See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/231001455

Tribological coatings: Contact mechanisms and selection

Article  in  Journal of Physics D Applied Physics · August 2007

DOI: 10.1088/0022-3727/40/18/S07

CITATIONS READS

77 1,885

3 authors, including:

Steven Ernest Franklin Kenneth Holmberg

Advanced Research Center for Nanolithography VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
46 PUBLICATIONS   701 CITATIONS    160 PUBLICATIONS   4,241 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Design beyond present codes, Materials in mining industry View project

UNITISS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Steven Ernest Franklin on 10 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

IOP PUBLISHING JOURNAL OF PHYSICS D: APPLIED PHYSICS
J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 40 (2007) 5463–5475 doi:10.1088/0022-3727/40/18/S07

Tribological coatings: contact

mechanisms and selection
A Matthews1 , S Franklin2 and K Holmberg3
1
Department of Engineering Materials, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK
2
Philips Applied Technologies, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
3
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Espoo, Finland

Received 15 February 2007, in final form 20 March 2007

Published 30 August 2007
Online at stacks.iop.org/JPhysD/40/5463

Abstract
This paper, which forms part of a special issue of this journal marking a 25th
year anniversary in tribology, aims to provide an appraisal of key issues in
coating tribology over that period. Two main inter-related strands are
emphasized. One is the continuing move down the length scale in terms of
the fundamental understanding of tribological contacts. This has been
particularly useful in aiding the development of new coatings by identifying
their property requirements at different scale levels. A second strand relates
to the ongoing imperative to be able to design and select coatings to meet
practical friction and wear requirements. This selection problem requires a
robust methodology, and one such is elaborated in the paper, which takes
account of the requirements of different types of tribological contacts and
uses a combination of theoretical and empirical information. Challenges
still remain in this regard, and the paper seeks to provide a basis for further
developments to improve coatings and to ensure their effective selection.
(Some figures in this article are in colour only in the electronic version)

1. Tribology across the length scales
As discussed in [1–3], the friction and wear processes in
any contact involve deformation (and, usually, chemical
interactions) occurring simultaneously at different scale
levels. In much of the scientific literature on this subject
tribological phenomena are described with a characteristic
set of parameters and scientific approaches pertinent for one
scale level which may often be very different from another
scale level. An illustration of the factors arising at different
tribological scale levels has been presented by Holmberg [2]
and the most important of these are illustrated in figure 1,
which also illustrates how attention to tribology-related effects
has progressively moved down the length scales with time.
Friction and wear became increasingly important during the
start of the Industrial Revolution, as machinery such as the
spinning wheel, weaving loom and steam engine were required
to operate efficiently and reliably. Gradually, attention
focussed on discrete components and their interactions, and
then, in the middle of the 20th Century, the scientific discipline
which we now know as tribology saw a considerable growth
in research, focussing primarily on the modelling and study of
contacts at the asperity level. More recently, attention has
begun to focus at the molecular and atomic level in order
to better clarify and influence tribological effects observed
on larger scales; indeed, tribology is now firmly part of
the ‘nano’ revolution—gaining greatly from new equipment
developments which enable surfaces to be studied in the
nanometre size range. So, we can see that there are five
important ‘scales’ in tribology:
Nanotribology or molecular tribology includes phenom-
ena related to the interaction between molecules and atoms,
such as the effects of van der Waal’s forces and related in-
teratomic phenomena, determined by the crystal and bonding
structures of materials.
Microtribology relates to aspects such as asperity
interactions. Phenomena such as fracture, elastic and plastic
deformation, debris formation, surface layer formation and
topography effects are all important at this scale.
Macrotribology relates to aspects such as the longer range
stresses present within contacting bodies. It is thus important
in considering the combined loading response of the substrate
and coating, particularly in highly loaded applications like
gears, bearing elements and rollers. Macrolevel stresses are

0022-3727/07/185463+13$30.00 © 2007 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 5463

A Matthews et al
Figure 1. Timeline illustrating the scales of tribology from unitribology to nanotribology.
Figure 2. Tribological contact mechanisms: (a) macromechanical, (b) material transfer, (c) micromechanical, (d) tribochemical and (e)
nanophysical. (image (e) after [8] and [16]).
responsible for observable wear mechanisms such as scuffing,
scoring and pitting, and may also lead to coating detachment
if the adhesion is inadequate.
Decitribology is related to defining and measuring typical
parameters originating from the interaction of components
and which define their performance, such as torque, forces,
vibrations, clearance and alignment.
Unitribology deals with the tribological factors which
influence the overall performance and efficiency of machines,
and includes aspects relating to their statistical reliability.
We shall discuss the current level of understanding of
tribological mechanisms at the first three of these scale levels,
since these are the ones in which the influence and effect of
coatings and their selection is most actively studied. Also,
within this paper, in accordance with the book by Holmberg
and Matthews [1], we shall discuss this primarily in relation
to coatings which have such a thickness that the substrate
also plays a role in the tribological response of the surface,
i.e., in supporting the coating when under load (otherwise,
the coating would be so thick that it would behave as a bulk
material).
5464
2. Tribological mechanisms for coated surfaces at
different length scales.
It follows from the above that in trying to optimize coatings in a
holistic way it is particularly useful to analyse the tribological
changes at the nano-, micro- and macro scale and to study
separately the mechanical and the chemical changes as well
as material transfer taking place in the contact, as shown in
figure 2. We shall now discuss, with particular reference to
coated surfaces, some aspects pertinent to mechanisms at each
of these scales.
2.1. Nanoscale mechanisms
Techniques such as atomic force microscopy and other
surface analysis methods [4, 5] have opened the possibility to
investigate friction and wear phenomena on a molecular scale
and to measure frictional forces between contacting molecules
at the nano-Newton level. Increased computational power has
made it possible to study friction and associated phenomena
by molecular dynamic simulations of sliding surfaces and
to investigate the atomic scale contact mechanisms [6, 7].
As discussed in [3], only limited aspects of these complex

