coatings
Article
Theoretical Study of the Friction Coefficient in the M-B Model
Hongjun Cao 1 , Min Zhu 1, *, Biao Li 1, *, Xiaohan Lu 1, *, Haiyan Li 2 , Ming Guo 1, *, Fei Wu 1 and Zijian Xu 1
Citation: Cao, H.; Zhu, M.; Li, B.;
Lu, X.; Li, H.; Guo, M.; Wu, F.;
Xu, Z. Theoretical Study of the
Friction Coefficient in the M-B
Model. Coatings 2022, 12, 1386.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
coatings12101386
Academic Editor: Ajay Vikram
Singh
Received: 30 August 2022
Accepted: 20 September 2022
Published: 22 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12101386
1 College of Nuclear Science and Technology, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan 430000, China
2 College of Weapons Engineering, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan 430000, China
* Correspondence: min0zhu@163.com (M.Z.); zjs19781129@163.com (B.L.); lxh13793754591@163.com (X.L.);
morpheusgwo@163.com (M.G.); Tel.: +86-13505358526 (M.Z.); +86-13406551805 (B.L.); +86-13793754591 (X.L.)
Abstract: In order to study the influencing factors of friction coefficient in an M-B model, based on
the basic model of fractal theory, the distribution function and probability distribution density of the
micro-convex body truncation area are derived by using mathematical and statistical means, and
a new model of critical truncation area and friction coefficient in fractal surface contact process are
proposed. Considering the differences between the actual contact area and the truncated area during
plastic deformation of the micro-convex body, a correction factor is introduced. Focusing on the
mechanism of the elastic-plastic transition phase, and finally a friction coefficient model based on the
fractal dimension, the normal force and correction factor is derived. Finally, the friction coefficient of
fractal surface is simulated and verified by taking nickel as an example, and it is proved that the new
model is correct in predicting the change trend of friction coefficient in the M-B model.
Keywords: friction coefficient; M-B model; fractal theory; elasto-plasticity
1. Introduction
There are a large number of contact surfaces in mechanical structures, and friction
occurs when rough surfaces of materials come into contact with each other, and the tribo-
logical properties of the contact surfaces have an important impact on the performance of
mechanical structures [1].
Fractal theory is an important tool for studying contact problems on rough surfaces.
Majumdar and Bhushan [2] applied fractal theory to roughness characterization and surface
contact mechanics as early as 1990 and found that when the surface treatment technique is
isotropic and random error in the observed scale, the resulting surface conforms to fractal
characteristics in that scale range, and the model they proposed is called the M-B model;
Wang and Komvopoulos [3] proposed a more complete M-B model, which suggests that
in the process of plane-to-plane friction contact, the contact interface undergoes complete
plastic deformation and elasto-plastic deformation in turn, and the specific mechanism
is as follows: at the beginning of contact, the top of the micro-convex body is the first
to contact the rigid plane, and the radius of curvature of the top is small, so the stress
is more concentrated and pure plastic deformation occurs; as the plane is continuously
pressed down, the top of the micro-convex body becomes larger due to deformation and
mutual fusion. In order to study the static frictional behavior of polymers and metals,
a self-designed static friction coefficient measurement device was used by Benabdallah [4],
focusing on the measurement of the exact moments during the sliding transition phase.
The polynomial equation for calculating such static friction coefficient was finally obtained,
revealing the law of the influence of two lubricants, water and paraffin, on the static friction
coefficient between polymers and metals. With means of experiments and simulations,
Zhang [5] established the static friction coefficient model associated with the bond surface
scale based on the fractal model, linking the bond surface scale with the static friction
coefficient. In recent years, there have been few theoretical studies on the coefficient
of friction, most researchers have studied the effects of some specific surface treatment
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/coatings
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 2 of 11

methods on the coefficient of friction based on experiments. For example, Sergei studied
the use of lasers on diamond-like nanocomposite coatings under different environmental
conditions. The surface is textured, and then the change law of the friction coefficient is
studied [6]; Han studied the effect of ultraviolet radiation on the friction coefficient of the
composite film structure [7].
The above-mentioned studies have their own focus on modeling the friction coefficient
of rough surfaces of different materials, but none of them has seriously explored the
influence of the elastic-plastic transition phase on the friction coefficient during frictional
surface contact. In this paper, based on the basic model of fractal theory, the assumption
that the truncated area of the asperity changes continuously is put forward, and then
the distribution function and probability distribution density of the micro-convex body
truncation area is derived by using mathematical and statistical means, and a new model of
the critical cut-off area and the normal force during the fractal surface contact is proposed.
Considering the difference between the actual contact area and the truncated area during
plastic deformation of the micro-convex body, a correction factor is introduced, part of
the mechanism of the elastic-plastic transition stage is discussed, and finally a friction
coefficient model based on the fractal dimension, normal force and correction factor is
derived and verified by simulation. In order to verify the above assumptions and the
correctness of the final model for the prediction of the friction coefficient trend, simulation
verification was carried out.

