EP Laboratories, Inc.

... the solution to your testing needs

Analytical Report
TRB-L 111104 REV3
Supersedes TRB-L 111104 REV2

Method:

Linear Reciprocating Ball-on-Flat

Wear Testing

Instrument:

Tribometer

Sample(s):

Steel, Al, Polymer against Sandstone (6)

Customer:

Top-Co LP
3443 N. Sam Houston Pkwy W. Suite 200, Houston TX 77086

Authorized by: Ethel Poir

Director, Lab Services
Date:

04 November 2011

EP Laboratories, Inc. 196 Technology Drive Suite A, Irvine CA 92618

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Principle

Standards and Practices

Instrument and Software

Specimens

Test Conditions and Parameters

Results

General comments pertaining to wear & friction testing

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 2

LINEAR RECIPROCATING BALL on FLAT WEAR TESTING

Principle

This test method involves two specimens: a flat specimen and a spherically
ended specimen (herein called ball specimen) which slides against the flat
specimen. These specimens move relative to one another in a linear, back
and forth sliding motion. The load is applied vertically downward through the
ball specimen against the horizontally mounted flat specimen.3
Since this test method involves reciprocating sliding where changes in the
sliding velocity and direction of motion occur during the test, constant velocity
conditions are not maintained. Dimensional changes for both ball and flat
specimens are used to calculate wear volumes and wear rates.3
Friction forces are measured during the test and may be used to assess
changes in the contact conditions or the kinetic friction coefficient as a function
of time.3 The ball is mounted on a stiff lever, designed as a frictionless force
transducer. As the flat specimen is moved back and forth, resulting frictional
forces acting between the ball and the flat specimen are measured by very
small deflections of the lever using an LVDT sensor. This simple method
facilitates the determination and study of friction and wear behaviour of almost
every solid state material combination, with varying time, contact pressure,
velocity, temperature, humidity, lubrication, etc.

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 3

Standards and Practices

Testing was performed in accordance with ASTM G133 Procedure A.
However, test is not in full compliance with the standard because:
The static partner is not a ball with a radius of 4.76mm
The normal force is 5N instead of 25N
The oscillating frequency is 2Hz instead of 5Hz
The test duration is 41min instead of 16min40s; however, the sliding
distance is 100m
No characterization information provided for the samples
Samples were tested as-received, they were not cleaned.
Instrument and Software
Test was performed with a Pin-on-Disk Tribometer from CSM Instruments,
S/N 18-281 with linear module S/N 1-120; software InstrumX version 2.7.
Profiles were processed and analyzed with the surface analysis software
Mountains from Digital Surf.
Specimens
Polymer (1x1x1/4), Steel and Aluminum (2x1x1/4) tested against 1
diameter sandstone parts. Surface finish, composition, microstructure and
processing treatment not specified.
Test conditions and Parameters
The following test parameters were used:
Applied normal force:
5 N (actual 5.027N) (1.1 lbf)
Stroke length:
10 mm (0.39 in)
Sliding distance:
100 m (328 ft)
Test duration:
41 min
Max linear speed:
0.063 m/s (2.48 in/s)
Frequency of oscillation: 2 s-1
Number of cycles:
5 000
Static specimen:
Coupon
Mobile specimen:
Sandstone
Lubricant:
none
Cleaning static specimen: none
Cleaning mobile specimen:none
Atmosphere:
Air
Relative Humidity:
40-41%
Temperature:
22-23C (room temperature)

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 4

Results
Note 1: The results relate only to the tested items. Samples were tested
under laboratory conditions and environment. The use, interpretation
and extrapolation of the results are customers sole responsibility and
liability.
Note 2: is the dynamic coefficient of friction, with conditions of wear.
Note 3: Sandstone specimens were not as flat as the coupons specimens.
The wear tracks were uneven; complete contact between the coupons
and the sandstone was not possible.
Note 4: Steel specimen: it would be recommended to perform testing using a
polished specimen in order to improve the evaluation of material loss.
Note 5: In order to improve the evaluation of the material loss, and the
evaluation of the comparative wear behaviour of the samples, it would
be recommended to perform testing using flatter pieces of sandstone,
or a spherical/radiused piece of material.