nanophysical phenomena have so far been investigated, and the
improving capabilities of the equipment and techniques used
to study interacting surfaces (and their individual properties) at
the nano-level is expected to provide new insights which will
enable coated surfaces to be optimized for the environmental
and contact conditions in which they operate. For example,
the sliding friction behaviour of diamond and ‘diamond-like’
carbon (DLC)-based coatings is now much better understood in
terms of a model based on two hydrogen-terminated diamond
surfaces, and this helps us to understand the influence of load,
crystallographic nature and bonding types [8,9]. Such coatings
have been of particular interest in nanoscale studies because of
their structure, inertness and good friction and wear properties.
Gao et al [10] showed that the three-dimensional structure
of an amorphous DLC film is paramount in determining its
mechanical properties. Particular orientations of sp2 ring-
like structures create films with both a high sp2 content and
high elastic constants. Films with graphite-like top layers
parallel to the substrate have lower elastic constants than
films with large amounts of sp3 -hybridized carbon. Several
of the most recent studies of DLC coatings indicate that the
general explanation for their extremely low coefficient of
friction, down to µ = 0.001 and below [11, 12] that has been
measured is related to three effects. The surfaces are extremely
smooth so asperity interlocking effects are eliminated, the
surfaces are hard so ploughing effects are eliminated and the
dangling bonds of the carbon structure are attached to hydrogen
atoms creating inert hydrophobic surfaces that exhibit almost
no frictional resistance [13]. This model indicates that no
internal material shear is taking place and that the hydrogen
planes separate the surfaces. Of course, this means that the
friction and wear phenomena are dictated by the availability
of hydrogen in the contact (either from the coating material
and/or the environment). These considerations may restrict the
practical applications available to such coatings. It may also (as
discussed later) mean that nanocomposite coatings allowing a
controlled supply of (for example) a ‘lubricious’ element may
offer the best potential for practical applications. Ultimately,
the performance will rely on a combination of effects, with the
level of coating adhesion being the ultimate factor determining
whether a coating will survive in service, and that depends on
factors such as the effectiveness of any interlayer in controlling
atomic forces between the substrate and coating [9]. There is
evidence [14] that, under elevated temperature conditions, such
interlayers may fail to accommodate the thermally induced
interfacial forces—resulting in a ‘microscale’ delamination.
The improved understanding of the origin of friction at
the atomic scale and even why friction exists has resulted in an
examination of the relationship between the commonly used
laws of friction at a macroscale and the molecular frictional
behaviour on a nanoscale. There have been suggestions that
friction arises from atomic lattice vibrations occurring when
atoms close to one surface are set into motion by the sliding
action of atoms in the opposing surface [15]. Thus some
of the mechanical energy needed to slide one surface over
the other would be converted to sound energy, which is then
eventually transformed into heat [16–19]. Tervo [20] found
that friction correlates to some extent with the Rayleigh surface
waves. This would suggest that friction arises mainly from the
elastic interactions, i.e. lattice vibrations on the surfaces due
Tribological coatings: contact mechanisms and selection
to sliding motion. The velocity of a Rayleigh surface wave
is dependent on Poisson’s ratio, shear modulus and density.
These observations arising from nano-level investigations
reveal that (amongst other things) the elastic properties of
surfaces are critical to their tribological performance. Again,
as we shall see later, these elastic properties can best be
optimized by the use of nanocomposite coatings.
2.2. Microscale mechanisms
As we have already seen, the nano-level mechanisms influence
the microlevel effects, and in turn the origin of the friction
and wear phenomena that we observe on the macro level is
found in the mechanisms that take place at the microlevel.
The integration of all the micromechanical mechanisms results
in the macromechanical mechanisms discussed later. The
micromechanical tribological mechanisms consider the stress
and strain at an asperity level, the crack generation and
propagation, material liberation and single particle formation.
In typical engineering contacts these phenomena are at the size
level of about one micrometre or less.
Shear and fracture are two basic mechanisms for the
first nucleation of a crack and for its propagation until it
results in the formation of a wear scar and a wear particle.
These mechanisms have been discussed by, for example,
Argon [21], Suh [22], Kato [23, 24], Gerde and Marder [25],
but still there is an incomplete understanding of these
fundamental phenomena. Another way to consider tribological
micromechanical mechanisms is by using the velocity
accommodation concept developed by Berthier et al [26] and
Singer et al [27]. Berthier and co-workers identified four
mechanisms by which velocity differences between contacting
surfaces can be accommodated: elastic deformation, fracture,
shear and rolling. If we assume that the second of
these mechanisms must be avoided, and that the third and
fourth may be feasible only in specifically designed systems,
then it follows that adequate elasticity is a requirement in
most contacts if failure is to be avoided. This velocity
accommodation concept has been extended by Holmberg and
Matthews [28] in the form of an ‘energy accommodation’
approach to the study of micromechanical tribological
mechanisms, which identifies the elastic modulus, shear
strength and fracture toughness as key material parameters,
and for a full analysis of the likely material response one would
need to know these for the asperities, the coating bulk and the
substrate. Another (related) way to consider micromechanical
mechanisms is to model the stresses and strains in a contact
and to simulate the different parameter interactions in the
contact. Such an approach is described in more detail in [3]
and [29–32]. In these models, it is, of course, evident that the
mechanical properties mentioned above are key to the response
of the coating-substrate system. Again, therefore, we see
the value in achieving such properties using a nanocomposite
coating approach, which uses the grain size as well as the
‘mix’ of phases to ‘extrinsically’ tailor the properties. Such
an approach can (for example) provide a means of gaining
control of elastic modulus, hardness/yield strength and fracture
toughness independently, and over a wider range of values,
than can be achieved using the alternative approach, which
is to try to select a specific coating material for its intrinsic
5465
A Matthews et al
Figure 3. Macromechanical contact conditions for different mechanisms that influence wear when a hard spherical slider moves on a coated
flat surface (after [1]).
mechanical properties. The latter method is much more
limiting in the range of properties which can be controlled,
and their independence from each other.
The chemical reactions taking place at the surfaces during
sliding contact, and also during the periods between repeated
contacts, change the composition of the outermost surface
layer and its mechanical properties. These are also normally
considered as microtribological effects (even if they have their
origin at atomic-level interactions). These ’tribochemical’
reactions have a considerable influence on both friction
and wear because they are both determined by, and to a
great extent influence, the properties of the surface, where
phenomena such as shear, cracking and asperity ploughing take
place [33]. The chemical reactions on the surfaces are strongly
influenced by the high local pressures at asperities and the flash
temperatures, which can be over 1000 ◦ C. Often, low friction in
sliding contacts is explained (even for relatively inert ceramic
coatings) by chemically formed low shear strength microfilms
on the hard coating or perhaps only on the asperity tips of the
coating. Since low shear strength may also represent low wear
resistance, the aim is thus to try to ensure that the availabliity
of the low shear strength phase is just sufficient to impart
the friction properties, but without excessive wear taking
place. Nanocomposite coatings hold considerable promise in
this regard—especially in the increasing search for ‘adaptive’
or ‘chameleon’ coatings, which can (for example) react to
changes in load and/or temperature, to provide a particular
composition within the shear layer to ensure low friction across
the temperature and load ranges [34]. The need for ‘controlled
release’ of the appropriate phases, and in sufficiently small
doses, is best met by nanocomposite coatings.
5466
2.3. Macroscale mechanisms
The macroscale tribological mechanisms usually emphasize
the mechanical responses by considering the stress distribution
and deformations in the whole contact, the elastic and plastic
deformations they result in and the wear particle formation
process and its dynamics. In contacts with one or two coated
surfaces, four main parameters that control the tribological
process have been defined [1]. They are the coating and
bulk deformability (hardness and elasticity), coating thickness,
surface roughness and debris and tribolayers in the contact.
The influence on the macromechanical wear mechanisms
of coating and substrate hardness, coating thickness, surface
roughness and debris present in the contact is illustrated in
figure 3. A diagram for the corresponding friction mechanisms
is given in [3]. It is important to notice that the three
geometrically related parameters, the film thickness, the
surface roughness and the wear debris, all typically appear
in the same dimension range from 0.01 to 10 µm. This means
that the interrelation between these dimensions for each real
case can be considered to have a dominating effect on both
friction and wear on macroscale. The mechanisms involved
are very different depending on whether the coating and the
substrate are soft or hard [1]. As in [1] and [3], we use the
words soft and hard for coatings in a general sense, meaning
their deformability and not only their hardness. The loading
conditions, both in the vertical and transverse direction, will
influence the stresses and strains in a surface and its friction and
wear behaviour. Hardness is one important parameter but not
the only one. The influence of elasticity in combination with
hardness gives a more reliable indicator of wear resistance than
hardness alone. This was recognized earlier by Oberle [35],
and has been revisited, and expanded upon, in recent years by
considering the reasons why the ratio of hardness (H ) to elastic