2. Methods
2.1. Micro-Convex Body Truncation Area Distribution Model
Fractal theory [2] holds that the number of micro-convex bodies with truncated area
greater than or equal to s satisfies.
 s ( D−1)/2
m
N (s) = (1)
s
In the above equation, D is the fractal dimension which is used for describing the
roughness of rough surfaces, and it indicates the degree of self-similarity of rough surfaces;
s is the truncated area of micro-convex body; N(s) is the number of micro-convex bodies
with truncated area greater than s, and sm is the maximum truncated area of the micro-
convex body. The truncated areas of all micro-convex bodies can be listed from smallest to
largest: s1 , s2 , s3 , . . . , sm . For a given plane, the maximum micro-convex truncation area
at any height has been determined, and the number of micro-convexes at the microscopic
level is known to be large, so it can be assumed that the micro-convex areas take continuous
values. Let the minimum truncation area s1 be taken as

1
s1 = sm (2)
α
Let si be the truncated area of the micro-convex body numbered i. α is a constant
greater than 1, obviously si will take a value in the range of [sm / α, sm ].
Let n be the number of micro-convex bodies and ni be the number of micro-convex
bodies numbered i. Equation (1) can then be deformed as follows:

m  ( D−1)/2
sm
N ( s i ) = n i + n i +1 + . . . + n m = ∑ nt = si
(3)
t =i

At this point, the total number N of all micro-convex bodies is

Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 3 of 11

N = n1 + n2 + . . . + n m
m
= ∑ ni
t =1
 ( D−1)/2
= ssm1 (4)
 ( D−1)/2
sm
= 1
α sm
= α −1)/2
( D

In this model, for a micro-convex body, the probability that its truncated area takes a
certain value [8] is:
n
P ( si ) = i (5)
N
This leads to the distribution function of the micro-convex body truncation area F (si )
as [9]:
ni +ni+1 +...+nm
F ( si ) = P { s < si } = 1 − P { s ≥ si } = 1− N
m
∑ nt
t =i
= 1− α ( D −1)/2
 ( D−1)/2
sm (6)
si
= 1− α( D−1)/2
 ( D−1)/2
sm
 sm 
= 1− αsi , si ∈ α , sm

This gives the probability distribution density of the truncated area f (si ) as
( D −1)/2
   
sm
d 1− αs
dF (si ) i
f ( si ) = dsi = dsi (7)
D −1 sm ( D −1)/2 (−1− D )/2


= 2 α si

2.2. Actual Contact Area

According to the M-B model [10], the actual contact area of the two contact planes is:
When sm ≤ sc , the micro-convex bodies are in pure plastic contact. At this time:

D − 1 4 of 13
 
Coatings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
S = Sp = sm (8)
3−D

When sm > sc , bothS =elastic  D − 1  plastic contacts exist and:

S p =  and  sm (8)
 3− D 
"  (3− D)/2 #
When sm > sc , both elastic and plastic contacts − 1and:
D exist sc
S = (3− D )/2 1 + sm (9)
D −1  6
s − 2D  s m
S= 1 +  c
 sm (9)
6 − 2 D   sm  

2.3. Elasticity Critical Point
2.3.1. Metal
2.3. Elasticity Material
Critical Point Stress Law
2.3.1. Metal Material Stress Law
A diagram of the yield curve of a metallic material is shown in Figure 1.
A diagram of the yield curve of a metallic material is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Yield curve of metallic materials.

Figure 1. Yield curve of metallic materials.
As shown in the figure, the material has different stress-strain relationships in each
of these stages. Among them, the “oa” segment is the elastic stage; the “ac” segment is the
microplastic strain stage; the “cd” segment is the yield stage; the “de” segment is the
strengthening stage; and the final “ef” segment is the necking stage [11].
From the yield curve of the material, it can be obtained that the stress is continuous
at the cut-off point of elastic-plastic deformation, which is the yield point “c”. For the M-
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 4 of 11

As shown in the figure, the material has different stress-strain relationships in each
of these stages. Among them, the “oa” segment is the elastic stage; the “ac” segment is
the microplastic strain stage; the “cd” segment is the yield stage; the “de” segment is the
strengthening stage; and the final “ef” segment is the necking stage [11].
From the yield curve of the material, it can be obtained that the stress is continuous at
the cut-off point of elastic-plastic deformation, which is the yield point “c”. For the M-B
model, the contact state changes and the calculation method also changes, but the stress
should be continuous at the critical cut-off area.

