Tribology-02-Notes - Vtu

Design of Machine Elements-1 (17ME54)
Tribology [17ME742] Module 02: Friction and Wear | Prof. Sunil Kumar S
A.J. INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

(A unit of Laxmi Memorial Educational trust®)
Kottara Chowki, Mangaluru – 575006
TRIBOLOGY
[AS PER CHOICE BASED CREDIT SYSTEM (CBCS) SCHEME]
(Sub Code: -17ME742)
Module 2
Prepared by
Mr. Sunil Kumar S
Asst. Professor, AJIET
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 1

TRIBOLOGY
B.E, VII Semester, Mechanical Engineering
[As per Choice Based Credit System (CBCS) scheme]
Course Code :17ME742 CIE Marks : 40

Number of Lecture : 03 SEE Marks : 60
Hours/Week
Total Number of Lecture : 40(8 Hours per Module) Exam Hours : 03
Hours
Credits – 03
.
Module – 2
Friction: Origin, friction theories, measurement methods, friction of metals and non-metals.
Wear: Classification and mechanisms of wear, delamination theory, debris analysis, testing
methods and standards. Related case studies.
TEXT BOOKS:
1.” Introduction to Tribology”, B. Bhushan, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2002
2. “Engineering Tribology”, Prasanta Sahoo, PHI Learning Private Ltd, New Delhi, 2011.
3.“Engineering Tribology”, J. A. Williams, Oxford Univ. Press 2005.
REFERENCE BOOKS
1. “Introduction to Tribology in bearings”, B. C. Majumdar, Wheeler Publishing.

2. “Tribology, Friction and Wear of Engineering Material”, I. M.Hutchings, Edward Arnold,
London,1992.
3. “Engineering Tribology”, G. W. Stachowiak and A. W. Batchelor, Butterworth-Heinemann,1992.
4. “Friction and Wear of Materials”, Ernest Rabinowicz, John Wiley & sons,1995.
5. “Basic Lubrication Theory”, A. Cameron, Ellis Hardwoods Ltd., UK.
6. “Handbook of tribology: materials, coatings and surface treatments” B.Bhushan,

B.K. Gupta, McGraw-Hill,1997.

TRIBOLOGY 17ME742 MODULE 02

Introduction to Friction
Friction is the resistance to motion during sliding or rolling, that is experienced when one solid body
moves tangentially over another with which it is in contact, Figure 5.1.1. The resistive tangential
force, which acts in a direction directly opposite to the direction of motion, is called the friction
force. There are two main types of friction that are commonly encountered: dry friction and fluid
friction. As its name suggests, dry friction, also called “Coulomb” friction, describes the tangential
component of the contact force that exists when two dry surfaces move or tend to move relative to
one another. Fluid friction describes the tangential component of the contact force that exists
between adjacent layers in a fluid that are moving at different velocities relative to each other as in
a liquid or gas between bearing surfaces. If the solid bodies are loaded together and a tangential
force (F) is applied, then the value of the tangential force that is required to initiate motion is the
static friction force, Fstatic or Fs. It may take a few milliseconds before relative motion is initiated at
the interface. The tangential force required to maintain relative motion is known as the kinetic (or
dynamic) friction force, Fkinetic or Fk . The static friction force is either higher than or equal to the
kinetic friction force,
Figure 5.1.1 Schematic illustrations of (a) a body sliding on a surface with a free body diagram, and
(b) a body rolling on a horizontal surface; W is the normal load (force) and F is the friction force.
Origin of Friction
Amontons and Coulomb were the first to propose the mechanism of friction. Coulomb proposed
that metallic friction can be attributed to the mechanical interaction of asperities of the contacting
surfaces. In the so-called Coulomb model, the action of the wedge-shaped asperities causes the two
surfaces to move apart as they slide from one position to another and then come close again. Work
is done in raising the asperities from one position to another and most of the potential energy stored
in this phase of the motion is recovered as surfaces move back. Only a small fraction of energy is
dissipated in sliding down the asperities. Since friction is a dissipative process, the mechanical
interaction theory was abandoned. A realistic friction theory should include mechanisms of energy
dissipation.
Laws of Friction (Rules of Friction)

Solid–Solid Contact (Rules of Sliding Friction)
Two basic rules of intrinsic (or conventional) friction are generally obeyed over a wide range of
applications. These rules are often referred to as Amontons equations, after the French physicist
Guillaume Amontons who rediscovered them in 1699 (Amontons, 1699); Leonardo da Vinci,
however, was the first to describe them some 200 years earlier.
The first rule states that the friction force, F, is directly proportional to the nominal load, W, that
is,
F = μW (5.2.1)
where μ (also commonly labeled as f) is a proportionality constant known as the coefficient of static
friction (μs ) or kinetic friction (μk ) which according to Equation 5.2.1 is independent of the normal
load. Alternately, it is often convenient to express this rule in terms of constant angle of repose or
frictional angle θ defined by μs = tan θ (5.2.2)
In this equation, θ is the angle such that any body of any weight, placed on a plane inclined at an
angle less than θ from the horizontal, will remain stationary, but if the inclination angle is increased
to θ, the body will start to slide down, Figure 5.2.1. The coefficient of dry friction can vary over a
wide range, from about 0.05 to a value as large as 10 or greater for soft and/or clean metals sliding
against themselves in vacuum.

Figure 5.2.1 Force equilibrium diagram for a body on an inclined plane.
The second rule states that the friction force (or coefficient of friction) is independent of the
apparent area of contact between the contacting bodies. Thus, two bodies, regardless of their
physical size, have the same coefficient of friction. To these two rules, a third rule is sometimes
added which is often attributed to Coulomb (1785). It states that the kinetic friction force (or
coefficient of friction) is independent of the sliding velocity once motion starts. He also made a
clear distinction between static friction and kinetic friction. These three rules are entirely empirical;
situations in which these rules are not followed do not imply violation of more fundamental laws of
nature.
In summary, the first two rules are generally obeyed to within a few percent in many cases. It should
be emphasized that μ is strictly constant only for a given pair of sliding materials under a given set
of operating conditions (temperature, humidity, normal pressure and sliding velocity). Many
materials show dependence of normal load, sliding velocity and apparent area on the coefficients of
static and kinetic friction in dry and lubricated contacts. In addition, μ is scale dependent Therefore,
any reported values should be used with caution.
OBSERVATIONS:
FRICTION
➢ is essentially an electrostatic force between two surfaces
➢ never initiates motion; it only responds to motion
➢ depends on the materials in contact with each other. The coefficient of friction, μ, is a
➢ critical property of the materials selected.
➢ depends on the net force normal pressing the two surfaces in contact (W)
➢ acts parallel to the surfaces that are (or might have the potential to be) moving with respect
to each other
➢ opposes the direction of motion
➢ is independent of the area of the surfaces in contact. (First postulated by Coulomb.)
➢ static friction > kinetic friction > rolling friction for the same combinations of surfaces
➢ when two surfaces are slipping across each other in the presence of kinetic friction, heat is
generated and mechanical energy is not conserved
➢ when a ball rolls (static friction) without slipping across a surface, mechanical energy is
➢ conserved and no heat is generated
➢ is not dependent upon the surface roughness, or at least surface roughness has a very
➢ modest effect on frictional forces.
➢ is dependent upon the material on both surfaces. Even minute quantities of moisture on
➢ the surfaces can reduce friction by 20% to 30%. If there is a layer of grease on the
surfaces,
➢ friction can be cut by a factor of 10.
Friction Theories
Adhesion Theory
When two nominally flat surfaces are placed in contact under load, the contact takes place at the
tips of the asperities, the load being supported by the deformation of contacting asperities, and
discrete contact spots (junctions) are formed, Figure 5.2.6.
Figure 5.2.6 Schematic of (a) two rough surfaces in a sliding contact and (b) a corresponding free
body diagram.
The sum of the areas of all the contact spots constitutes the real (true) area of the contact (Ar) and
for most materials under normal load, this will be only a small fraction of the apparent (nominal)
area of contact (Aa). The proximity of the asperities results in adhesive contacts caused by either
physical or chemical interaction. When these two surfaces move relative to each other, a lateral
force is required to shear the adhesive bonds formed at the interface in the regions of real area of
contact. Rupture occurs in the weakest regions, either at the interface or in one of the mating bodies.