modulus (E) can give an effective indication of a surface’s
ability to resist mechanical degradation and failure [36, 37].
Since this relates primarily to wear resistance, and that is
not the usual purpose of applying soft coatings, we shall
devote our attention here to the ‘hard on soft’ combinations
covered in figure 3. Incidentally, though, a soft coating,
although typically applied to obtain its lower friction, and
conformability properties, can still benefit from the presence
of harder grains within its structure, to (for example) improve
its load carrying capabilities; then a nanocomposite structure
is preferred.
The use of hard thin coatings on softer substrate materials
is very popular in many tribological applications. The hard
coating can provide good wear protection and, with a suitable
choice of material and surface layer design, the friction can also
be low, against an appropriate counterface. However, with a
very thin hard layer on top of a softer substrate it may be that
neither the coating nor the substrate is able to support the load.
If the substrate deforms under the load, it is important that
the coating should be able to tolerate that deformation without
failure by debonding or cracking. Hence a long ‘elastic strain
to failure’ is required. That equates to a high ratio of yield
stress to elastic modulus—which also signifies a high ratio of
H /E.
Increased loads can also be resisted with thicker hard
coatings because of their load carrying capacity which reduces
deflections. However, in most cases (even with quite thick
coatings), it is the substrate which has the dominant influence
on the deformation. If this is the case then the use of
a thick coating can be a risky strategy, since the bending
stresses are greater for thicker coatings (at a given radius of
deformation), and thus yielding, and even fracture, of the
coating becomes more likely. The risk can be reduced by using
a coating comprising alternating layers of hard/soft/hard soft
(etc) materials. In this way, the softer (or, beneficially, more
elastic) layer can accommodate the shear stresses, ensuring
that the hard thin layers do not experience such high bending
stresses [38]. This illustrates that it can often be beneficial
to combine a low modulus material with a hard material in
a coating to optimize its response to deformation forces. A
further benefit of having a relatively soft phase present is that
it may be able to trap wear debris, and therefore take it out of
the system, and reduce its possibility to act as an abradant. Of
course, there is always a balance to be struck between the need
to have a certain degree of conformability and the need to have
a hard (and sufficiently stiff) surface which can resist failure
by fracture.
3. Global selection methodology, structured
approach
3.1. Wear mechanism considerations
In the above section we have presented a highly length-
scale specific approach to the consideration of tribological
mechanisms. This is very useful in providing an insight into the
friction and wear behaviour of coatings and in indicating how
coatings can be developed to provide enhanced performance.
However, in practical applications (for example, when devising
predictive wear rate models) such an approach is not usually
Tribological coatings: contact mechanisms and selection
taken, and the terminology used usually relates to a more
‘generalised’ (non-length-scale specific) definition of the wear
situation and mechanism. In the context of defining a coating
selection methodology (particularly to resist wear), we should
therefore bring the problem back to such a basic practical level,
and first present two important definitions:
• Wear: localized volume loss from a surface, leading to a
decrease in a local dimension.
• Wear mechanism: the mechanism by which the volume
loss occurs. If wear particles are formed, even though
these may greatly influence the wear mechanism and wear
rate, wear volume loss will occur only if the particles are
lost from the local surface.
Using these definitions, it is relatively easy to categorize
different wear mechanisms into two groups:
• Mechanical wear mechanisms:
◦ (Micro)ploughing/cutting: = ‘abrasion’, ‘erosion’,
etc, whereby (micro)chips of material are formed
through ploughing of a harder surface (or 3rd body)
in a softer one.
◦ Extraction: wear particles are formed by being ‘pulled
out’ from the surface, e.g. because an adhesive
junction is formed that is stronger than the local
cohesive strength of the material.
◦ Plastic deformation/compaction: volume is lost
locally by material on the surface being plastically
deformed and flowing away from the contact area or
compacted within the contact area.
• Physical–chemical wear mechanisms:
◦ Chemical wear: volume is lost by (electro)chemical
reaction. Oxidation may also occur, whereby
the oxidized material is subsequently lost, e.g.
by a mechanical mechanism: (micro)ploughing or
extraction.
◦ Physical wear: volume is lost through dissolution,
diffusion or evaporation.
Of course, the above mechanisms seldom occur
individually and independently, in practice, different
combinations of mechanisms occur. The relative contributions
of these mechanisms change in time during the course of the
wear process as a result of changes in the local conditions
within the tribological system. This may be regarded as the
single largest problem with wear prediction: predicting how
the system will change in time and, therefore, how the nature
and contribution of each acting wear mechanism will change.
The wear mechanism does not indicate the amount of wear
but merely describes how the wear takes place. However,
because most of the wear mechanisms can be described
mathematically and related to physical quantities, knowledge
or prediction of the predominant wear mechanisms at different
times during the process of the wear can be useful in predicting
how the wear rate changes in time. Of course, this is not the
sole knowledge needed; we also need to consider, for example,
the wear particle dynamics.
Incidentally, it can be argued that surface fatigue and
fretting are not wear mechanisms in themselves but special
conditions related to the local motion and environment that
cause one or more of the above mechanisms to be facilitated or
5467
A Matthews et al

Table 1. Generic characteristics of surface treatments and coatings.

Layer thickness and
properties (hardness, etc)
Surface growth
Applicable substrates
Layer-substrate transition
Layer-substrate adhesion
Surface treatment
Largely dependent on the substrate.
Percentage of the total layer thickness,
generally less easy to control accurately.
Limited by the substrate composition.
Usually relatively gradual with no abrupt
interface.
Generally excellent. (NB: residual stresses
are often compressive, which can enhance
fatigue life).
Surface coating
Largely independent of the substrate.
Equal to coating thickness, high precision is
usually possible.
Less dependent on the substrate.
Usually a relatively abrupt, clear interface.
Dependent on the coating process and substrate
(e.g. some processes build up increasing residual
stress with thickness, and this affects adhesion,
thus limiting the permissible thickness).