2.3.2. Ideal Plastic Contact Load

According to Hertzian contact theory [12], the ideal plastic contact load for a micro-
convex body with an actual contact area of Si is

Pp (Si ) = HSi (10)

The actual contact area Si in plastic contact should be slightly larger than the truncated
area si , and they are not equal [10]. Therefore

Si = asi (11)

where a is the correction factor and H is the material hardness.

At this point, the relationship between the ideal plastic contact load of the micro-
convex body and the truncated area is

Pp (si ) = aHsi (12)

2.3.3. Ideal Elastic Load

According to Hertzian contact theory [12], the ideal elastic contact load for a micro-
convex body with an actual contact area of Si is
√ 4− D
4 πE∗ G D−2 Si 2
Pe (Si ) = (13)
3
In the ideal elastic contact state, the relationship between the actual contact area and
the truncation area is [13]:
1
Si = s i (14)
2
This results in the relationship between the ideal plastic contact load of the micro-
convex body and the cross-sectional area as
D √ 4− D
22 πE∗ G D−2 si 2
Pe (si ) = (15)
3
In the above equation, G is the fractal roughness and E* is the equivalent Young’s
modulus.

2.3.4. Critical Truncation Area Model

For a certain micro-convex body with a truncation area equal to the critical truncation
area sc , the contact type changes from an ideal plastic contact state to an ideal elastic contact
state. At this time, by the stress continuity theory, its internal stress should be continuous,
so that
Pe (sc ) = Pp (sc ) (16)
Combining Equations (12) and (15), it is obtained that
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 5 of 11

D √ ! 2
D −2
22 πE∗ G D−2
si = (17)
3aH

2.4. Friction Coefficient

When sm ≤ sc , the micro-convex body is in full plastic contact state. At this point,
combining Equations (4), (7) and (12), it can be introduced that
Z sm
D−1
 
P=N Pp (si ) f (si )dsi = a Hsm (18)
s1 3−D

At this point, combined with the Equation (18), the friction coefficient can be ob-
tained [14]:
µ = τSP
τ( D −1
D −3 ) s m
= (19)
aH ( D−
D 1
−3 ) s m
τ
= aH
where τ is the shear strength of the softer of the two materials in the friction sub.
When sm > sc , the micro-convex body is in mixed elastic-plastic contact. The total load
is divided into elastic contact load and plastic contact load. Combining Equations (4), (7),
(12) and (15), the total load of the micro-convex body P is obtained as

P = Pp + Pe Rs Rs
= [ N − N (sc )] s c f (si ) Pp (si )dsi + N (sc ) scm f (si ) Pe (si )dsi
1
 (3− D)/2 D√ D −1 5−2D 5−2D (20)
2 2 πE∗ G D−2 ( D −1)
= 3D−−D1 aH ssmc sm + 3(5−2D )
sm2 (sm 2 − sc 2 )
= p( a, sm )

In this case, combining Equation (9), the contact surface friction coefficient can be
obtained as "   3− D #
τS τ D−1 sc 2
µ= = 1+ sm (21)
P p( a, sm ) 6 − 2D sm

Among them, the correction factor is generally fixed and can be determined experi-
mentally, while the maximum cut-off area sm is related to the normal load and increases
gradually with the increase of the normal load. From Equations (19) and (21), it can be
seen that the friction coefficient is related to the correction factor a and the maximum
cross-sectional area sm with the same experimental object.
In summary, this friction coefficient model is based on the following assumptions:
(1) The value of the cross-sectional area of the asperity is continuous, and the minimum
value is close to 0;
(2) There is a proportional relationship between the contact area and the cut-off area of
the asperities in the pure plastic deformation stage, and the proportionality coefficient
is a;
(3) The stress of the asperity is continuous at the critical point of elastoplasticity.
Next, we need to verify that this model is correct.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Model Analysis
We took the data of No. 45 steel, which is more commonly used in engineering
practice, as an example to illustrate the changing law of this model. The units of all physical
quantities have been converted to international standard units, and the specific data are
shown in Table 1 [15]:
Coatings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13

Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 6 of 11

Table 1. Some physical values of the example materials.