Specimen

Average Coefficient of Friction

2 way extraction
[]

Steel
Aluminum
Polymer Control
Polymer Diesel
Polymer -60C
Polymer 300F

0.797
0.575
0.506
0.479
0.544
0.556
Accuracy: 0.004

Steel
Aluminum
Polymer Control
Polymer Diesel
Polymer -60C
Polymer 300F

Coupon
Cross Section
Wear Track*
[ mil2 ]

Coupon
Cross Section
Wear Track*
[ microns2 ]

Coupon
Volume Loss*

Sandstone
Volume Loss

[ mm3 ]

[ mm3 ]

1.00 1.01
48.60 34.12
24.75 27.71
37.25 27.94
19.02 9.18
24.21 11.54

645 649
31 353 22 015
15 969 17 878
24 034 18 027
12 269 5 925
15 618 7 448

0.0065
0.3135
0.1597
0.2403
0.1227
0.1562

*: Values computed with the average cross section of the wear track (average of 24 profiles)

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 5

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 6

Coefficient of Friction

Steel
As-Measured

1 way extraction

As-Measured

1 way extraction

Polymer Control
As-Measured

1 way extraction

Aluminum

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 7

Coefficient of Friction

Polymer Diesel
As-Measured

1 way extraction

Polymer -60C
As-Measured

1 way extraction

Polymer 300F
As-Measured

1 way extraction

TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 8

General comments pertaining to wear & friction testing

This test method is designed to simulate the geometry and motions that are
experienced in many types of rubbing components whose normal operation results in
periodic reversals in the direction of relative sliding. The wear resulting from this
mode of movement may differ from that experienced by the same materials sliding
continuously in only one direction (unidirectional sliding) even for comparable
durations of contact.3
Owing to the nature of this type of test, the wear scar on the ball specimen may not
always be circular or flat.3
The repeatability of tests on the same material will depend upon material
homogeneity, machine and material interaction1,2.
It is important to keep in mind that friction is a system property. Appropriate caution
must be used when comparing or using data from different sources and systems.
Friction coefficients of material couples obtained on one type of test apparatus may
be significantly different from coefficients of the same material couples tested on a
different apparatus2.
The precision of wear determinations is dependent on the wear characteristics of the
material under the imposed testing conditions. Some materials wear evenly so as to
produce clearly defined wear scars, and wear dimensions can be measured with a
higher degree of precision than for certain other materials which wear in an uneven
manner and whose wear scars cannot be delineated as clearly.3
Unlike material combinations may wear at different rates depending on which material
is the ball specimen and which is the flat specimen. The ball specimen experiences
nominally constant contact, whereas the flat specimen surface experiences a
changing state of stress as the slider passes and may wear by a different set of
mechanisms. It should therefore not be assumed that the same relative wear
volumes would be obtained if materials for ball and flat specimens were reversed.3
The amount of wear in any system will, in general, depend upon the number of
system factors such as the applied load, machine characteristics, sliding speed,
sliding distance, the environment, and the material properties. The value of any wear
test method lies in predicting the relative ranking of material combinations. Since the
pin-on-disk test method does not attempt to duplicate all the conditions that may be
experienced in service (for example: lubrication, load, pressure, contact geometry,
removal of wear debris, and presence or corrosive environment), there is no
ensurance that the test will predict the wear rate of a given material under conditions
differing from those in the test.1
Reference 1:
Reference 2:
Reference 3:

ASTM G99 Standard Test Method for Wear Testing with a Pin-on-Disk
Apparatus
ASTM G115 Standard Guide for Measuring and Reporting Friction Coefficient
ASTM G133 Standard Test Method for Linearly Reciprocating Ball-on-Flat
Sliding Wear

END OF REPORT
TRB-L-111104 REV3 Page 9