After shearing of the existing contacts, new contacts are formed. Because adhesion arises from
molecular forces between the surfaces, the adhesive forces are of the same nature as the forces
existing between the molecules themselves. Consequently, the interface may be as strong as the bulk
materials, and during sliding, the shearing process may actually tear out fragments of the materials.
In that case, the friction force would depend on the bulk shear strength of the materials.
From the classical theory of adhesion to a very rough first approximation, the friction force (Fa) is
defined as follows (Bowden and Tabor, 1950). For a dry contact,
𝑭𝒂 = 𝑨𝒓 𝝉𝒂 (5.2.4)
and for a contact with a partial liquid film,

𝑭𝒂 = 𝑨𝒓 [𝜶𝝉𝒂 + (𝟏 − 𝜶)𝝉𝒍 ]
𝜼𝒍 𝑽
And 𝝉𝒍 =
𝒉
where 𝝉𝒂 and 𝝉𝒍 are the average shear strengths of the dry contact and of the lubricant film,
respectively; α is the fraction of the unlubricated area; 𝜼𝒍 is the dynamic (absolute) viscosity of the
lubricant; V is the relative sliding velocity; and h is the liquid film thickness. A contribution to
friction due to adhesion is always present at an interface. In boundary lubricated conditions and/or
unlubricated interfaces exposed to humid environments, the presence of a liquid may result in the
formation of menisci or adhesive bridges and the meniscus /viscous effects may become important,
in some cases even dominating the overall friction force.
Bowden and Tabor’s simple Adhesion theory

Bowden and Tabor (1950) proposed that for two metals in sliding contact, high pressures developed
at individual contact spots cause local welding and the contacts thus formed are sheared
subsequently by relative sliding of the surfaces. Later, it was argued that asperities do not have to
weld, but only the interfacial adhesion between asperities is sufficient to account for the friction of
metals and ceramics (Bowden and Tabor, 1964, 1973). In addition to the frictional energy (or force)
to overcome adhesion developed at the real areas of contact between the surfaces (asperity contacts),
energy is required for micro-scale deformation of the contacting surfaces during relative motion. If
the asperities of one surface (the harder of the two, if dissimilar) plow through the other via plastic
deformation, energy is required for this macroscale deformation (grooving or plowing). Macro-scale
deformation can also occur through the particles trapped between the sliding surfaces. In viscoelastic
materials (such as polymers), deformation force arises from elastic hysteresis losses. These theories,
first advanced by Bowden and Tabor, are widely accepted theories for friction of metals and
ceramics. The dominant mechanism of energy dissipation in metals and ceramics is plastic
deformation.
There is a little energy loss during the elastic deformation of interfaces; a loss of 0.1–10% (typically
less than 1%) of the energy loss can occur by phonons. In engineering interfaces, even if deformation
is primarily elastic, some plastic deformation also occurs. Regardless of the type of deformation,
breaking of adhesive bonds during motion requires energy. If we assume that there is negligible
interaction between the adhesion and deformation processes during sliding, we may add them, and
the total intrinsic frictional force (Fi ) equals the force needed to shear adhered junctions (Fa) and
the force needed to supply the energy of deformation (Fd ). Therefore, we can write (see e.g.,
Bowden and Tabor, 1964)
Fi = Fa + Fd
or the coefficient of friction μi = μa + μd . In polymers (especially elastomers) and rough surfaces in

general, μd may be a significant fraction of μi .
For elasto - plastic materials , the normal load W can be expressed as
𝑾 = 𝑨 𝒑𝟎
Where A is the real area of contact and 𝒑𝟎 is the yield pressure which is almost equal to hardness
H. Therefore
𝑾=𝑨𝑯
As the plastic deformation become severe, the asperity junctions get cold welded and for strong
adhesive bond. Then frictional force due to adhesion
𝑭𝒂𝒅𝒉𝒆 = 𝑨 𝒔
Where s is the shear strength of softer material. And the co-efficient of friction is given as
𝑭𝒂𝒅𝒉𝒆 𝒔
𝝁𝒂𝒅𝒉𝒆 = =
𝑾 𝑯
The typical value of co-efficient of friction of most of the metals as per this theory is 0.2.
Deformation Theory (Ploughing)

Friction due to Deformation: This theory is based on the fact that contact between tribo-pairs only
occurs at discrete points, where the asperities on one surface touch the other. The slope of asperities
governs the friction force. Sharp edges cause more friction compared to rounded edges. Expression
for coefficient of friction can be derived based on the ploughing effect. Ploughing occurs when two

bodies in contact have different hardness. The asperities on the harder surface may penetrate into
the softer surface and produce grooves on it, if there is relative motion.
Fig.: Deformation theory

Contact between tribo-pairs only occurs at discrete points. Assume n conical asperities of hard
metal in contact with flat soft metal, vertically
𝑾 = 𝒏(𝟎. 𝟓 × 𝝅𝒓𝟐 )𝑯
𝑨 = 𝒏(𝟎. 𝟓 × 𝝅𝒓𝟐 )
𝑭 = 𝒏(𝒓𝒉)𝑯
project area of contact. μd = (F/W), substituting the equations of F and W, we get μd = (2/π)cot θ
This relation shows important of cone angle, θ. Table 2.3 lists the μd for various θ values.
Table 2.3
In practice slopes of real surfaces are lesser than 100 (i.e. θ > 800), therefore μd = 0.1. If we add this
value (μd = 0.1), total μ, should not exceed 0.3. Total μ, representing contribution for both ploughing
and adhesion terms.

Ploughing by Spherical Asperity: If we consider asperities on solid surfaces are spherical, vertical
projected area of contact:
Figure. Spherical Asperity

𝑨 = 𝒏(𝟎. 𝟓 × 𝝅𝒓𝟐 )
Or
𝑨 = 𝒏(𝟎. 𝟓 × 𝝅(𝟎. 𝟓𝒅)𝟐 )
𝝅𝒅𝟐
Or 𝑨 = 𝒏
𝟖
𝟐
𝝅𝒅
𝑾=𝒏 𝑯
𝟖
𝟐𝒉𝒅
𝑭=𝒏 𝑯
𝟑
𝟐𝒉𝒅𝟖 𝟏𝟔𝒉 𝟏𝟔 𝒉 𝒉
𝝁𝒅 = = = = 𝟎. 𝟔 √
𝟑𝝅𝒅𝟐 𝟑𝝅𝒅 𝟑𝝅 √𝟖𝒉𝑹 𝑹
Generally, h << R, therefore μd is almost equal to 0.1. This means total μ, should not exceed 0.3
Summary of theories related to adhesion and ploughing effects
𝑭𝒂𝒅𝒉𝒆 𝒔
𝝁𝒂𝒅𝒉𝒆 = =
𝑾 𝑯
ℎ
μd = (2/π)cot θ = 0.64
𝑟
𝒉
𝝁𝒅 = 𝟎. 𝟔 √
𝑹
Fig.: Summary of adhesion and ploughing.

Three frictional theories were discussed:

• In first expression it is shown that friction depends on the lowest shear strength of the contact
tribo-pair. Reducing shear strength and increasing the hardness reduces the coefficient of friction.
• Second expression shows the dependence of coefficient of friction on the angle of conical asperity.
• Third expression indicates lesser sensitivity of coefficient of friction compared to that of conical
asperity.
None of these expressions provides reliable estimation of coefficient of friction which we observe
during laboratory tests. Bowden and tabor improved that theory of adhesion and incorporated the
limiting shear stress concept. References: 1. J Halling, Principles of Tribology, The Macmillan Press
Ltd, London, 1975.
Modified Adhesion Theory (Junction Growth): Bowden and Tabor were motivated to think that
contact area (shown in Fig. 2.16) might become much enlarged under the additional shear force and
they proposed junction growth theory. They considered two rough surfaces subjected to normal load
W and friction force at the interface. To explain their hypothesis they considered two dimensional
stress system (Eq.(2.1)). If W force is in y-direction and force in x-direction is zero, then principle
stresses can be expressed by
𝝈𝒙 + 𝝈𝒙 𝝈𝒙 + 𝝈𝒙 𝟐
𝝈𝟏,𝟐 = ± √( ) + 𝝉𝟐𝒙𝒚
𝟐 𝟐
𝜹𝑾 𝜹𝑭
𝝈𝒙 = 𝟎, 𝝈𝒚 = , 𝝉𝒙𝒚 =
𝜹𝑨 𝜹𝑨
Fig. Two contacting surfaces
𝜹𝑾 𝜹𝑾 𝟐
𝜹𝑨𝝈𝟏 = √
+ ( ) + 𝜹𝑭𝟐
𝟐 𝟐
𝜹𝑾 𝜹𝑾 𝟐
𝜹𝑨𝝈𝟐 = − √( ) + 𝜹𝑭𝟐
𝟐 𝟐
σ1 is first principal stress, and δ is elemental area.

