THE ANNALS OF UNIVERSITY “DUNĂREA DE JOS “ OF GALAŢI 29

FASCICLE VIII, 2005, ISSN 1221-4590

TRIBOLOGY

HYSTERETIC EFFECTS IN DYNAMIC HERTZ TYPE CONTACT

OF RUBBER BALLS
Florina Carmen CIORNEI, Emanuel N. DIACONESCU
“Ştefan cel Mare” University of Suceava, Romania
florina@fim.usv.ro

ABSTRACT
Energy dissipation through hysteresis occurs in rubber elements subjected to
cyclic loading. An estimation of damping can be achieved by calculating the energy loss
per load cycle. The dynamic, circular, Hertz-like contact between a rubber sphere and a
glass plate was investigated. The pulse cosinusoidal force and corresponding normal
approach were registered. Hysteresis loops for load frequencies in the range 0…1,5 Hz
were obtained by an oscilloscope and these were approximated by numerical methods.
The contact stiffness was evaluated and it was found almost constant for employed
experimental conditions.

KEYWORDS: Hertz-like contact, rubber, dynamic hysteresis.

1. INTRODUCTION plate is thick enough and is considered to model a

rigid half-space. A normal cosinusoidal load, imposed
It is known that mechanical characteristic of by a signal generator, over-imposed on a static force
rubber is not linear [1, 2], but, in order to take into was applied. The force and normal approach variation
account the damping, an approximation using a linear are registered by a memory oscilloscope.
viscoelastic model is of common use [3]. The experimental set-up, shown in figure 1, is
The aim of this paper is to prove that, from the composed of an electrodynamic force generator, a
damping perspective, rubber may be modelled by a mechanical device for accomplishing the Hertz-type
linear viscoelastic model. contact and the static load, and data acquisition and
Energy dissipation through hysteresis occurs in computing blocks.
rubber. It depends on the type of polymer, the filler
and other compounding ingredients. An estimation of
damping can be achieved by calculating the energy
loss per cycle of loading.
By plotting the instantaneous stress versus strain
for a given cycle, for a linear viscoelastic material, an
elliptically shaped hysteresis curve is generated [4, 5].
The area captured within the hysteresis loop is equal
to the dissipated energy per cycle. The loop area can
be used to calculate the damping.
If the relation between the stress and the
deformation is approximately linear, the application
of a sinusoidal force will result in a sinusoidal
deformation of the same frequency but displaced out
of phase by an amount termed the loss angle. The
area of the hysteresis loops depends on frequency.

2. EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP
Experimental tests were carried out using the
apparatus and equipment existing in Contact
Mechanics Laboratory at Suceava University.
Dynamic, circular, Hertz-like contact between a
rubber sphere and a glass plate was investigated. The Fig. 1. Experimental equipment.
30 THE ANNALS OF UNIVERSITY “DUNĂREA DE JOS “ OF GALAŢI
FASCICLE VIII, 2005, ISSN 1221-4590
TRIBOLOGY

