & 100 rpm Fig.24 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.486 at 1kgf & 100 rpm

COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration

0.70 0.80
Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

0.60 0.70

0.50 0.60
0.50
0.40
0.40
0.30
COF 0.30 COF
0.20 0.20
0.10 0.10
0.00 0.00
0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 500 1000 1500 2000
Sliding Duration (s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.25 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.455 at 1.5kgf & 100 rpm Fig.26 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.594 at 2 kgf & 100 rpm

26
 COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration
1.2 0.60

Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

1 0.50
Co-efficient Of Friction

0.8 0.40

0.6 0.30
CoF COF
0.4 0.20

0.2 0.10

0 0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 500 1000 1500
Sliding Duration(s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.27 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.709 at 0.5kgf & 150 rpm Fig.28 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.457 1kgf & 150rpm

COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration

0.80 0.80
Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

0.70 0.70
0.60 0.60
0.50 0.50
0.40 0.40
0.30 COF 0.30 COF
0.20 0.20
0.10 0.10
0.00 0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Sliding Duration (s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.29 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.641 at 1.5kgf &150 rpm Fig.30 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.659 at 2kgf & 150rpm

COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration

1 0.80
Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

0.70
0.8
0.60
0.6 0.50
0.40
0.4 COF 0.30 COF
0.20
0.2
0.10
0 0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Sliding Duration (s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.31 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.69 at 0.5kgf & 200 rpm Fig.32 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.56 at 1kgf & 200 rpm

27
 COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration
0.60 0.60
Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

0.50 0.50
0.40 0.40
0.30 0.30
0.20 COF COF
0.20

0.10 0.10

0.00 0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Sliding Duration (s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.33 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.541 at 1.5kgf & 200 rpm Fig.34 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.421 at 2kgf & 200 rpm

COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration

0.90 0.90
Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

0.80 Co-efficient Of Friction (μ) 0.80

0.70 0.70
0.60 0.60
0.50 0.50
0.40 0.40
0.30 COF 0.30 COF
0.20 0.20
0.10 0.10
0.00 0.00
0 200 400 600 800 0 200 400 600 800
Sliding Duration (s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.35 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.776 at 0.5kgf & 250 rpm Fig.36 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.718 at 1kgf & 250 rpm

COF Vs. Sliding Duration COF Vs. Sliding Duration

0.80 0.70
Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

Co-efficient Of Friction (μ)

0.70 0.60
0.60
0.50
0.50
0.40
0.40
0.30
0.30 COF COF
0.20
0.20
0.10 0.10

0.00 0.00
0 200 400 600 800 0 200 400 600 800
Sliding Duration (s) Sliding Duration (s)

Fig.37 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.644 at 1.5kgf & 250 rpm Fig.38 CoF Vs Sliding Duration With Mean μ=0.622 at 2kgf & 250rpm

28
CHAPTER 4

29
 CONCLUSION
 As the Load increase at a constant sliding speed, the weight loss due to wear also
increases.
 As the Sliding speed at a constant load, the wear rate also increases.
 weight loss is minimum at 0.5 kgf and 100 rpm.
 weight loss is maximum at 2 kgf and 250 rpm.
 wear is minimum at 0.5kgf and 250 rpm.
 wear is maximum at 2kgf and 100 rpm.
 CoF ranges from 0.421 to 0.78.
 Trend is almost same for each case of weight loss of wear as well as coefficient of
friction.
 Though the coefficient of friction does not depend upon the contact area but on the
material, but still we find different kind of value of coefficient of friction.

30
CHAPTER 5

31
 REFERENCE
 Prasanta Sahoo, Engineering Tribology,PHI Learning Private Limited,2005.
 A. Ravikiran , S. Jahanmir. Effect of contact pressure and load on wear of alumina.
 Pradeep L Menezes, Sudeep P. Ingole, Michael Nosonovsky, Satish V. Kailas, Michael
R. Lovell, Tribology for Scientists and Engineers
 Stachowiak , Gwidon W. & Batchelor, Andrew W. Engineering Tribology
 Nadesta R. Tedesco, Eliria M. J. A. Pallone, Roberto Tomasi, Effects of the Pin-on-Disc
Parameters on the Wear of Alumina.
 NPTEL Tribology courses.
 V.P Sergienko, S.N. Bukharov and A.V Kupreev, “The Noise and Vibration in Break
System Cars”, “Journal of Friction and Wear”, Vol.29 No3,2008.

32