By Subtracting,
𝜹𝑾 𝟐
𝜹𝑨(𝝈𝟏 − 𝝈𝟐 ) = 𝟐 √( ) + 𝜹𝑭𝟐
𝟐
Where σ2 is second principal stress, yield strength of material is σy = σ1 - σ2 and shear strength and
τy = 0.5τy. On substituting and rearranging,
𝜹𝑾 𝟐
𝜹𝑨 𝝉𝒚 = √( ) + 𝜹𝑭𝟐
𝟐
τy and W remain constant and this indicates that area of contact will increase with increasing friction
force, till force reaches its limiting value. We can state that on application of additional incremental
tangential force, there will be further plastic flow at constant shear stress, resulting in an incremental
contact area of A. Bowden and Tabor called this increase the junction growth. Assume τi is shear
stress of fractured interface.
𝑭𝑳𝒊𝒎𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 = 𝝉𝒊 𝑨𝒎𝒂𝒙
𝜹𝑾 𝟐
√
𝜹𝑨 𝝉𝒚 = ( ) + 𝜹𝑭𝟐
𝟐
𝟐 𝜹𝑾 𝟐
(𝝉𝒚 𝑨𝒎𝒂𝒙 ) = ( ) + (𝝉𝒊 𝑨𝒎𝒂𝒙 )𝟐
𝟐
𝑭𝑳𝒊𝒎𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈
μ=
𝑾
𝝉𝒊 𝑨𝒎𝒂𝒙
μ= 𝟐
𝟐 √(𝝉𝟐𝒚 −𝝉𝟐𝒊 ) + (𝑨𝒎𝒂𝒙 )𝟐
𝝉𝒊 𝟎.𝟓
μ= 𝟐
= 𝝉 𝟐
𝟐 √(𝝉𝟐𝒚 −𝝉𝟐𝒊 ) √( 𝒚 ) −𝟏
𝝉𝒊
coefficient of friction can be calculated from ratio τi / τy, as given in Table 2.4

Table 2.4
The above analysis applies only to clean surfaces. Understanding this mechanism motivates to apply
thin film of low shear strength materials to the surfaces. Therefore, in order to reduce maintenance
cost and increase bearing life, interface shear strength of contacting surfaces need to be as low as
possible. How to reduce Junction Growth? Two methods to reduce junction growth are
contaminations (reducing adhesion) and lubrication.
Contamination: A few molecules thick oxide layer (encountered with metals in air) on the
surface (as shown in Fig. 2.17) can reduce the friction (i.e. μ = 0.1 to 0.3)
Fig.: Surface contamination
The surface film prevents the surfaces from sticking together strongly and allows only a small
amount of junction growth to occur. The formation and breakage of contamination layer is a
dynamic process; therefore, there is possibilities of variation in μ. • Weak(ductile) metal, weak
oxide: Film easily broken, rapid junction growth, and high μ Examplesa: indium, gold.
• Weak metal, strong oxide: Transition from low to high μ as load increases (as shown in Fig. 2.18)
e.g. Copper, Iron.
• Strong metal, strong oxide: Low μ at all loads. Examples: steel,
Fig. Variation in μ with load
Note : Both junction growth and ploughing (two/three) effects play role, and either of these may
dominate friction behavior. Lubrication to reduce Junction Growth : 1. To reduce junction growth
minimum value of ratio τi/τy(Eq. 2.1) must be selected.
2. Lubricant: Presence of liquid lubricant reduces chances of junction growth. One way is to choose
liquid lubricant which has a low value of τ.
3. Use of suitable contacting materials : Using less reactive material (but high hardness) materials,
which result in low shear strength of interface.
4. Never use same metal or closely similar metals in tribo-pair : (μCopper on copper = 1.0, μ
Aluminum – lowcar bonsteel = 0.8, μSilver - lowcarbonsteel = 0.3).
5. Ductility: Use materials of limited ductility. These materials after a small amount of junction
growth will fracture rather than flow further. Sliding Dry Friction with Time : Sliding in dry contact
starts with running-in period :
• High rate of ploughing of softer surface by asperities
- Relatively low adhesion.
• Rupture/breakage of asperities polish surface:
- Reduce ploughing coefficient but increase coefficient of adhesion.
- On removal of contaminating layers, adhesion coefficient increases.

Fig. Sliding friction vs time
Coefficient of friction varies with sliding time. Essentially, a dry contact starts with a running in
period(as shown by 'Line 1' in Fig. 2.19). Initially, the friction force is largely a result of ploughing
of the surface by asperities. Adhesion does not play much significant role due to surface
contamination. Asperity deformation takes place and affects the static coefficient of friction and
surface is easily polished. This is the main reason of reduction in friction coefficient, as shown in
Fig. 2.19 by 'Line 1'. Consequently the coefficient of friction in the initial stage is largely
independent of the material combination. But if polishing wear process is able to remove the
contaminating layers, elements of bare surface will appear, resulting in increase in the coefficient
of friction due to increased adhesion as shown by 'Line 2'. In addition the coefficient of friction
increases due to rapid increase in the number of wear particles entrapped between the sliding
surfaces as a consequence of higher wear rates as shown by 'Line 3', 'Line 4', 'Line 5' and 'Line 6' in
Fig. 2.19. The deformation of asperities continues and the adhesion effect increases due to larger
clean interfacial areas. Some of the wear particles are trapped between the surfaces, causes
ploughing. A steady state friction conditions arrives depending on the worn out surfaces.
Laws of Rolling Friction

Coefficient of friction due to rolling (μr) is generally smaller than that caused by sliding action.
Therefore wherever possible rolling friction compared to sliding friction is desired. μr is defined as
the force required to maintain steady rolling, divided by the load carried by the roller. Rolling
friction coefficients often depend on hardness of contacting solids. On increasing hardness, elastic
deformation under load decreases. Therefore, hysteresis loss and so the value of μr decreases. For
hard smooth steel rollers, the coefficient of rolling friction ranges between 0.01 and 0.001. A roller
or sphere made of soft material(as shown in Fig. 2.20) when rolled over other soft surface, generates
a higher level of rolling friction. Sources of Rolling Friction : It is important to know the source of
rolling friction, so that proper actions may be implemented to control the rolling friction. Let us

consider a hard steel ball which rolls over a softer rubber such as shown in Fig. 2.20. As it rolls
along, the ball displaces rubber elasto-plastically around and ahead of it. The force required to
display rubber is almost equal to the observed rolling friction. Thus, the rolling friction is essentially
a measure of the force required to deform other material. With a very bouncy rubber rolling friction
will be lesser compared to a very soggy rubber.
The main contributions to friction in rolling contacts are :
1. Micro-slip effect within the contact area.
2. Elastic hysteresis of the contacting materials
3. Plastic deformation of the materials, and
4. Adhesion effects in the contact. It is important to note that lubricant cannot reduce deformation
of surface; therefore, lubricants have very little effect(except reduction in adhesion effects) on the
rolling friction.
Fig.: Rolling friction in rubber. Examples of Rolling Friction : • Ball bearings
Rolling are made of high strength (induced stresses are lesser than elastic compressive strength)
materials having hystereis losses lesser than one percent. Due to such materials(μ = 0.001).
In practice, the balls must be surrounded by cage to separate them and prevent the rubbing on one
another. But sliding between the cage and balls occurs, and this sliding friction is often far greater
than the rolling friction. Lubricants are used to reduce the sliding friction between balls and cage
and to prevent corrosion of the metal parts. • Automobile Tires :
In free rolling, the tire is deformed as it meets the road surface and recovers as it leaves. If there is
negligible slip between tire and road the energy loss is not large and μ = 0.01 to 0.03. However, If
the tire is made of a rubber with a higher hysteresis loss (or filled with lesser air-pressure), the rolling
friction is larger and there is a larger power loss. High hysteresis loss by tire, increases controllability

(better gripping of the road during accelerating, decelerating or cornering) and comfort (acts as
shock absorber in passing over rough road). Therefore, automobile tire material provides trade off
between "rolling friction", "Controllability" and "Comfort".
Friction Measurement Methods

The basic principle of friction measurement is to place two specimens together under normal
specified load and in relative motion while tangential force resisting motion is measured. When the
two objects are horizontal and without relative movement, there is no frictional force. As the objects
are slowly tilted, the force of static friction must increase from zero to counteract the component of
the force of gravity that acts along the interface. Eventually, as the angle increases, that component
of the force of gravity exceeds the maximum value of the force of static friction, and the top object
slides off.
As is show in free body diagram in the figure, there exists a relation between the angle
of the tilted plane and the coefficient of friction is measured.
The Pin-on-Disc Friction Rig A DC heated pin assembly that clamps a test piece in place is
mounted below a loadcell at one end of a lever arm, which is pivoted about the horizontal axis. An
electric servo actuator is connected to the other end, enabling the DC heated pin assembly to be
forced down into a rotating disc. The lever arm assembly is mounted on a second bearing with a
vertical axis, rotation of which is prevented by the frictional loadcell. A schematic of the test system
is shown in Figure 4, below.

Figure. Pin on Disc Test rig
The test piece is a U shaped piece of metal, machined to give a nominal 5mm x 5mm contact area
during testing. The nominal thickness of the pin at point of contact is approximately 1mm. The loss
of volume is measured and thus co efficient of friction is measured.
There are different types based on direction of force and rotation as shown in the figure below.
Friction of Metals and Non-Metals
Friction is the tangential resistance to motion. The occurrence of friction is a part of everyday life.
It is needed so that we have control on our walking. On the other hand, in most of running machines
friction is undesirable (energy loss, leading to wear of vital parts, deteriorating performance due to
heat generation) and all sorts of attempts (i.e. using low friction materials, lubricating surfaces with
oil or greases, changing design so that sliding can be reduced) have been made to reduce it. Often
coefficient of friction(μ) is considered a constant value for a pair of material. In addition, the value
of μ is accounted much lesser than 1.0. In practice μ greater than 1.0, as shown in Table 2.1, has
been observed. Generally, coefficients of friction depend on parameters such as temperature, surface
roughness and hardness.