Equivalent Critical Cut-Off

Table 1. Some physical
Fractal values of Hardness
the example materials.
Physical Quantities Fractal Dimension Young's Modulus Area
Roughness (m) (N/m2)
Hardness Equivalent(Pa)
Young’s Modulus (m2) Cut-Off Area
Critical
Physical Quantities Fractal Dimension Fractal Roughness (m)
(N/m2 ) (Pa) (m2 )
Symbol D G H E* sc
Symbol D G H −8 E* 11 sc
Value
Value 2.46
2.46 2.00 × ×1010−9−9
2.00 2.60
2.60××10
10−8 2.34
2.34××10
1011 4.46 ×4.46
10−6
× 10−6

3.1.1. Maximum Cross-Sectional Area and Normal Force Relationship

3.1.1. Maximum Cross-Sectional Area and Normal Force Relationship
When the two planes are in contact, if the experimental object remains unchanged,
When the two planes are in contact, if the experimental object remains unchanged,
the maximum cross-sectional area must gradually increase with the increase of the normal
the maximum cross-sectional area must gradually increase with the increase of the normal
force. Figure 2 gives a schematic diagram of the relationship between the normal force
force. Figure 2 gives a schematic diagram of the relationship between the normal force
and the maximum cross-sectional area at the two stages of elastic contact and elasto-plas-
and the maximum cross-sectional area at the two stages of elastic contact and elasto-plastic
tic contact.
contact.

Figure 2. Plot of normal force versus maximum cross-sectional area.

Figure 2. Plot of normal force versus maximum cross-sectional area.

In theInfigure above,
the figure somesome
above, message can be
message can obtained:
be obtained:
(1) L1 shows the relationship between the maximum cross-sectional area and the normal
(1) L1 shows the relationship between the maximum cross-sectional area and the normal
force when sm ≤ sc without considering the critical cross-sectional area. The micro-
force when sm ≤ sc without considering the critical cross-sectional area. The micro-
convex body body
convex is in plastic contact
is in plastic at thisattime,
contact and itand
this time, canitbecanseen from from
be seen Figure 2 and2 and
Figure
Equation (18) that the normal force is linearly related to the maximum
Equation (18) that the normal force is linearly related to the maximum cut-off area. cut-off area.
(2) L2(2) shows
L2 showsthe relationship
the relationship between the maximum
between the maximum cut-off area and
cut-off areatheandnormal forceforce
the normal
whenwhensm > scswithout considering the critical cut-off area. At this time, the micro-con-
m > sc without considering the critical cut-off area. At this time, the micro-
vex body
convex is inbody
mixed is elastic-plastic contact, and
in mixed elastic-plastic the relationship
contact, between the between
and the relationship normal the
force normal
and theforce maximum truncation area is more complicated, but the
and the maximum truncation area is more complicated, but the relation- relationship
betweenshipthe normal
between theforce
normal andforce
the maximum
and the maximum truncation area is area
truncation still is
largely linear,linear,
still largely
with awith
higha high
linearlinear
correlation, but its
correlation, slope
but is greater
its slope than than
is greater that of theofplastic
that contact
the plastic contact
stage.stage.
(3) L3(3) shows
L3 showsthe relationship
the relationship between
betweenthe maximum
the maximum truncation area and
truncation area theandnormal
the normal
force force
whenwhen the critical truncation area is considered. It can be
the critical truncation area is considered. It can be seen from seen from the graph
the graph
that the
that normal force force
the normal changes abruptly
changes with awith
abruptly large change
a large in theinnormal
change the normalforce force
whenwhen
the contact type of
the contact typetheofmicro-convex
the micro-convex bodybodychanges near the
changes nearcritical truncation
the critical area. area.
truncation
FromFromthe above
the above analysis, it can be obtained that the relationship between themaxi-
analysis, it can be obtained that the relationship between the maximum
mumcut-off
cut-offarea
area andand thethe normal
normal force
force is roughly
is roughly linearlinear
in bothin phases,
both phases,
but thebut therelationship
linear linear
relationship is different
is different in thecontact
in the plastic plastic phase
contactand phase
the and the elastic-plastic
elastic-plastic mixing phase.
mixing phase.

3.1.2. Maximum Cross-Sectional Area and Friction Coefficient Relationship

Figure 3 shows the graph of the friction coefficient as a function of the maximum
cut-off area when the correction factor a is taken as 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2.
 3.1.2. Maximum Cross-Sectional Area and Friction Coefficient Relationship
Figure 3 shows the graph of the friction coefficient as a function of the maximum cut-
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 7 of 11
off area when the correction factor a is taken as 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2.