• A methodology is needed because of the complexity

Figure 4. Groups of surface treatments.
stimulated. In surface fatigue, repeated stressing of the surface
leads to a decrease in the local cohesive strength through
crack formation or other weakening. This then makes it easier
for the material to be removed from the surface through one
of the above wear mechanisms such as extraction or micro-
ploughing. Fretting wear is always associated with oscillations
or vibrations within the contact area with an amplitude small
enough to ensure that a significant number of the wear particles
formed remain within the contact area. With metals such as
steel, these particles become oxidized, often increasing the
friction and forming hard oxide particles that subsequently
stimulate wear mechanisms such as micro-ploughing. In the
case of polymers, the wear is greatly influenced by thermal
processes, probably more so than with metals and ceramics.
However, this thermal influence is not a wear mechanism in
itself, but a factor affecting which of the wear mechanisms are
predominant and also the amount of wear that takes place.
On a ‘micro’ scale, e.g. on the scale of asperity roughness,
volume loss in one location may lead to a volume increase
(negative wear) in another location on the same surface or on
the counterface. On a larger scale, e.g. the contact between
two interlocked gear teeth, these effects may be averaged out.
3.2. The need for a coating selection methodology
In view of the comments above, it is clear that those who
have to select coatings (such as design engineers) have a very
challenging task, not only in understanding the complexities
of tribo-contacts, but also in identifying a suitable coating
or treatment. There is a vital need to identify a selection
methodology for two main reasons:
• Firstly, we need to use coatings more widely and
effectively because the surface can have a dominant effect
on performance and reliability of engineering products.
of tribology and the very large number of surface
coating/treatment processes and materials available.
Whereas surface coatings cover the original surface,
interacting to only a limited extent with the substrate, surface
treatments merge with the original surface, changing the
microstructure and/or composition. From the point of view
of selection it is useful to distinguish between these groups
because of their general characteristics, which may give reason
to show preference for one or the other group and thus facilitate
the selection process, see table 1.
Figures 4 and 5 illustrate some of the sub-groups of surface
coatings and treatments which should be considered when
making a selection. Within each of these sub-groups, there
may be dozens of other processes and within those process
types there may be dozens, or even hundreds of further groups
and processes. Thus a structured methodology is needed,
which can break down the problem into discrete steps. Such a
methodology is illustrated in figure 6, which is expanded from
diagrams appearing in [1] and [39].
3.3. Pre-selection of coatings
In this paper the main emphasis is on tribological
functionality; however, in practice the first stage of the
selection process is often dominated by application-related
and economic/procurement factors. This is in fact the
most effective means of carrying out the first filtering of
potential solutions that can be realistically implemented,
see figure 7. The ticks indicated the most likely pairing
for which requirements of the application might dictate
that a particular process might be filtered in or out from
consideration. For example, if the required surface finish
is high, then certain processes may not be able to achieve
that, or may require expensive post-coat polishing. In this
context, a large number of parts to be coated may be a
positive factor if it allows automated polishing. Some of
these linkages between application requirements and process
characteristics are process and product specific. For example,
in some processes, if a large number of parts have to
be fitted into a coating chamber or vessel, then that can
limit the possible coating thickness and uniformity. With
regard to these process-related pre-selection issues, it is best
to consult coating process providers early in the product
design cycle. Also, for certain tribological applications in
which special functional requirements (e.g. bio-compatibility,

5468

and
Figure 5. Groups of surface coatings.
and
Economic and
Figure 6. Methodology for tribological coating selection.
optical, thermal or magnetic properties) are also sought, then
again, specialist advice should be sought.
By considering first the non-functional application
requirements, the number of practically possible coating
solutions can often be reduced very effectively. For these
remaining coatings, consideration of the functional surface
requirements for the contact conditions appropriate to the
application, in combination with the coating properties and
characteristics, provides a further filtering of the potential
solutions. See section 3.5 on contact types.
3.4. Testing
Following the first (pre-selection) stage, it is common, in
practice, to carry out laboratory tests under closely simulated
practical conditions, and subsequently bench or field tests in
order to arrive at the final selection, see figure 8. These
tests might include evaluation of the functional properties
mentioned above (e.g. to satisfy a legal toxicity-related
requirement). Laboratory ‘model’ and field tests each provide
a vital input to the selection process. For example, at a
fundamental level laboratory studies might provide data (such
as mechanical or chemical properties) used in modelling or
simulation calculations. Bench tests can provide a convenient
Tribological coatings: contact mechanisms and selection
(x) (y)
and
means of evaluation without the expense of a full field test
simulating in-service conditions. The aim will usually be
to narrow down the pool of potentially suitable coatings or
treatments by a sequential, iterative series of tests, supported
by a thorough appraisal of the contact conditions and the
application of design rules pertinent to those conditions as
mentioned in the following section.
To reiterate, testing is important at all stages of the
selection process, right from the initial pre-selection procedure
to the final product validation process.
3.5. Contact conditions
The main tribological contact conditions encountered are
illustrated in figure 9 [1, 40, 41]. In addition to sliding, the
others are abrasion, where a hard sharp counterface ploughs in
the surface; fatigue, where a low load is continuously repeated;
impact, where a dynamic load is applied, usually mainly
perpendicular to the surface; fretting, where the movement
is reciprocating with a small amplitude; chemical dissolution,
where high temperatures can induce mutual solubility at the
surface and corrosion, where the contact is within a corrosive
medium or environment. These may also be augmented by
lubrication, if an external fluid is introduced into the contact.
5469
A Matthews et al
The dominating contact features and the required surface
properties for these contact types have been discussed by
Holmberg and Matthews [3] and are listed (with additions)
in table 2.
3.5.1. Static contact condition. Many contact conditions
exist in combination with a ‘static’ loading state, which
may involve both elastic and plastic deformation. For the
elastic part of the deformation, the stress distribution (usually
Hertzian) must therefore be superimposed on (and probably
modify, or be modified by) the stresses induced by the other
and accuracy
r
Figure 7. The relevance of coating process characteristics to
application requirements.
Figure 8. Typical route to the final selection of a coating solution based on testing.
5470
contact type(s). The stress distribution is of course affected by
both the coating and substrate and the influence of the latter
must be fully considered.
3.5.2. Sliding condition. The tribological mechanisms
involved in sliding are fairly well known and have been
described earlier. In the case of conformal contacts, e.g. flat
sliding on flat, the contact is characterized by low pressure,
but high contact temperatures may be generated and wear
particles may remain within the system. The coating must then
minimize wear and create a long lifetime and stable contact
condition. This is often related to the formation of suitable
transfer layers on the surface that allow the shear from sliding
to take place with minimum wear.
In some non-conformal sliding contacts, such as a sphere
sliding against a flat surface, continuous heat generation occurs
only at the location of the sphere contact and not the flat
counterface (which may see intermittent heating as the pin
repeatedly passes over it). The contact conditions and the
stresses and strains generated have been studied and modelled
by Holmberg et al [29–32]. The aim is usually to reduce both
friction and wear, and the need to prevent plastic deformation
is paramount. This is the reasoning behind the use of the
plasticity index
[42], which was originally devised for static
contacts to estimate the surface roughness required to ensure
that asperity plastic deformation does not take place:


E σ

= ,
H β
where E  is the equivalent modulus of the contacting surfaces,
H is the hardness of the softer material, β is the typical radius
of an asperity and σ is the standard deviation of the asperity
height distribution. Since
contains the H /E ratio, it can
also be used to indicate the hardness and elastic modulus
requirements of the surface—again illustrating the benefits of
a suitably low elastic modulus and a suitably high hardness.
2nd
 Tribological coatings: contact mechanisms and selection

Figure 9. Typical contact conditions in tribological applications of coated surfaces: (a) contacts stresses at normal load, (b) sliding, (c)
abrasion, (d) impact, (e) surface fatigue, (f ) fretting and (g) chemical dissolution.