Table: Coefficient of friction for various metals sliding on themselves.
Fig. 2.1 indicates that under dry lubricant conditions, μ ranges between 0.1 to 1.0 for most of the
materials. Very thin lubrication reduces coefficient by 10 times
Fig. 2.1: Coefficient of friction for various metals
Generally, adhesion (Fig. 2.2) increases the friction. So, while selecting metal pairs, low adhesion
metal pairs must be selected to reduce friction force. Similar material pair must be avoided as similar
materials have higher tendency of adhesion.
In the case of soft and ductile metals such as In, Pb and Sn, the contact area is large even at low
loads but the shear strength of the contacts may be low. The coefficient of friction is generally high
because of large contact areas and small elastic recovery. Hexagonal metals such as Co and Mg as
well as other non-hexagonal metals such as Mo and Cr exhibit low friction. Chromium forms a
tenacious oxide film which is responsible for low friction. Co, Mo and Cr are common alloying
elements in steels to reduce friction, wear, and corrosion. In general, the coefficient of friction for
an alloy tends to be lower than that of its pure

components. Binary alloys of cobalt and chromium with more than 10% Cr exhibit excellent
resistance to oxidation and corrosion. Tungsten and molybdenum are added to increase their strength
and to improve friction and wear properties. Haynes Stellites (Co-Cr-W-C alloys) and Tribaloys
(Co-Cr-Mo-Si-C) are commonly used for tribological applications. Nickel-based alloys are poor in
galling resistance (a severe form of adhesive wear) and are inferior to cobalt-based alloys. Lead-
based white metals (babbitts), brass and bronze and gray cast iron exhibit relatively low friction. All
contain phases which form films of low shear strength. In the lead-based alloys, a thin film of lead
is formed during sliding and in gray cast iron, the low shear strength film is provided by the graphite
constituent. Thus, these alloys exhibit intrinsically low coefficients of friction in dry sliding against
steel, which do not depend on the formation of a protective oxide layer. These alloys are commonly
used as bearing and seal materials.
Fig. : Adhesive Friction among various materials.
Adhesional Friction of Elastomers:
The classical adhesion theories of friction just described are generally accepted for all materials
except fully viscoelastic materials-elastomers. Several molecular-kinetic and mechanical models
have been proposed in the literature (Moore, 1972; Bartenev and Lavrentev, 1981; Bhushan et al.,
1984). In an adhesion model advanced by Bulgin et al. (1962), part of the
physical model considers a simplified stick-slip event on a molecular level, and part uses
information from a mechanical model. Consider an elastomer sliding on a rigid surface and assume
that adhesion takes place at a point A, Figure 5.2.9a. Let the adhesion persist for a time during which
the system moves a distance and then release takes place. An associated strain develops in the
material causing energy to be stored elastically in the element, Figure 5.2.9b. When the elastic stress
exceeds the adhesive force, failure of the adhesive bonds take place at A and the element relaxes.
Adhesion takes place at a new point A, and so one, Figure 5.2.9c. The coefficient of adhesional
friction (μa) is given by
𝝅 𝑨𝒓
𝝁𝒂 = 𝝉 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝜹
𝟐 𝑾 𝒂
Where 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝜹 is the tangent modulus or damping factor.
Friction of Ceramics
Friction and wear data of ceramics in ambient and extreme environments can be found in various
references (Bhushan and Sibley, 1982; Anonymous, 1987; Chandrasekar and Bhushan, 1990;
Jahanmir, 1994; Bhushan and Gupta, 1997). Ceramics exhibit high mechanical strength, do not lose
much mechanical strength or oxidize readily at elevated temperatures and are resistant to corrosive
environments. Therefore, ceramic couples are commonly used in extreme environmental
applications, such as high loads, high speeds, high temperatures, and corrosive environments. The
mechanical behavior of ceramics differs from that of metals/alloys because of the different nature
of the interatomic forces with covalent or ionic bonding in ceramics compared to that of metallic
bonding in metals/alloys. Ceramic materials of either bond type show only limited plastic flow at
room temperature and much less ductility than metals. Although adhesive forces, of covalent, ionic,
or van der Waals origin, are present between
Figure 5.4.2 Coefficient of friction as a function of temperature for cobalt sliding on stainless
steel at a normal load of 5 N and sliding velocity of 25 mm/s.

ceramic materials in contact, the low real area of contact results in relatively low values of the
coefficient of friction comparable to metallic couples sliding in air in the presence of intact oxide
films. Under clean environments, the coefficients of friction of ceramic pairs do not reach the very
high values observed in clean metals, especially in ultra-high vacuum or in the absence of oxygen.
Friction of Polymers
Polymers include plastics and elastomers. The coefficient of friction of selected polymers used for
tribological applications, sliding against themselves or against metals or ceramics, ranges from 0.15
to 0.6 except for polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) which exhibits a very low coefficient of friction of
about 0.05, comparable to that of conventional solid lubricants (Lancaster, 1972; Bhushan and
Dashnaw, 1981; Bhushan and Wilcock, 1981; Bhushan and Winn, 1981; Asperity deformation with
polymers is primarily elastic. In this respect, the friction of polymers differ from metals and
ceramics. As shown in Chapter 3, the mechanical property ratio E/H along with surface roughness
determines the extent of plasticity in the contact region. For metals and ceramics E/H is typically
100 or greater, whereas for polymers it is on the order of 10. Thus, the plasticity index for a polymer
is on the order of one-tenth of that of a metal or a ceramic, consequently contact is primarily elastic
except for very rough surfaces. The forces of friction are mainly adhesion, deformation and elastic
hysteresis. Adhesion responsible in polymers results from the weak bonding forces such as van der
Waals forces and hydrogen bonding, which are also responsible for the cohesion between polymer
chains themselves in the bulk of the material.
Friction of Solid Lubricants
Solid lubricants are solid materials that exhibit very low friction and moderately low wear in sliding
in the absence of an external supply of lubricant. The most commonly used solid lubricants are
graphite and molybdenum disulfide as well as PTFE discussed earlier (Braithwaite, 1964, 1967;
Anonymous, 1971, 1978, 1984; Clauss, 1972; Paxton, 1979; Iliuc, 1980; Bhushan and Gupta, 1997).
A new form of carbon – fullerenes or Buckyballs (C60) – is also proposed as a solid lubricant
(Bhushan et al., 1993; Gupta et al., 1994). CaF2 and CaF2 − BaF2 eutectic based coatings are also
used for solid lubrication (Bhushan and Gupta, 1997). Graphite, a planar molecule, has a hexagonal
layered structure with a large number of parallel layers in the ABAB stacking sequence along the c
axis, stacked 0.3354 nm apart, Within each layer (plane), atoms are arranged in hexagonal structure
(benzene ring) with each carbon atom bonded (C–C distance = 0.1415 nm) to three other carbon
atoms, arranged at the apexes of an equilateral triangle. The three hybridized valence electrons of
carbon atoms create covalent (σ) bonds and the remaining unhybridized fourth electron creates π
bonds between the two carbon atoms. The sheets of carbon atoms are attracted to each other only
by the weak van der Waals forces. The graphite material is anisotropic. The existence of

σ bonds explains the high electrical and thermal conductivity in the hexagonal plane—over 100
times that normal to the plane. They cleave (separate) easily, which accounts for the typical low
friction of graphite.
WEAR
Introduction
Wear is progressive damage, involving material loss, which occurs on the surface of a component
as a result of its motion relative to adjacent working parts. Wear is an almost inevitable companion
of friction. The economic consequences of wear are widespread and pervasive. They not only
involve the costs of downtime but the cost of replacement parts, lost production, and the
consequences of lost business opportunities. Wear is customarily noted by “ω” and is defined by
the volume of material lost from the wearing surface per unit sliding distance. Its dimensions are
consequently, length. For a dry or unlubricated surface, the factors for wear rate are: normal load,
the relative sliding speed, the initial temperature of the sliding pair, and mechanical properties of
the materials involved. There are many physical mechanisms that can contribute to wear and
certainly no simple and universal mathematical model is applicable to all situations. Elements such
as entrained dirt, moisture, corrosion of surfaces, de‐lamination of component material, etc. can
definitely contribute to wear. The Archard wear equation states that ω is directly proportional to the
load W on contact but inversely proportional to the surface hardness “H” of the wear material
or:
ω = K (W/H)
Undesirable removal of material from operating solid surface is known as wear. There are two
definitions:
(1) Zero wear : Removal of material which causes polishing of material surfaces may be known
as "Zero wear". It may increase performance. It is for betterment, so it is not undesirable. Zero wear
is basically a polishing process in which the asperities of the contacting surfaces are gradually worn
off until a very fine, smooth surface develops. Generally, “polishing-in” wear is desirable for better
life of tribo-pair. Fig. 3.1(a) shows polished surface of helical gear which occurs due to slow loss of
metal at a rate that will have a little affect on the satisfactory performance within the life of the
gears.

Fig. Zero wear of helical gear
2) Measurable wear : Removal of material from surface that increases vibration; noise or surface
roughness may be treated an "Measurable wear". Often, we measure wear in volume/mass reduction.
Undesirable removal of material occurs in measurable wear. Measurable wear refers to a loss of
material which must be counted to estimate the life of tribo-pair. The extent of measurable wear
depends on the lubrication regime, the nature of the load, the surface hardness and roughness, and
on the contaminants in the lubricating oil. A typical example of measurable wear in helical gear is
shown in Fig. 3.1(b) which is typically known as pitting.
Fig.: Measurable wear of helical gear
Pitting is a surface fatigue failure which occurs due to repeated loading of tooth surface and the
contact stress exceeding the surface fatigue strength of the material. Material in the fatigue region
gets removed and a pit is formed. The pit itself will cause stress concentration and soon the pitting
spreads to adjacent region till the whole surface is covered with pits. Subsequently, higher impact
load resulting from pitting may cause fracture of already weakened tooth. Sometimes impurities in
materials provide nucleus for crack generation as shown in Fig. 3.1(c). Fig. 3.1(d) shows merger of
generated cracks, which finally detaches from the surface as shown in Fig. 3.1(e). Such formation
of pits (removal of material) comes under measurable wear.