The force generator block consists of the The contact stiffness was approximated by the
following devices: power block, amplifier, low relation:
frequency function generator, fix electromagnet and
mobile coil. The block for acquisition, storing and Pmax − Pmin
Ks =
computing data is composed of: zero electrical force α max − α min (2)
block, displacement transducer, memory oscilloscope,
optical microscope, video camera, computer, sound
where α is the normal approach.
board, acquisition data board miro VIDEO DC10,
It was in the authors’ intention to achieve a
Media Studio pack programs for films and images:
cosine pulse load for all frequencies, but some
Video Editor, Video Capture and Image Editor,
experimental differences occur. The minimum force
monitor and the device for accomplishing the contact
was not zero, but always of relatively small positive
between the ball and glass plate and the static
values.
loading.
Using the oscilloscope, the load frequency was
precisely known and the maximum phase lag between
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION force and normal approach, denoted by ∆t , was
measured. The loss factor at a given frequency f was
The rubber denoted BCDUR90 is considered to
computed from the phase lag ∆t , [7], using the
be linear at small loads and strains. The measured
relation:
shear modulus was G = 28 MPa for forces varying
in the range 0.001-1.5 N [6]. The radius of the ball is δ = 2π ⋅ ∆t ⋅ f (3)
R=5 mm. The frequency dependence of contact
elements is searched. Minimum and maximum forces,
The used dynamic contact presents hysteresis, as
working frequency and experimentally measured
seen in figures 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18. All hysteresis
normal approach as well as phase lag are shown in
curves are asymmetric, but tending to an elliptic
Table 1. On oscilloscope, simultaneous variation with
shape. Therefore, an approximation in MathCAD was
time of signals for force and normal approach were
made using an ellipse having the same area as the
captured and then computed with respect to previous
experimental loop. In figures 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 and 19,
calibration. The results are plotted in figures 2, 5, 8,
the co-ordinates are force versus normal approach and
11, 14 and 17. Maximum lag between force and
the red circles represent the experimental loading
normal approach was measured and the loss tangent
points, the blue diamonds are the experimental results
was calculated. The hysteresis loss is computed using
during unloading and the thick olive loop is the
the data from HAMEG Oscilloscope, Excel and
numerically approximated ellipse.
MathCAD applications. The area of the loop
The hysteresis loss increases rapidly with
represents the energy dissipation per cycle, D. The
frequency in the range 0…1Hz, but for higher
energy stored during loading, denoted W, is
frequencies it tends to remain constant, figure 20.
represented by the area between the loading curve and
Yet, the frequency domain studied is too narrow and
the axis of normal approach.
general conclusion cannot be drawn.
The hysteresis losses are given by the ratio H:

H = D/W (1)

Table 1. Experimental contact parameters.

Frequency Minimum force Maximum force Phase lag Loss factor Hysteresis loss Figure

f = 0.171 Hz Pst = 0.006 N Pmax = 1.37 N ∆t = 0.230 s δ = 0.247 H = 14.42 % 2, 3, 4

f = 0.458 Hz Pst = 0.006 N Pmax = 1.37 N ∆t = 0.115 s δ = 0.331 H = 19.04 % 5, 6, 7

f = 0.756 Hz Pst = 0.0055 N Pmax = 1.41 N ∆t = 0.058 s δ = 0.276 H = 21% 8, 9, 10

f = 0.98 Hz Pst = 0.012 N Pmax = 1.44 N ∆t = 0.043s δ = 0.265 H = 25.9 % 11, 12, 13

f = 1.22 Hz Pst = 0.012 N Pmax = 1.404 N ∆t = 0.046 s δ = 0.36 H = 22.33 % 14, 15, 16

f = 1.43 Hz Pst = 0.0115 N Pmax = 1.486 N ∆t = 0.035 s δ = 0.317 H = 26.03 % 17, 18, 19
 THE ANNALS OF UNIVERSITY “DUNĂREA DE JOS “ OF GALAŢI 31
FASCICLE VIII, 2005, ISSN 1221-4590
TRIBOLOGY

35
Normal
Normal 35
approach, µm
approach, µm
30 30
25 25
20 20 Force, N
15 15
Force, N 10
10
5
5
0
0
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.1 3.6 4.1 4.6 5.2
4.5 5.9 7.3 8.8 10.2 11.6 13.0 14.4 15.9 Time,s
Time, s
Time, s
Time,s
Fig. 2. Dynamic load and normal approach Fig. 5. Dynamic load and normal approach
∆t = 0. 230 s ; δ = 0.247 . ∆t = 0.115 s ; δ = 0.331 .

1.6 1.6

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2

1 1
Fo Fo
0.8
rţa 0.8
Force, N
rce
Force, N

N N
0.6 0.6

0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

approach, µm
Apropierea,
Normal Normal approach,
Normal µm

Fig. 3. Hysteresis loop evidenced from oscilloscope. Fig. 6. Hysteresis loop evidenced from oscilloscope.