Table 2. Guidelines on surface requirements for different contact conditions.

Contact Dominating
condition phenomena
Static vertical loading Hertzian stress
distribution
2-body sliding (a) Low friction sliding
= tangential surface loading (b) Mild wear Hertzian
(= adhesive sliding) stress distribution
3-body sliding (a) Third particle
= tangential surface loading indentations
with local scratching (b) Two body
(= abrasive sliding) ploughing
Impact loading High energy impacting
stress
Fatigue loading Cyclic surface stress
waves
Vibrating low amplitude (a) High frequency
tangential loading large stress waves
(= fretting) (b) Wear debris
continuously trapped
within contact
Chemical dissolution High temperature
(metal cutting)
Corrosion Corrosive/aggressive
environment
Lubricated Coating giving load
support for lubricant
film and acting as an
emergency layer
Typical required
properties of the
surface and
near-surface region
Adequate yield strength
and hardness
(a) Low shear strength
at surface top layer
(b) Good load support
(a) Good microtoughness
and load support
(b) High hardness to resist
plastic deformation
(c) Sufficient coating thickness
(a) Good macrotoughness
(b) Good elasticity
(a) Good macrotoughness
(b) Good load support
(a) Good elasticity
(b) Low shear strength surface layer.
Not producing hard wear debris.
Surface chemistry: inertness or
lubricious reaction product
(a) Non-soluble
(b) Thermally conductive
Galvanic protection or
inert barrier layer
(a) Interaction with
lubricant additives
(b) Texturing to support
lubricant availability
Examples of coating solutions
(application-dependent)
Thermal hardening, thermochemical
diffusion treatments
DLC, MoS2 , Diamond, (electroless)
NiP-PTFE, (electrolytic) Co-Cr3 C2
(at T > 300 ◦ C), thermal spray WC–Co
Weld surfacing, hardfacing, thermal
spray hard coatings, TiN, TiAlN, TiC,
Al2 O3 , CrN, CrC, hard chrome,
thermochemical diffusion treatments
Thermochemical diffusion treatments,
tough resilient coatings (sandwich,
graded, duplex, multilayer,
nanocrystalline, multicomponent)
Thermochemical diffusion treatments,
tough coatings (sandwich, graded,
duplex, multilayer, nanocrystalline,
multicomponent)
MoS2 , Cu-Ni-In multilayer, DLC
TiN, TiAlN, TiC, WC, CrAlN, DLC,
diamond
Zn-based coatings. Ni-, Al- and
Cr-based coatings that provide hermetic
sealing, CVD TiN, polymer coatings
DLC, TiN, TiC, CrN, hard chrome,
thermochemical diffusion treatments

For a ‘rigid ball on elastic/plastic plate’ the contact ratio of
H 3 /E 2 is a strong indicator of a surface’s resistance to plastic
deformation [34]—yet again indicating the importance of H
and E (in combination) in determining surface response to
load. Incidentally, it goes without saying that a coating which
can deflect with the substrate’s deformation (be it elastic or
elasto-plastic) under load is vital, and as stated earlier this
requires a long elastic strain to failure, i.e. a high H /E ratio.
3.5.3. Abrasion condition. In abrasion, a hard counterbody
moves against and ploughs through a softer material and
thus the hardness of the softer material is of considerable
importance. The aim of the surface material choice is to inhibit
large plastic deformation, such as grooving, on the surface.
Usually thick coatings are used in abrasive contact conditions,
and the performance of thin coatings such as PVD TiN, is
often poor under such conditions. This is partly due to the
thickness limitations of hard PVD and CVD coatings, their
lack of toughness and the need for effective load support,
especially under three-body abrasion with sharp and hard
abrasive particles. The load support requirement, to prevent
adverse macromechanical mechanisms, can be fulfilled by
utilizing interlayers such as electroless nickel [43]. It has been