Fig.: Formation of pit
Types of Wear
Adhesive Wear
Adhesive wear occurs when two nominally flat solid bodies are in sliding contact, whether
lubricated or not. Adhesion (or bonding) occurs at the asperity contacts at the interface, and these
contacts are sheared by sliding, which may result in the detachment of a fragment from one surface
and attachment to the other surface. As the sliding continues, the transferred fragments may come
off the surface on which they are transferred and be transferred back to the original surface, or else
form loose wear particles. Some are fractured by a fatigue process during repeated loading and
unloading action resulting in formation of loose particles. Several mechanisms have been proposed
for the detachment of a fragment of a material. In an early theory of sliding wear (still well
recognized), it was suggested that shearing can occur at the original interface or in the weakest
region in one of the two bodies (Archard, 1953), Figure 7.2.1. In most cases, interfacial adhesion
strength is expected to be small as compared to the breaking strength of surrounding local regions;
thus, the break during shearing occurs at the interface (path 1) in most of the contacts and no wear
occurs in that sliding cycle. In a small fraction of contacts, break may occur in one of the two bodies
(path 2) and a small fragment (the shaded region in Figure 7.2.1) may become attached to the other
surface. These transfer fragments are irregular and blocky shape.
Case Study for Adhesive Wear
A scanning electron microscope (SEM) micrograph of a stainless steel shaft surface after adhesive
wear by sliding in a stainless steel journal bearing under unlubricated conditions is shown in Figure
7.2.3 (Bhushan et al., 1985b). Evidence of adhesive debris pullout can be clearly seen. During
sliding, surface asperities undergo plastic deformation and/or fracture. The subsurface also
undergoes plastic deformation and strain hardening. The SEM micrograph of the cross section of
the shaft surface from adhesive wear shows visible plastic deformation with a 25 μm thick layer,
Figure 7.2.4. (A copper plate was applied before sectioning to protect the worn surface.) Selected
area electron diffraction studies in a transmission electron microscope of the cross sections of worn
samples showed that extensive structural changes had occurred. We believe that material close to
the worn surface (∼15 μm thick) may have recrystallized from an instantaneous surface temperature
rise during sliding. Microhardness measurements of the cross-section ofworn samples showed that
a 10–80% increase of hardness in the worn layer had occurred (Cook and Bhushan, 1973; Bhushan
et al., 1985b). Severe types of adhesive wear are often called galling, scuffing, welding or smearing,
although these terms are sometimes used loosely to describe other types of wear.
Figure 7.2.3 SEM micrograph of 303 stainless steel shaft surface after adhesive wear under unlubricated
conditions. Sliding direction is along the vertical axis
Figure 7.2.4 SEM micrograph of cross section of 303 stainless steel shaft after adhesive wear. Sliding
direction is along the vertical axis.

Abrasive Wear (by Plastic Deformation and Fracture):
Adhesive wear is a result of micro‐junctions caused by welding between opposing asperities on the
rubbing surfaces of the counter‐bodies. The load applied to the contacting asperities is so high that
they deform and adhere to each other forming micro‐joints. The motion of the rubbing counterbodies
result in rupture of the micro‐joints. The welded asperity ruptures in the non‐deformed (non‐cold
worked) regions. Thus some of the material is transferred by its counter‐body. This effect is called
scuffing or galling. When considerable areas of the rubbing surfaces are joined during the friction,
a seizure resistance (compatibility) or seizure of one body by the counter‐body may occur. Several
factors can lower adhesive wear. These are as follows:
• Lower load.
• Harder rubbing materials.
• Removing contaminates between rubbing surfaces.
• Presence of solid lubricants.
• Presence of lubricating oil.
• Anti‐wear additives in oil.
Abrasive wear is damage to the surface of a component which arises due to the relative motion
between those surfaces. Harder asperities or perhaps hard particles trapped at the interface of two
surfaces create the wear model. These hard particles may have been introduced between the two
softer surfaces as a contaminant from the outside environment or formed due to oxidation or some
other chemical process. Abrasive wear can occur when a harder material is rubbing against a softer
material.
• If there are only two rubbing parts involved in the friction process the wear is called two body
wear. In this case the wear of the softer material is caused by the asperities on the harder surface.
• If the wear is caused by a hard particle (grit) trapped between the rubbing surfaces it is called three
body wear. The particle may be either free or partially embedded into one of the mating materials.
In the micro‐level, abrasive action results in one of the following wear modes:
• Ploughing. The material is shifted to the sides of the wear groove. The material is not removed
from the surface.
• Cutting. A chip forms in front of the cutting asperity/grit. The material is removed (lost) from the
surface in the volume equal to the volume of the wear track (groove).
• Cracking (brittle fracture). The material cracks in the subsurface regions surrounding the wear

groove. The volume of the lost material is higher than the volume of the wear track.
The following figure will help demonstrate the mechanisms:
Fig. TWO‐ BODY AND THREE BODY WEAR MECHANISMS
Abrasive wear occurs when asperities of a rough, hard surface or hard particles slide on a softer
surface and damage the interface by plastic deformation or fracture. In the case of ductile materials
with high fracture toughness (e.g., metals and alloys), hard asperities or hard particles result in the
plastic flow of the softer material. Most metallic and ceramic surfaces during sliding show clear
evidence of plastic flow, even some for ceramic brittle materials. Contacting asperities of metals
deform plastically even at the lightest loads. In the case of brittle materials with low fracture
toughness, wear occurs by brittle fracture. In these cases, the worn zone consists of significant
cracking. There are two general situations for abrasive wear, Figure 7.2.12. In the first case, the hard
surface is the harder of two rubbing surfaces (two-body abrasion), for example, in mechanical
operations, such as grinding, cutting and machining; and in the second case, the hard surface is a
third body, generally a small particle of abrasive, caught between the two other surfaces and
sufficiently harder, that it is able to abrade either one or both of the mating surfaces (three-body
abrasion), for example, in free-abrasive lapping and polishing. In many cases, the wear mechanism
at the start is adhesive, which generates wear particles that get trapped at the interface, resulting in
a three-body abrasive wear (Bhushan et al., 1985b).

Figure : Schematics of (a) a rough, hard surface or a surface mounted with abrasive grits sliding on a softer
surface, and (b) free abrasive grits caught between the surfaces with at least one of the surfaces softer than the
abrasive grits.
Abrasive Wear by Plastic Deformation
Figure 7.214 : Schematics of abrasive wear processes as a result of plastic deformation by three
deformation modes
Material removal from a surface via plastic deformation during abrasion can occur by several
deformation modes which include plowing, wedge formation and cutting, Figure 7.2.14. Plowing
results in a series of grooves as a result of the plastic flow of the softer material. In the plowing (also
called ridge formation) process, material is displaced from a groove to the sides without the removal
of material, Figure 7.2.14a. The plowing process also causes subsurface plastic deformation and
may contribute to the nucleation of surface and subsurface cracks (Bhushan, 1999). Further loading

and unloading (low-cycle, high-stress fatigue) cause these cracks and pre-existing voids and cracks
to propagate (in the case of subsurface cracks to propagate parallel to the surface at some depth) and
join neighboring cracks which eventually shear to the surface leading to thin wear platelets. In the
wedge formation type of abrasive wear, an abrasive tip plows a groove and develops a wedge on its
front. It generally occurs when the ratio of shear strength of the interface relative to the shear
strength of the bulk is high (about 0.5–1). In this situation, only some of the material displaced from
the groove is displaced to the sides and the remaining material shows up as a wedge, Figure 7.2.14b.
In the cutting form of abrasive wear, an abrasive tip with large attack angle plows a groove and
removes the material in the form of discontinuous or ribbon-shaped debris particles similar to that
produced in a metal cutting operation, Figure 7.2.14c. This process results in generally significant
removal of material and the displaced material relative to the size of the groove is very little.
Case Study: To obtain a quantitative expression for abrasive wear for plastic contacts, we consider
a simplified model, in which one surface consists of an array of hard conical asperities sliding on a
softer and flat surface and plows a groove of uniform depth (Rabinowicz, 1995).
Figure 7.2.16 SEM micrographs observed of wear process during wear of unlubricated brass by a steel pin
Figure 7.2.17 shows a single conical asperity, with a roughness angle (or attack angle) of θ (apex
semi-angle of asperities 90◦ – θ), creating a track through the softer surface with a depth of d and
width of 2a. We assume that the material has yielded under the normal load dW;
Figure 7.2.17 A hard conical asperity in sliding contact with a softer surface in an abrasive wear mode