1.5 1.5
1.5

1.1 1.1
Fu
q, 1

Fc
0.7 0.7
Force, N

s, 1
Force, N

For
Force, N

ce,
N g1p( r1 )

0.3 g2p( r2 ) 0.3

y 1( t )
0.1 0.1

-0.02011 0.5 0.5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Du, Dc , r1 , r2 , x 1( t )
Normal approach,
Normal approach, µm
microns
q, 0
Normal s, 0
approach,
Normal approach, microns
µm

Fig. 4. Approximation of hysteresis loop; Fig. 7. Approximation of hysteresis loop;

H = 14.42 % . H = 19.04 % .
32 THE ANNALS OF UNIVERSITY “DUNĂREA DE JOS “ OF GALAŢI
FASCICLE VIII, 2005, ISSN 1221-4590
TRIBOLOGY

35 35
Normal Normal
30 30
approach, approach,
µm N
25 Forţa, 25
µm
Forţa,
20 20 N
15 Apropierea, 15 Force, N
Apropier
Force, N
10 micrometri 10 microm
5 5 i
0 0
0.3 0.6 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.9 2.3 2.6 2.9 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.2
Timp,
Time, s s Time,
Time, s

Fig. 8. Dynamic load and normal approach Fig. 11. Dynamic load and normal approach
∆t = 0.058 s ; δ = 0.276 . ∆t = 0.043s ; δ = 0.265 .

2 2

1.5 1.5
Fo Force, N
Force, N

Fo
rţa 1 rţa
1
,N
,N
0.5
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Normal approach, µm
Apropierea, Apropierea,
Normal approach, µm
i i

Fig. 9. Hysteresis loop evidenced from oscilloscope. Fig. 12. Hysteresis loop evidenced from oscilloscope.

1.5 1.5

1.1 1.1
Fu Fu
q, 1 q, 1

Fc Fc
Force, N

s, 1 0.7
Force, N

s, 1 0.7
Force, N
Force, N

g1p( r1 ) g1p( r1 )

g2p( r2 ) 0.3 g2p( r2 ) 0.3

y 1( t ) y 1( t )
0.1 0.1

0.5 0.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Du
q, 0
Normal
, Dc , r1 , r2 , x 1( t )
s, 0
approach, µm
Du
Normal
q , 0 approach,
s, 0 µm
, Dc , r1 , r2 , x 1( t )
Normal approach, microns Normal approach, microns

Fig. 10. Approximation of hysteresis loop; Fig. 13. Approximation of hysteresis loop;
H = 21% . H = 25.9 % .
 THE ANNALS OF UNIVERSITY “DUNĂREA DE JOS “ OF GALAŢI 33
FASCICLE VIII, 2005, ISSN 1221-4590
TRIBOLOGY

35 Normal 35
Normal
30 approach, µm 30
25 Forţa, N 25
approach, µm
20 20 Forţa,
15 Force, N
Apropierea, 15
10
Force, N
Apropiere
micrometr 10
5 i 5
micromet
0 0
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.4
Time, s Time,
Time, s s
Time, s

Fig. 14. Dynamic load and normal approach Fig. 17. Dynamic load and normal approach
∆t = 0.046 s ; δ = 0.36 . ∆t = 0.035 s ; δ = 0.317 .

2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

Fo 1.0 Fo
Force, N

1.0
Force, N
rţa,
rţa, N
N
0.5
0.5

0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Apropierea,
approach, µm
Normal Normal approach, µm
Apropierea,
i i i i

Fig. 15. Hysteresis loop evidenced from oscilloscope. Fig. 18. Hysteresis loop evidenced from oscilloscope.

1.5 1.5 1.5

1.5

1.1 1.1
Fu Fu
q, 1 q, 1

Fc Fc
Force, N

s, 1 0.7 s, 1 0.7
Force, N
Force, N

Foce, N

g1p( r1 ) g1p( r1 )

g2p( r2 ) 0.3 g2p( r2 ) 0.3

y 1( t ) y 1( t )
0.1 0.1

-0.0858328 0.5
-0.115356
0.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0 Du , Dc , r1 , r2 , x 1( t ) 35 0 Du
Normal µm
, Dc , r1 , r2 , x 1( t )
q , 0 approach,
35
µm
q, 0 s, 0 s, 0
Normal
Normalapproach,
approach, microns Normal approach, microns

Fig. 16. Approximation of hysteresis loop; Fig. 19. Approximation of hysteresis loop;
H = 22.33 % . H = 26.03 % .
34 THE ANNALS OF UNIVERSITY “DUNĂREA DE JOS “ OF GALAŢI
FASCICLE VIII, 2005, ISSN 1221-4590
TRIBOLOGY