5471
A Matthews et al
found that by multilayering Ti and TiN films it is possible
to produce a composite coating which is both hard and tough,
thus controlling micromechanical mechanisms and performing
well in erosive and abrasive conditions [44]. Note that erosion
can take several forms (e.g. solid particle, liquid droplet and
cavitation), and the ‘rules’ pertinent to its avoidance may
combine effects of abrasion, impact, fatigue, corrosion and
dissolution.
3.5.4. Surface fatigue condition. In contact fatigue the
surface is repeatedly loaded, and this can be a sliding or
rolling action. This results in deterioration of the surface
strength and crack initiation and propagation at or below
the surface. The aim of a surface coating is mainly to
distribute and decrease the surface stresses and to inhibit
crack propagation. The fatigue life of a thin coating may be
considerably longer than that of a thick coating for different
reasons. Under similar deformation conditions the thicker
coating will experience higher bend stress levels. Furthermore,
since the coating typically has a columnar growth morphology,
any crack normal to the surface will be large in a thick
coating, and may exceed the critical crack length, whereas
in a thin coating this may not be the case. It has been shown
experimentally that in rolling contact fatigue tests hard TiN
coatings with a film thickness well below one micrometre have
up to two orders of magnitude longer lifetime than 2–3 µm
thick similar coatings [45]. Note that Polonsky et al [46]
claim that they have been able to demonstrate that the rolling
contact fatigue life increase achieved with less than 1 µm TiN
coatings was entirely due to polishing of the steel loading
balls by the significantly harder TiN coating. They changed
the test procedure and eliminated the polishing effect and
observed a somewhat negative effect of the TiN coating on the
rolling contact fatigue life. Harris has demonstrated a similar
mechanism for DLC-based coatings in rolling contacts [47].
Doll [48–50] gives further information on the benefits of
metal-doped DCL coatings in rolling bearing applications,
emphasizing the benefits of nanocomposite structures.
Note also that surface treatments, such as carburizing or
shot peening, which can induce compressive ‘in-plane’ stress
in the surface can provide benefits to fatigue life, by ensuring
that in-service surface tensile stresses are reduced and crack-
opening effects are restricted.
3.5.5. Impact condition. Impact resistance is usually
required under conditions of repetitive dynamic loading. It
may be regarded as another form of contact fatigue, sometimes
in combination with static contact (over)loading. In such
conditions, a coated surface must possess a high toughness in
order to absorb the impacts that result in repeated stress states
and energy input to the surface. Ideally this energy should
be absorbed elastically, so that no permanent deformation
results. This ability to absorb energy is governed by the
elastic resilience of the material, which is defined as the yield
stress (Y )2 /2E. Since the hardness is typically about 3Y ,
we can see that this means that we need to maximize H
and minimize E in order to increase the elastic resilience.
Incidentally, we stated above that, ideally, the impact energy
should be absorbed elastically. That is generally the case.
However, since fracture toughness can be enhanced by having
5472
a ductile constituent present, there are arguments for having
a nanocomposite coating structure with a small amount of a
ductile phase present, if fracture toughness is to be enhanced
(i.e. to increase the ‘ultimate’ resilience of the surface–as
defined by the total area under the stress-strain curve).
3.5.6. Fretting condition. Fretting is a special case of fatigue
wear at the surface, where the distance of reciprocating sliding
is typically smaller than the contact length. In the contact
the reciprocating friction load produces surface stresses that
can result in cracks and asperity detachment. The wear
products stay within the contact region and influence the
contact conditions, e.g. concentrating the surface load due
to the released wear particles and increasing the localized
surface stresses. On steel surfaces the contact process
wears off the oxide layers on the surface, which is exposed
to chemical reactions. Oxidized wear particles can cause
increased abrasion, and the associated volume increase can
lead to seizure in closed constructions with a narrow fit. The
purpose of coatings in fretting contacts can be to increase
surface elasticity and/or decrease the friction and thus reduce
surface stresses, to increase the surface toughness and reduce
the crack initiation and propagation or to increase the surface
inertness and thus reduce the unfavourable chemical reactions.
It is possible in some cases to build up favourable transfer
of reaction layers on the surfaces that decrease the shear and
friction. Fretting wear is often most efficiently reduced by
effective macromechanical design measures, e.g. to control the
displacements and stresses induced in the contact. However,
it is also possible to modify the frictional conditions to reduce
friction, e.g. by means of a solid lubricant coating such as MoS2
applied by PVD, or a soft electroplated metal [3]. Again, there
can be advantages in providing such additions as phases in a
nanocomposite coating.
3.5.7. Chemical dissolution condition. A typical
chemical dissolution dominated tribochemical application is
a workpiece material moving over a cutting tool. The aim
of a coating on the cutting tool surface is to resist the
high temperature conditions, to reduce friction and thus heat
generation, to inhibit dissolution of the surface material and
reduce scratches produced by hard elements in the workpiece
material [1]. To be successful the coating material should
exhibit the following characteristics: low adhesion to the
workpiece material but high adhesion to the tool material, good
abrasion resistance, high chemical and thermal stability and
high toughness. Thin hard coatings of nitrides and carbides
match these requirements well and are used successfully.
In metal-cutting applications the resistance of TiN films to
oxidation has been improved by employing mixed phase nano-
layered and nanocomposite ceramics, sometimes with phase
additions to help form a stable oxide on the surface [3].
3.5.8. Corrosion condition. Moving mechanical contacts
acting within a corrosive environment are clearly likely to see
both accelerated wear and corrosion (as the corrosion products
are continually being removed to reveal a clean surface). This
was mentioned above for fretting, but can also occur for the
other contact types mentioned here. To reduce and control