Fatigue Wear
Subsurface and surface fatigues are observed during repeated rolling (negligible friction) and
sliding, respectively. The repeated loading and unloading cycles to which the materials are exposed
may induce the formation of subsurface or surface cracks, which eventually, after a critical number
of cycles, will result in the breakup of the surface with the formation of large fragments, leaving
large pits in the surface, also known as pitting. Prior to this critical point (which may be hundreds,
thousands, or even millions of cycles), negligible wear takes place, which is in marked contrast to
the wear caused by an adhesive or abrasive mechanism, where wear causes a gradual deterioration
from the start of running. Therefore, the amount of material removed by fatigue wear is not a useful
parameter. Much more relevant is the useful life in terms of the number of revolutions or time before
fatigue failure occurs. Chemically enhanced crack growth (most common in ceramics) is commonly
referred to as static fatigue. In the presence of tensile stresses and water vapor at the crack tip in
many ceramics, a chemically induced rupture of the crack-tip bonds occurs rapidly, which increases
the crack velocity. Chemically enhanced deformation and fracture result in an increased wear of
surface layers in static and dynamic (rolling and sliding) conditions.
Figure 7.2.28 Spalling of a 52100 ball bearing race from subsurface fatigue.
Impact Wear
Two broad types of wear phenomena belong under this heading: erosive and percussive wear.
Erosion can occur by jets and streams of solid particles, liquid droplets, and implosion of bubbles
formed in the fluid. Percussion occurs from repetitive solid body impacts. Repeated impacts result
in progressive loss of solid material.
Erosion
Erosive wear is the process involving the removal of material by the impingement of particles,
usually at high velocities, on component surfaces. Erosive wear is caused by impingement of
particles (solid, liquid or gaseous), which remove fragments of materials from the surface due to
momentum effect. Erosive wear of engine bearings may also be caused by cavitation in the
lubrication oil. The cavitation voids (bubbles) may form when the oil exits from convergent gaps
between the bearing and journal surfaces. The oil pressure rapidly drops, providing conditions for
the formation of voids when the pressure is lower than the oil vapor pressure. The bubbles (voids)
then collapse producing a shock wave, which removes particles of the bearing material from the
bearing surface. Erosion can be brought about deliberately by shot‐blasting using iron or sand
particles but, when encountered unintentionally in service, is often extremely deleterious. Severe
erosion can be present during the transport of powders or slurries, the impact of dust particles on
the blades of turbo‐machinery, and the operation of fluid bed combustors. The particles do not have
to be solid. The operation of water droplets on rotating machinery can impart major damage.
Solid Particle Erosion

Solid particle erosion occurs by impingement of solid particles, Figure 7.2.33. It is a form of
abrasion that is generally treated rather differently because the contact stress arises from the kinetic
energy of particles flowing in an air or liquid stream as it encounters a surface. The particle velocity
and impact angle combined with the size of the abrasive give a measure of the kinetic energy of the
impinging particles, that is, of the square of the velocity. Wear debris formed in erosion occurs as a
result of repeated impacts.
Liquid Impingement Erosion
When small drops of liquid strike the surface of a solid at high speeds (as low as 300 m/s), very high
pressures are experienced, exceeding the yield strength of most materials. Thus, plastic deformation
or fracture can result from a single impact, and repeated impact leads to pitting and erosive wear. In
many cases, the probable impact velocities and impact angles are such that pure liquid impingement
erosion is an unlikely mechanism; an erosion-corrosion mechanism usually does more damage
(Preece, 1979). The damage by this process is important in the so-called moisture erosion of low-
pressure steam turbine blades operating with wet steam, rain erosion of aircraft or missile surfaces
and helicopter rotors, nuclear power plant pipes, and heat exchangers.
Cavitation Erosion
Cavitation is defined as the repeated nucleation, growth, and violent collapse of cavities or bubbles
in a liquid. Cavitation erosion arises when a solid and fluid are in relative motion, and bubbles
formed in the fluid become unstable and implode against the surface of the solid. When bubbles
collapse that are in contact with or very close to a solid surface, they will collapse asymmetrically,
forming a microjet of liquid directed toward the solid. The solid material will absorb the impact
energy as elastic deformation, plastic deformation or fracture.
The latter two processes may cause localized deformation and/or erosion of the solid surface
(Preece, 1979). Damage by this process is found in components such as ships’ propellers and
centrifugal pumps. All liquids contain gaseous, liquid and solid impurities, which act as nucleation
sites for the bubbles or vapor-filled voids. When a liquid is subjected to sufficiently high tensile
stresses, bubbles are formed at weak regions within the liquid. Subsequently if this liquid is
subjected to compressive stresses, i.e. to higher hydrostatic pressures, these bubbles will collapse.
In practice, cavitation can occur in any liquid in which the pressure fluctuates either because of flow
patterns or vibration in the system.
Chemical (Corrosive) Wear
Chemical or corrosive wear occurs when sliding takes place in a corrosive environment. In air, the
most dominant corrosive medium is oxygen. Therefore, chemical wear in air is generally called
oxidative wear. In the absence of sliding, the chemical products of the corrosion (e.g., oxides) would
form a film typically less than a micrometer thick on the surfaces, which would tend to slow down
or even arrest the corrosion, but the sliding action wears the chemical film away, so that the chemical
attack can continue. Thus, chemical wear requires both chemical reaction (corrosion) and rubbing.
Machinery operating in an industrial environment or near the coast generally produces chemical
products (i.e., it corrodes) more rapidly than when operating in a clean environment. Chemical wear
is important in a number of industries, such as mining, mineral processing, chemical processing,
and slurry handling. Corrosion can occur because of the chemical or electrochemical interaction of
the interface with the environment. Chemical corrosion occurs in a highly corrosive environment
and in high-temperature and high-humidity environments. Electrochemical corrosion is a chemical
reaction accompanied by the passage of an electric current, and for this to occur, a potential
difference must exist between two regions. The region at low potential is known as an anode and
the region at high potential is known as a cathode. If there is a current flow between the anode and
cathode through an electrolyte (any conductive medium), at the anode the metal dissolves in the
form of ions and liberates electrons. The electrons migrate through the metal to the cathode and
reduce either ions or oxygen. Thus, electrochemical corrosion is equivalent to a short-connected
battery with partial anodic and partial cathodic reactions occurring on the two sliding members
(commonly referred to as galvanic corrosion) or in a sliding member on two regions atomic
distances away. These regions may shift to different locations (Wagner and Traud, 1938).
Electrochemical corrosion is influenced by the relative electro potential. Electrochemical corrosion
may accelerate in a corrosive environment because corrosive fluids may provide a conductive
medium necessary for electrochemical corrosion to occur on the rubbing surfaces. The most
common liquid environments are aqueous, and here small amounts of dissolved gases, commonly

oxygen or carbon dioxide, influence corrosion. A typical example of a corroded roller subsequent
to running in a bearing is shown in Figure 7.2.39. The corrosion left a multitude of dark-bottomed
pits, the surroundings of which are polished by running. The condition subsequently creates
extensive surface-originated spallings from a multitude of initiated points.
Figure 7.2.39 SEM micrograph of 52100 quenched and tempered roller bearing after corrosive wear.
Fretting and Fretting Corrosion
Fretting wear is a phenomenon that can occur between two surfaces which have a relative oscillatory
motion of small amplitude, usually only a few tens of microns. The main characteristic of a fretting
contact in ferrous material pairs is the appearance of reddish‐brown debris made up of particles of
the hard oxides of iron. These can act as a grinding paste or lap producing highly polished patches
on the fretted contact Fretting occurs where low-amplitude oscillatory motion in the tangential
direction (ranging from a few tens of nanometers to few tens of microns) takes place between
contacting surfaces, which are nominally at rest (Anonymous, 1955; Hurricks, 1970;Waterhouse,
1981, 1992). This is a common occurrence, since most machinery is subjected to vibration, both in
transit and in operation. Examples of vulnerable components are shrink fits, bolted parts, and
splines. The contacts between hubs, shrink- and press-fits, and bearing housings on loaded rotating
shafts or axles are particularly prone to fretting damage. Flexible couplings and splines, particularly
where they form a connection between two shafts and are designed to accommodate some
misalignment, can suffer fretting wear. Basically, fretting is a form of adhesive or abrasive wear,
where the normal load causes adhesion between asperities and oscillatory movement causes
ruptures, resulting in wear debris. Most commonly, fretting is combined with corrosion, in which
case the wear mode is known as fretting corrosion. The oscillatory movement is usually the result
of external vibration, but in many cases it is the consequence of one of the members of the contact
being subjected to a cyclic stress (i.e., fatigue), which results in early initiation of fatigue cracks and
results in a usually a more damaging aspect of fretting, known as fretting fatigue. Surfaces subjected
to fretting wear have a characteristic appearance with red-brown patches on ferrous metals and
adjacent areas that are highly polished because of the lapping quality of the hard iron-oxide debris.
Figure 7.2.41 shows the SEM micrograph of the 303 stainless steel shaft after it underwent fretting
corrosion. A rapid increase in wear rate occurs with slip amplitude over an amplitude range, Figure
7.2.42. For a given slip amplitude, the amount of wear per unit of sliding distance per unit of applied
normal load linearly increases with the number of oscillating cycles up to an amplitude of about 100
μm. Above this amplitude, the wear rate per unit sliding distance becomes constant, identical with
unidirectional or reciprocating sliding wear rates. This then gives a possible upper limit for the slip
amplitude for the case of true fretting. At small amplitudes, characteristic of fretting, the relative
velocities are much lower, even at high frequencies, compared with conditions in typical
unidirectional sliding. The fretting wear rate is directly proportional to the normal load for a given
slip amplitude. In a partial slip situation, the frequency of oscillation has little effect on the wear
rate per unit distance in the low-frequency range, whereas the increase in the strain rate at high
frequencies leads to increased fatigue damage and increased corrosion due to rise in temperature.
However, in the total-slip situation, there is little effect of the frequency (Waterhouse, 1992)
Figure 7.2.41 SEM micrographs of 303 stainless steel shaft surface after fretting corrosion.