The average slope of hysteresis loops remain

constant, figure 22, suggesting that contact stiffness is
constant, and therefore the losses may be caused by
20 adhesion hysteresis. Briscoe [8], found that bulk
Hysteresis loss, %

hysteresis is not important compared to adhesion

Hf
i2 , 1 hysteresis in the case of elastomeric lens on a glass
plane. Adhesion between rubber balls and glass is
g( r )
10 important [9, 10, 11], and it was revealed in the above
tests; at loading, the contact area increased rapidly at
an almost zero force. Other tests [6], made with more
important forces, showed the tack phenomenon [12],
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 when unloading.
Hf ,r
i2 , 0
Frequency, Hz 3. CONCLUSIONS
Fig. 20. Hysteresis loss as a function of loading The variation with frequency of the loss tangent
frequency. deduced from Hertz-like contact suggests a
viscoelastic material.
The contact stiffness in the case of dynamic
0.4
contact of rubber balls on glass is approximately
constant for the used load frequencies, which is
0.3
characteristic to elastic materials.
Loss factor

tan δ i2
The shape of the hysteresis loops differs with
0.2
0 respect to elastic cases. The tendency to an elliptical
0.1
form suggests a viscoelastic behaviour and the effect
of adhesion.
0
These aspects lead to the conclusion that the
0 0.38 0.75 1.13 1.5 Hertz-type contact between a rubber ball and a glass
f plate requires a theoretical model including both
i2
Frequency, Hz viscoelastic nature of material and adhesion
phenomenon.
Fig. 21. Loss tangent function of loading frequency.
REFERENCES
0.05
1. Aklonis J.J., Mac Knight W.J., Shen M., 1972, Introduction to
Polymer Viscoelasticity, Wiley Interscience, New York.
2. Arridge R.G.C., 1975, Mechanics of Polymers, Clarendon
0.04 Press, Oxford.
3. Ferry J.D., 1980, Viscoelastic Properties of Polymers, New
Ks York, John Viley & Sons inc.
i2 4. Vinogradov G.V., Malkin A.J., 1980, Rheology of Polymers.
Contact stiffness

0.03
Viscoelasticity and Flow of Polymers, Moscow, Mir Publishers.
Contact stiffness, N/µm

Ka
i2 5. Diaconescu E.N., 1981, Rezistenţa materialelor, Partea I,
Universitatea Suceava.
Ksm
0.02 6. Ciornei F.C., Diaconescu E.N., 2003, Determinarea
0 caracteristicilor mecanice ale materialelor din experimente de
contact static, VAREHD 11, Suceava, Romania.
7. Ciornei F.C., Diaconescu E.N., Pintilie D., 2003, Determinarea
0.01 factorului de pierderi din experimente de contact, VAREHD 11,
Suceava, Romania.
8. Briscoe B.J., Arvanitaki A., Adams M.J., Johnson S.A., 2001,
The friction and adhesion of elastomers, Tribology research: From
0 Model Experiment to Industrial Problem, G. Dalmaz et al.
0 0.5 1 1.5
(Editors), Elsevier Science B.V., pp. 661-672.
f Hz
Frequency,i2 9. Falsafi A., Deprez P., Bates F.S., Tirrell M., 1997, Direct
Frequency, Hz measurement of adhesion between viscoelastic polymers: A contact
mechanical approach, Journal of Rheology, 41(6),
Fig. 22. Contact stiffness versus load frequency. 10. Johnson K.L., 1958, A note on the adhesion of elastic solids,
British Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 9, May.
The variation with frequency of the loss 11. Iacobescu F.C., 1996, Adeziunea şi implicaţiile ei asupra
contactului, VAREHD 8, Suceava, Romania.
tangent, tan( δ ) , is an indicator of viscoelastic nature 12. Barquins M., Maugis D., 1981, Tackiness of Elastomers,
of the material [1]. As a general tendency, International Conference on Adhesion and Adhesives of the
Plastics and Rubber Institute, Durham University, England,
experimental data show a slightly increase with September 3-5, 1980; Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Inc.
frequency, as seen in figure 21. This suggests a
viscoelastic behavior.