corrosion, coatings need to be dense and pore-free, which
typically applies for nanocomposites. The fine grain size
of nanocomposites leads to a more uniform corrosion, rather
than localized pitting, which can be a particular problem with
thin ceramic coatings, often producing accelerated substrate
corrosion at ‘pin-hole’ defects. It has also been suggested
that the fine grain structure can suppress ‘galvanic’ corrosion
effects which can occur within conventional polycrystalline
metallic and composite coatings. Note also that certain
coatings (zinc being a prime example) can provide ‘sacrificial’
protection (for example, to steel) due to their more negative
electrode potentials—which means that they will protect the
substrate from corrosion, e.g. in an aqueous environment.
3.5.9. Lubricated condition. Most of the current research on
surface coatings deals with their performance in dry conditions,
some even in vacuum or in an inert gas. However, there are
many applications, e.g. related to engines, transmissions and
seals, where the coating is expected to perform in a liquid,
often in oil. In the full-film lubrication regime, the oil lubricant
carries the load and separates the surfaces from each other and
the shear takes place in the lubricant. The role of the coating is
then to act as a safety element that comes into action when the
lubricant film fails for one reason or another. Thus, the coated
surface is expected to have good tribological performance in
boundary lubricated conditions where surfaces are partly in
direct contact with each other and surrounded by oil. The
performance of many coatings is dependent to a certain extent
on tribofilm formation on the counterface and it is important
here to consider the influence that the lubricant has on the
effectiveness of the tribofilm formation process.
When the lubricant contains reactive dopants and the
contact is in the boundary lubrication regime, a reaction film
is formed on top of the surface and the shear takes place in
this film. The film is typically formed by chemical reaction
between oil additive elements such as Zn, S, Cl or P and the
steel surface and is enhanced by high temperature [1]. For a
coating to be effective in such conditions it is necessary either
that it has the ability to react chemically with the additives and
form a strong low shear reaction film, or it has the ability to
itself produce a strong and low shear surface layer that protects
the contact from destruction.
Ronkainen et al [51] showed how a reaction layer is built
up on a steel ball sliding against a steel surface in lubrication
oil with additives. Very similar tribological performance was
achieved with the ball sliding in dry conditions against a DLC
coating and then a transfer layer was formed on the steel ball.
When the steel ball was sliding against the DLC layer in oil
lubricated conditions no visible transfer layer was formed but
the tribological performance was in the same range as in the
previous cases. This indicates that a DLC coating does not
really improve the friction and wear in an oil lubricated contact,
but can act as a safety layer [52]. By utilizing a nanocomposite
coating (e.g. based on carbon with metal additions) which can
be designed to create a transfer layer, then the ability to run
dry and/or with a lubricant can be enhanced [53].
3.6. Design guidelines
In earlier papers [39, 54] the present authors discussed the
empirical and theoretical design guidelines that are appropriate
Tribological coatings: contact mechanisms and selection
to the above contact conditions. Franklin and Dijkman [54]
present a comprehensive resume of eight design guidelines
pertinent to the selection of materials and coatings to resist
wear. Rather than providing a guarantee for the prevention of
wear problems, the guidelines are intended to assist design
engineers in minimizing the likelihood of wear problems
occurring when the design goes into service. The guidelines
presented in [54] cover the following phenomena:
• Contact overloading (CO): intended to avoid plastic
deformation in the contact.
• Fretting (FR): designed to assess the propensity for fretting
to occur, so that suitable treatments or coatings can be
applied.
• Excessive material transfer (MT): based on knowledge
of material pairings which should be avoided in order
to minimize the chances of adhesive material transfer
occurring.
• Two- and three-body abrasion (2B and 3B): based
essentially on the well-known rule of thumb that if a
surface is to resist abrasion its hardness should be at least
30% harder than any abradant present.
• Negligible wear (NW): based on the work of Bayer et al
[55]. This guideline checks whether the maximum shear
stress in the contact region exceeds a critical value and
also considers the possible presence of a lubricant.
• Surface fatigue (SF): based on empirical data and thus
restricted to materials for which data has been assembled
(mostly steels).
• Steady-state wear factor (WF): this guideline examines the
wear rate data (and the scatter) available for the selected
materials pairings to predict wear life.
In effect, the boundary conditions for applying the above
guidelines are determined by the dominating phenomena listed
in table 2, and they are typically applied in order to ensure that
the required properties are achieved in the surface and near-
surface regions (again, as listed in table 2).
The ‘contact overload’ (CO) guideline states basically that
the elastic limit should not be exceeded in the contact. In effect,
this particular rule, although simple in concept is complex in
application, particularly when applied to coatings. This is
because the limit of ‘load bearing capacity’ may in fact be
determined by several different effects, not just the need to
avoid exceeding the elastic limit. In addition, the values of
appropriate properties relating to the failure criteria of coatings
are often poorly known to the design engineer. Figure 10
illustrates that the contact load limit may be defined in several
ways (such as coating debonding, coating cracking, substrate
cracking, substrate or coating plastic deformation or even
elastic deformation which might take a surface, or component,
outside its designed operating dimensions). Nevertheless, in
spite of this complexity, it can be seen that the ratio of hardness
to elastic modulus, as mentioned earlier, must play a key
role in determining the ability of the coating and substrate to
accommodate elastic strains without failure. In effect, without
adequate mechanical properties at the surface the inability
to carry the required contact pressure can result in a rise in
ploughing, coating fracture, plastic yield or fracture under the
coating.
5473
A Matthews et al
Figure 10. Illustration on how the limits of load support load
bearing capacity of a coated surface can be defined by different
limiting factors. Limiting factors: (a) coating fracture, (b) coating
debonding, (c) substrate elastic deformation, (d) substrate plastic
deformation, (e) substrate fracture and (f) ploughing friction.
It should be emphasized that, even if the basic boundary
conditions for applicability are met, the extent to which
these guidelines may be applicable to a specific contact
situation is left to the judgement of the user. Nevertheless,
it would be highly unlikely that one rule would suffice in
any one particular contact condition, and it is most likely
three or more would have to be applied in order to gain a
reasonable level of confidence that a particular surface material
pairing will perform satisfactorily. It should also be noted
that the guidelines presented in [54] have their origin in
tribological theories relating to uncoated surfaces. Only now
are robust models being developed which permit a thorough
understanding of coated surface response to various contact
types. One such model has been developed by Holmberg and
colleagues [30–32] for a sliding contact on a coated surface.
4. Conclusions
By considering tribological interactions at several levels of
scale, and adopting a macromechanical approach to the
categorization of surface interactions, it is possible to achieve
a clearer insight into the friction and wear behaviours of
tribological coatings. This helps in the identification of
the requirements from coatings and the gaps in current
knowledge—both in the modelling of behaviour and in the
development of new coatings.
The advanced plasma-based PVD and CVD processes
facilitate the deposition of ceramic, binary alloy, multi-
layered, nanocomposite, hybrid, duplex and functionally
graded surfaces which hold the potential to fulfil any desired
operating requirement, and this will lead to the adoption of
these surface engineering processes in an increasingly diverse
range of demanding applications.
There is a clear need for the development of improved
practical design guidelines that can be readily implemented by
design engineers without the need for in-depth knowledge of
tribology, and that nevertheless encompass the latest tribology
theory. This is particularly true of coated surfaces, for which
useful models representing the response of coated surfaces
in different contact conditions are only recently becoming
available.
5474
References
[1] Holmberg K and Matthews A 1994 Coatings
tribology—properties, techniques and applications in
surface engineering Elsevier Tribology Series vol 28
(Amsterdam: Elsevier) 442 p ISBN 0 444 88870 5
[2] Holmberg K 2001 Reliability aspects of tribology Tribol. Int.
34 801–8
[3] Holmberg K and Matthews A 2005 Tribology of Engineered
Surfaces Wear: Materials Mechanisms and Practice
ed G W Stachowiak (Chichester, UK: Wiley) chapter 7,
pp 123–66
[4] Israelachvili J N and Tabor D 1972 The measurement of van
der Waals dispersion forces in the range 1.5 to 130 nm Proc.
R. Soc. A 331 19–38
[5] Bhushan B 1999 Nanoscale tribophysics and tribomechanics
Wear 225–9 465–92
[6] Landman U, Luedtke W and Ringer E 1992 Atomistic
mechanisms of adhesive contact formation and interfacial
processes Wear 153 3–30
[7] Zhang L and Tanaka H 1997 Towards a deeper understanding
of wear and friction on the atomic scale—a molecular
dynamics analysis Wear 211 44–53
[8] Harrison J, Stuart S and Perry M 1998 The tribology of
hydrocarbon surfaces investigated using molecular
dynamics Tribology Issues and Opportunities in MEMS ed
B Bhushan (Dordrecht: Kluwer)
[9] Neuville S and Matthews A 2007 A perspective on the
optimisation of hard carbon and related coatings for
engineering applications Thin Solid Films 515 6619–53
[10] Gao G, Mikulski P, Chateauneaf G and Harrison J 2003 The
effects of film structure and surface hydrogen on the
properties of amorphous carbon film J. Phys. Chem. B
107 11082–90
[11] Erdemir A, Eryilmaz O and Fenske G 2000 Synthesis of
diamond-like carbon films with superlow friction and
wear properties 46th Int. Symp. Am. Vac. Soc. (Seattle,
USA, 25–29 October 1999) J. Vac. Sci. Technol.
18 1987–92
[12] Erdemir A 2002 Friction and wear of diamond and
diamond-like carbon films Proc. Instn Mech. Eng. J
216 387–400
[13] Erdemir A and Donnet C 2001 Tribology of diamond,
diamond-like carbon and related films Modern Tribology
Handbook vol 2, ed B Bhushan (Boca Raton, FL: CRC
Press) pp 871–908
[14] Pei Y T, Galvan D and De Hosson J Th M 2006 Tribological
behaviour and thermal stability of TiC/a-C:H
nanocomposite coatings J. Vac. Sci. Technol 24 1448–53
[15] Celis B 1987 Theoretical analysis of dry friction in brittle and
ductile materials Wear 116 287–98
[16] Krim J 1996 Friction at the atomic scale Sci. Am. (October)
48–56
[17] Krim J 2002 Friction at macroscopic and microscopic length
scales Am. J. Phys. 70 890–7
[18] Krim J 2002 Surface science and the atomistic-scale origins of
friction: what once was old is new again Surf. Sci.
500 741–58
[19] Robbins M and Krim J 1998 Energy dissipation in interfacial
friction MRS Bull. (June) 23–6
[20] Tervo J 1998 Wear properties of high nitrogen austenitic
stainless steels Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica
(Mechanical Engineering Series vol 128) (Espoo, Finland:
Finnish Academy of Engineering Sciences) 88 p
[21] Argon A S 1980 Mechanical properties of near-surface
material in friction and wear, in Fundamentals of Tribology
ed N P Suh and N Saka (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
pp 103–25
[22] Suh N P 1986 Tribophysics (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall) p 489
[23] Kato K, Diao D and Tsutsumi M 1991 The wear mechanism of
ceramic coating film in repeated sliding friction Int. Conf.