Wear Debris Analysis
Types of Particles Present in Wear Debris The size and shape of debris may change during sliding
in dry and lubricated systems; therefore, the condition of a system can be monitored by debris
sampling and maintenance can be scheduled, known as condition-based maintenance. Mild wear is
characterized by finely divided wear debris (typically 0.01–1 μm in particle size). The worn surface
is relatively smooth. Severe wear, in contrast, results in much larger particles, typically on the order
of 20–200 μm in size, which may be visible even with the naked eye; the worn surface is rough.
Particles are collected during sliding for analysis. Particles are collected from dry interfaces by
sucking air from the sliding interface on a filter paper. Particles in a sample of lubricant from an oil-
lubricated system are recovered by filtration, centrifuging, or magnetically (for magnetic particles).
The technique commonly used for ferrous metals, known as ferrography, uses a magnetic field to
sort particles by the size and shape of the magnetic particles (Scott andWestcott, 1977). The size,
shape, structural, and chemical details of particles are analyzed using various techniques including
optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission and scanning transmission
electron microscopy (TEM/STEM), energy dispersive and wavelength dispersive spectroscopy
(EDS and WDS), Auger electron spectroscopy (AES), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), X-
ray and electron diffraction. Size analysis of airborne particles is also carried out using particle
counters, generally based on a lightscattering method. Particles can be classified based on the wear
mechanism or their morphology. Particles collected from a wear test may not be in the same state
in which these were first produced because of changes in subsequent sliding. Since it is difficult to
identify the exact possible wear mechanism, particles are generally classified based on their
morphology, and their description follows (Scott, 1975; Scott and Westcott, 1977; Ruff et al.
Plate-Shaped Particles
Thin, plate-shaped or flake-type wear particles with an aspect ratio of 2–10, are commonly found in
wear debris from dry and lubricated interfaces. These particles are produced as a result of plowing
followed by repeated loading and unloading fatigue, as a result of nucleation and propagation of
subsurface cracks or plastic shear in the asperity contacts, Figures 7.3.1 and 7.3.2. Note that particles
produced in rolling-contact fatigue are large and their formation develops macroscopic pits.

Figure 7.3.1 Secondary electron images of (a) a wear track on single-crystal Si(111) after sliding
against a diamond pin at a normal load of 0.5 N and a sliding velocity of 25 mm/s in vacuum, and
(b) a flake-type debris particle.
Ribbon-Shaped Particles
Ribbon-shaped or cutting-type particles are frequently found with aspect ratios, on the order of ten
or more; and usually are curved and even curly. These are produced as a result of plastic
deformation. They have all the characteristics of machining chips: as a result, the ribbon-shaped
particles are referred to as microcutting chips or cutting chips. They are generally produced during
run-in, as a result of detachment of fin-like ridges generally present at the edges of the abrasion
grooves in machined (e.g., ground) surfaces. These particles are produced with sharp asperities or
abrasive particles digging into the mating surface with material flowing up the front face of the
asperity or abrasive particles and being detached from the wearing surface in the form of a chip,
Figure 7.3.3. Typically, changes in chemical composition are small.

SEM micrograph of flake-type debris particle generated by sliding a Cu-Be block on a

M2 tool steel ring at a normal load of 133 N, a sliding velocity of 50 mm/s and a sliding distance of 360 m in dry
argon.
Spherical Particles
Spherical particles are not common. Wear particles of various shapes may not escape from the
interface to become loose debris. Some of them remain trapped and are processed further as in the
spherical shape. Spherical particles have been observed in sliding (Rigney, 1992), fretting and
rolling contact fatigue (Smith, 1980; Samuels et al., 1981). Spherical particles with 1–5 μm in
diameter are reported to be associated with rolling-contact fatigue just prior to fatigue failure, Figure
7.3.4.
SEM micrograph of spherical particles present on the surface of a crack produced as a

result of rolling contact fatigue of steel surfaces.

Irregularly Shaped Particles
The majority of particles have an irregular morphology. Wear debris produced by detachment of
the transferred fragment in adhesive wear and brittle fracture are irregularly shaped, Figure 7.3.5.
Figure 7.3.5 SEM micrographs of (a) a wear surface of an austenitic steel showing irregular fragmentation
of the surface, and (b) typical debris particles produced from multiple fracturing in a brittle
layer produced on the surface during sliding
Delamination Theory of Wear
Delamination wear is sometimes referred to as surface fatigue wear. It is a relatively recently

discovered form of wear being first theorized about by Nam P. Suh at M.I.T. in 1973. It takes
place in three stages:
➢ Voids form near the surface.
➢ Voids grow as cracks parallel to the surface
➢ Detachment of long thin wear particles when the crack reaches a critical length and breaks
through to the surface
Voids usually form at the location of inclusions or other imperfections in the material. Dislocations
in the metal pile up at these impurities causing the voids to grow. Because metal impurities are key
in the nucleation of these voids, materials with few inclusions will suffer less wear from
delamination wear.
A crack growing from a void will not initially go to the surface because it is under a tri-lateral
compressive state of stress and there is plastic strain at the surface. Crack growth requires stress
reversals; in this case the stress reversals are supplied by asperities on the surface. As an asperity
slides over a surface the material facing the asperity sees alternating shear stresses. Because the
crack grows parallel to the surface at a shallow depth, wear particles formed by this mode of wear
will be long and thin.

Wear Testing Methods

Wear test is carried out to predict the wear performance and to investigate the wear mechanism.
Two specific reasons are as follows:
– From a material point of view, the test is performed to evaluate the wear property of a material so
as to determine whether the material is adequate for a specific wear application.
– From a surface engineering point of view, wear test is carried out to evaluate the potential of using
a certain surface engineering technology to reduce wear for a specific application, and to investigate
the effect of treatment conditions (processing parameters) on the wear performance, so that
optimised surface treatment conditions can be realised.
Three levels of wear testing
Wear test is performed in three levels, namely,
(1) laboratory test,
(2) component simulation test,
(3) in-service test.
We may use an example to describe the difference among each type of test. A new surface
engineering (SE) technology has been developed, which could be potentially used to improve the
wear resistance of parts for a metal-on-metal hip joint (for human body). Perhaps the ideal and
logical sequence of wear testing in this example will be as follows:
Stage 1 Laboratory test with small samples are initially carried out under testing conditions
simulated insofar as conveniently possible to determine whether the surface engineering technology
warrants further consideration, and if so, to find out under what treatment conditions, the highest
wear resistance improvement can be achieved.
Stage 2 In the next stage, the optimised surface treatment condition will be used to treat some real
joint parts, e.g. femoral head or cup, which will then be tested in a hip-joint simulator, with the
testing conditions being controlled as close as possible to those for a real human joint, for example,
lubricated with body liquid, temperature around 37°C, and moving like a human walking or running.
Stage 3 Only when the surface treated parts have survived the simulation tests, and indeed show
considerably improved wear resistance yet without losing other properties (e.g. corrosion and bio-
compatibility), can the in-service tests be carried out. The surface treated joint parts will be
implanted in a human body and tested (monitored) for a pro-longed period of time if there is no
immediate side effect after implantation.

As we can see, simulation test and in-service test produce more reliable results, however, laboratory
test is cheap, safe and quick and thus serve a most useful function. In the following sections, we will
introduce the methods for laboratory wear test. The working principles of three widely used
laboratory wear testers will be given, followed by an introduction of wear measurement. An example
of laboratory wear testing and measurement can be found in a short case study.
Test Methods
The test methods that are most likely to be a
reasonable match to the industrial need established by the survey of industrial wear problems.
The tests are:
• Fluid jet erosion testing
• Gas blast erosion test
• Three body abrasion testing
• ASTM B611, wet slurry steel wheel
• ASTM G65, dry sand rubber wheel
• ASTM G105, wet sand rubber wheel
• Ball cratering
• Scratch testing
• Pin-on-disc sliding wear
• Reciprocating sliding wear
• Fretting wear
• Thrust washer sliding wear
REQUIREMENT FOR WEAR TESTING
There are several different reasons for performing wear tests [2]. These are:
1. To obtain fundamental information on the mechanisms that occur in the wear of materials. These
studies are normally carried out in the laboratory with simple test systems.
2. To characterise materials performance and determine how variations in materials structure can
affect wear and friction. These studies are normally carried out in the laboratory with simple test
systems.
3. To compare the wear performance of materials using simple laboratory tests, aimed at simulating

in-service conditions, as a guide to material selection for actual machine components.
4. To perform component trials, where assemblies of components are tested on the bench in new
component development.
5. To perform prototype testing, where new components (or components from new materials) are
tested in the intended final application in better controlled conditions than the real life application.
6. Field trails to determine performance in real life situations.
7. Troubleshooting to determine the cause of failure of machinery.
Wear Testing Standards
The compilation of wear testing standards [6] lists 424 wear testing procedures. This list of standards
covers both those for the specification of products, and also more general test methods. The
standards originate from many countries around the world. However, the strong output of the ASTM
G 2 committee on wear testing is evident in the number of standards that have been issued by ASTM.
There is also a strong representation from the German wear testing community through DIN
standards. There is likely to be considerable duplication within this list of standards, with the same
test method listed several times within standards originating from different countries and for the
specification of different products. Where possible, the test methods listed in the standards have
been analysed to obtain information on the different types of test method. The results are given in
Table 4
Laboratory wear testing method

An apparatus for wear testing is termed as wear tester, tribotester or tribometer. The prefix of "tribo-
" refers to wear, friction and lubrication. Many, probably more than several hundreds, different wear
testing arrangements and procedures are used in laboratories around the world and described in
technical literature. However big difference of one arrangement as compared with another, a wear
tester will always involve two components loaded against and relatively moving each other. The
movement can be driven by a motor or by an electro-magnetic device. For convenient purpose, the
material or component being investigated is normally referred to as specimen, the other termed as
counterface. As examples, the working principle of three most widely used laboratory wear testers
are given below.
1. An Abrasive Wear Tester

Fig. 1 is a schematic of an abrasive wear tester, in which a wheel or a ball is driven by a motor,
rotating and sliding against a fixed sample in the presence of abrasive particles. The specimen is in
the form of a plate or a block. Contact pressure is controlled by dead weight through a loading lever.
The abrasive particles, such as silica, are added through a nozzle connecting to a hopper above,

giving a three-body wear situation. After a set time of running, the sample is removed, and wear
loss is measured. The parameters to be controlled include contact load, sliding speed, type of
abrasive particles and its flow rate.
Fig 1. An Abrasive Wear Tester
2. A rolling sliding wear tester
Rolling-sliding wear tester is the most popular tribometer for investigating wear as well as frictional
behaviour of a materials under conditions of rolling, sliding, or a combination of both. Two discs
(wheels), as show in Fig. 2a), are fixed to two parallel shafts and pressed against each other under a
constant contact load. Driven by a motor through a train of gear, the specimens are rotating along
with the shafts. The rotating speed can be controlled, so that when the linear speeds of two wheels
are equal at the contact point (V1=V2), a pure rolling contact is achieved. When V1 and V2 are
different (V1 ? V2) and both wheels are rotating, a combined rolling-sliding can be realised. Whilst
when one of the specimen is fixed, and the other is rotating, then wear is a pure sliding. In this case,
the fixed specimen can be a block, so that a name of block-on-wheel is used. Abrasive particles may
be added to the contact area, achieving a three body abrasive wear testing.
Fig 2. A rolling sliding wear tester

3. A pin-on-disc wear tester

In a pin-on-disc wear tester, a pin is loaded against a flat rotating disc specimen such that a circular
wear path is described by the machine. The machine can be used to evaluate wear and friction
properties of materials under pure sliding conditions. Either disc or pin can serve as specimen, while
the other as counterface. Pin with various geometry can be used. A convenient way is to use ball of
commercially available materials such as bearing steel, tungsten carbide or alumina (Al2O3) as
counterface, so that the name of ball-on-disc is used.
Fig 3. Pin on Disc Wear Tester
Wear Measurement/Quantification
Wear measurement is carried out to determine the amount of materials removed (or worn away)
after a wear test, (and in reality after a part in service for a period of time). The material worn away
can be expressed either as weight (mass) loss, volume loss, or linear dimension change depending
on the purpose of the test, the type of wear, the geometry and size of the test specimens, and
sometimes on the availability of a measurement facility. Common techniques of wear measurement
include using a precision balance to measure the weight (mass) loss, profiling surfaces, or using a
microscope to measure the wear depth or cross-sectional area of a wear track so as to determine the
wear volume loss or linear dimensional change.
Mass loss
Mass loss measurement by a precision balance is a convenient method for wear measurement,
especially when the worn surface is irregular and unsymmetrical in shape. Sample to be measured
is carefully cleaned, and the weight is measured before and after a wear test. The difference in
weight before and after test represents the weight loss caused by wear. The unit can be gram (g) or
milligram (µg).
Volume Loss
Wear volume is normally calculated from the wear track (scar) depth, length, width and/or scar
profile according to the geometry of the wear track/scar. A surface profilometer, e.g. a stylus type,

or sometimes a microscope with scale is used for the measurement. The reporting unit of wear
volume loss is mm3 or µm3. Wear volume loss enables a better comparison of wear among materials
having different densities. However, it is not easy to measure volume loss when a wear track is
irregular. In this case, mass loss may be measured first, and the volume loss is calculated if the
materials is uniform and its density is known.
Linear dimension loss
Measuring wear by linear dimension change is very useful in many engineering situations, where
certain dimension such as length, thickness or diameter is more critical to the normal function of the
system. A surface profilometer, e.g. a stylus type, a micrometer or a microscope can be used. The
unit for linear dimension loss can be µm or mm.
Wear rate
Wear rates are calculated results reflecting wear mass loss, volume loss or linear dimension change
under unit applied normal force and/or unit sliding distance. Wear rate can be expressed in many
different ways. Examples are listed in Table 1.
Wear resistance
Wear resistance is a term frequently used to describe the anti-wear properties of a material.
However, the scientific meaning of wear resistance is vague, and there is no specific unit to describe
wear resistance. Nevertheless, the inverse of mass loss or volume loss is sometimes used as the
(relative) wear resistance. The ratio of wear loss for a reference material over that of the investigated
material under same testing conditions can also used as relative wear resistance. In any case, if a
numeric value of wear resistance is given, its meaning should be clearly indicated.

Question Bank
1. What are the theories of friction explain any two theories and test measurements? VTU
Dec-Jan 2019
2. How do you classify mechanism of wear and explain any one measurement of test method?
VTU Dec-Jan 2019
3. What is delamination theory? Explain. VTU Dec-Jan 2019
4. Write short notes on friction of metals and non-metals VTU Dec-Jan 2019
5. Define the term Friction. Explain measurement of friction by an inclined plane test rig.
VTU Jun-Jul 2019
6. Explain Bowden and Tabor’s adhesion theory of friction. VTU Jun-Jul 2019
7. Define the term wear. Explain in brief classification of wear in relation to wear mechanism.
VTU Jun-Jul 2019
8. Explain delamination theory of wear in brief. VTU Jun-Jul 2019

Tribology-02-Notes - Vtu

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tribology-02-Notes - Vtu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Machine Elements-1 (17ME54)

A.J. INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY

(Sub Code: -17ME742)

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 1

Course Code :17ME742 CIE Marks : 40

3.“Engineering Tribology”, J. A. Williams, Oxford Univ. Press 2005.

1. “Introduction to Tribology in bearings”, B. C. Majumdar, Wheeler Publishing.

6. “Handbook of tribology: materials, coatings and surface treatments” B.Bhushan,

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 2

TRIBOLOGY 17ME742 MODULE 02

Laws of Friction (Rules of Friction)

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 4

Figure 5.2.1 Force equilibrium diagram for a body on an inclined plane.

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 6

and for a contact with a partial liquid film,

Bowden and Tabor’s simple Adhesion theory

or the coefficient of friction μi = μa + μd . In polymers (especially elastomers) and rough surfaces in

For elasto - plastic materials , the normal load W can be expressed as

Deformation Theory (Ploughing)

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 8

Fig.: Deformation theory

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 9

Figure. Spherical Asperity

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 10

Three frictional theories were discussed:

Fig. Two contacting surfaces

σ1 is first principal stress, and δ is elemental area.

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 12

Fig.: Surface contamination

• Strong metal, strong oxide: Low μ at all loads. Examples: steel,

Fig. Variation in μ with load

• High rate of ploughing of softer surface by asperities

- Relatively low adhesion.

• Rupture/breakage of asperities polish surface:

- Reduce ploughing coefficient but increase coefficient of adhesion.

- On removal of contaminating layers, adhesion coefficient increases.

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 14

Fig. Sliding friction vs time

Laws of Rolling Friction

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 15

The main contributions to friction in rolling contacts are :

1. Micro-slip effect within the contact area.

2. Elastic hysteresis of the contacting materials

3. Plastic deformation of the materials, and

Fig.: Rolling friction in rubber. Examples of Rolling Friction : • Ball bearings

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 16

Friction Measurement Methods

of the tilted plane and the coefficient of friction is measured.

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 17

Figure. Pin on Disc Test rig

Friction of Metals and Non-Metals

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 18

Table: Coefficient of friction for various metals sliding on themselves.

Fig. 2.1: Coefficient of friction for various metals

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 19

Fig. : Adhesive Friction among various materials.

Adhesional Friction of Elastomers:

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 21

Friction of Solid Lubricants

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 22

Department of Mechanical Engineering, AJIET, Mangalore 23

Fig. Zero wear of helical gear