on Wear of Materials (Orlando, FL, 7–11 April 1991)
(New York: ASME) pp 243–8
[24] Kato K and Adachi K 2001 Wear mechanisms Modern
Tribology Handbook ed B Bhushan, vol 1 (Boca Raton, FL:
CRC) pp 273–300
[25] Gerde E and Marder M 2001 Friction and fracture Nature
413 285–8
[26] Berthier Y, Godet M and Brendle M 1989 Velocity
accommodation in friction Tribology Trans. 32 490–6
[27] Singer I 1998 How third-body processes affect friction and
wear MRS Bull. (June) 37–40
[28] Holmberg K and Matthews A 2001 Tribological properties of
metallic and ceramic coatings Modern Tribology Handbook
ed B Bhushan, vol 2 (Boca Raton, FL: CRC) pp 827–870
[29] Holmberg K, Laukkanen A, Ronkainen H, Wallin K and
Varjus S 2003 A model for stresses, crack generation and
fracture toughness calculation in scratch TiN-coated steel
surfaces Wear 254 278–91
[30] Holmberg K, Laukkanen A, Ronkainen H, Wallin K, Varjus S
and Koskinen J 2006 Tribological contact analysis of a rigid
ball sliding on a hard coated surface 1. Modelling stresses
and strains Surf. Coat. Technol. 200 3793–809
[31] Holmberg K, Laukkanen A, Ronkainen H, Wallin K, Varjus S
and Koskinen J 2006 Tribological contact analysis of a rigid
ball sliding on a hard coated surface: 2. Material
deformations, influence of coating thickness and Young’s
modulus Surf. Coat. Technol. 200 3810–23
[32] Laukkanen A, Holmberg K, Koskinen J, Ronkainen H,
Wallin K and Varjus S 2006 Tribological contact analysis of
a rigid ball sliding on a hard coated surface: 3. Fracture
toughness calculation and influence of residual stress Surf.
Coat. Technol. 200 3824–44
[33] Gee M and Jennett N M 1995 High resolution characterization
of tribochemical films on alumina Wear 193 133–45
[34] Leyland A and Matthews A 2006 Optimisation of
nanostructured tribological coatings Hard Nanostructured
Coatings ed J Th M De Hosson and A Cavaliero (Berlin:
Springer) pp 511–38, chapter 12
[35] Oberle T L 1951 Properties influencing wear of metals
J. Metals. 3 438–9
[36] Leyland A and Matthews A 2000 On the significance
of the H/E ratio in wear control: a nanocomposite
approach to optimised tribological behaviour Wear
246 1–11
[37] Leyland A and Matthews A 2004 Design criteria for
wear-resistant nanostructured and glassy-metal coatings
Surf. Coat. Technol. 177–178 317–24
[38] Matthews A, Jones R and Dowey S 2001 Modelling the
deformation behaviour of multilayer coatings Tribol. Lett.
11 103
[39] Matthews A, Holmberg K and Franklin S 1992 A
methodology for coating selection Proc. Leeds–Lyon
Tribology Symp.: Thin Films in Tribiology (Leeds, UK,
8–11 September 1992) (Amsterdam: Elsevier)
View publication stats
Tribological coatings: contact mechanisms and selection
[40] Franklin S 1993 Surface modifications for the control of wear
and friction Report CTR 545-93-0036 CTF Technology,
Philips Centre for Manufacturing Technology
[41] Matthews A, Leyland A, Holmberg K and Ronkainen H 1998
Design aspects for advanced tribological coatings Surf.
Coat. Technol. 100–101 1–6
[42] Greenwood J A and Williamson J B 1966 Contact of
nominally flat surfaces Proc. R. Soc. A 295 300–19
[43] Matthews A and Leyland A 1995 Hybrid techniques in surface
engineering Surf. Coat. Technol. 71 88–92
[44] Leyland A and Matthews A 1994 Thick Ti/TiN multi-layered
coatings for abrasive and erosive wear resistance Surf. Coat.
Technol. 70 19–25
[45] Erdemir A and Hochman R F 1988 Surface metallurgical and
tribological characteristics of TiN-coated bearing steels
Surf. Coat. Technol. 36 755–63
[46] Polonsky I A, Chang T P, Keer L M and Sproul W D 1997 An
analysis of the effect of hard coatings on near-surface
rolling contact fatigue initiation induced by surface
roughness Wear 208 204–19
[47] Harris S J and Weiner A M 1998 Scaling relationships for the
abrasion of steel by diamondlike carbon coatings Wear
223 31–6
[48] Doll G L and Osborn K B 2001 Engineering surfaces of
precision steel components Proc. 44th Annual SVC
Technical Conf. (Philadelphia, USA 21–26 April 2001)
(Albuquerque, NM: SVC) pp 78–84
[49] Doll G L, Evans R D and Ribaudo C R 2005 Improving the
performance of rolling contact bearings with tribological
coatings Surface Engineering in Materials Science III
ed A Agarwal et al (Warrendale, PA: TMS) pp 153–62
[50] Doll G L, Ribaudo C R and Evans R D 2004 Engineered
surfaces for steel rolling element bearings and gears
Proc. Conf. on Materials Science & Technology 2004
(New Orleans, LA, USA, 26–29 September 2004)
(Warrendale, PA: AIST/TMS) pp 367–76
[51] Ronkainen H, Varjus S and Holmberg K 1998 Friction and
wear properties in dry, water- and oil-lubricated DLC
against alumina and DLV against steel contacts Wear
222 120–8
[52] Ronkainen H 2001 Tribological properties of hydrogenated
and hydrogen-free diamond-like carbon coatings VTT
Publications No 434 (VTT Technical Research Centre of
Finland)
[53] Doll G L, Evans R D and Johnson S P 2005 Providing oil-out
protection to rolling element bearings with coatings Proc.
48th Annual SVC Technical Conf. (Denver, USA,
23–28 April 2005) (Albuquerque, NM: SVC) pp 595–8
[54] Franklin S E and Dijkman J A 1995 The implementation of
tribological principles in an expert system (‘PRECEPT’) for
the selection of metallic materials, surface treatments and
coatings in engineering design Wear 181–3 1–10
[55] Bayer R G, Shalkey A T and Wayson A R 1969 Designing for
zero wear Machine Des. 41 142–51
5475