Figure 3. Friction
Figure coefficient
3. Friction versus
coefficient maximum
versus cross-sectional
maximum area.area.
cross-sectional

From Figure
From Figure 3, the friction
3, the frictioncoefficient
coefficientfirst
firstremains
remains constant during
duringthe thegradual
gradualincrease
in-
of the
crease maximum
of the maximum cut-off areaarea
cut-off from 0. At
from 0. this time,
At this the friction
time, statestate
the friction is pure plastic
is pure contact
plastic
when
contact sm ≤smsc≤, and
when the the
sc , and friction coefficient
friction model
coefficient corresponds
model to Equation
corresponds (19); (19);
to Equation then,then,
after the
maximum cut-off area reaches the critical cut-off area, the friction turns
after the maximum cut-off area reaches the critical cut-off area, the friction turns into elas-into elastic-plastic
contact,contact,
tic-plastic and theand friction coefficient
the friction model corresponds
coefficient to Equation
model corresponds (21). It can
to Equation be Itseen
(21). canthat
the friction
be seen that thecoefficient model changes
friction coefficient more obviously
model changes at the critical
more obviously at thetruncation area.
critical truncation
area.
3.1.3. Relationship between Normal Force and Friction Coefficient
Both normal
3.1.3. Relationship force and
between friction
Normal coefficient
Force can beCoefficient
and Friction set or calculated by the simulation, so
the
Both normal force and friction coefficient can be setthe
normal force vs. friction coefficient relationship is or most effective
calculated waysimulation,
by the to validate the
model.
so the normalFigure
force4 vs.
shows the normal
friction force
coefficient versus friction
relationship is thecoefficient relationship
most effective constructed
way to validate
from the model.
the model. Figure 4 shows the normal force versus friction coefficient relationship con-
structed from the model.

Figure 4. Friction coefficient versus normal force graph.

Figure 4. Similar to Figureversus

Friction coefficient 3, thenormal
relationship between the normal force and the friction co-
force graph.
efficient in Figure 4 also shows a general trend of constant force, then a sharp decline,
and finally
Similar a leveling
to Figure off.
3, the However, between
relationship near the the
inflection
normalpoint, the relationship
force and between
the friction coeffi-
the
cient in normal
Figure 4force
also and
shows thea friction
general coefficient is disturbed,
trend of constant which
force, then may be
a sharp relatedand
decline, to the
graph
finally drawing
a leveling off.method.
However,However, in reality,point,
near the inflection the maximum cross-sectional
the relationship between thearea is not
nor-
necessarily continuous and increasing in this process, and there may be more complex
changes near the elastic-plastic critical point, which leads to the confusion near the critical
point in Figure 4 [16]. However, the relationship between the normal force and the friction
coefficient in this model must include the variable of the maximum cross-sectional area
which cannot be measured, so it is not possible to directly plot the friction coefficient image
with the normal force as the initial variable for the time being [17].
 mal force and the friction coefficient is disturbed, which may be related to the graph draw-
ing method. However, in reality, the maximum cross-sectional area is not necessarily con-
tinuous and increasing in this process, and there may be more complex changes near the
elastic-plastic critical point, which leads to the confusion near the critical point in Figure
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 4 [16]. However, the relationship between the normal force and the friction coefficient 8 of in
11
this model must include the variable of the maximum cross-sectional area which cannot
be measured, so it is not possible to directly plot the friction coefficient image with the
normal force as the initial variable for the time being [17].
3.2. Simulation Material Simulation Analysis
3.2. Simulation Material Simulation Analysis
3.2.1. Modeling
3.2.1.
In this Modeling
paper, we take the M-B model in fractal theory as the research object, so we
need to establish a rough
In this paper,surface
we takethat meets
the M-B the fractal
model characteristics
in fractal theory as the first. Theobject,
research equation of
so we
need
the surface to establish
profile of the amodel
rough is
surface
[10]: that meets the fractal characteristics first. The equation
of the surface profile of the model is [10]:
6
6
z( x ) = z∑ ( D −2) n n
( x )1.5
n =0 
= 1.5([D1−−
n=0
2) n cos(1.5 x )]n
[1 − cos(1.5 x)] (22)
(22)

In the above
In theequation, D is taken
above equation, as 2.3,
D is taken as2.4
2.3,and 2.5,2.5,
2.4 and andand
thethe
obtained
obtainedprofile
profilecurves
curves
can be seen
can in
beFigure
seen in 5.
Figure 5.

D=2.5

D=2.4

D=2.3

Figure 5. Contour curves for different fractal dimension D.

Figure 5. Contour curves for different fractal dimension D.
Coatings 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 13
Next, according to this to
Next, according surface profile
this surface model
profile to build
model a model,
to build this
a model, thissimulation
simulation using
using
MATLAB MATLAB for modeling, and use the Python language to build a copy intoABAQUS
for modeling, and use the Python language to build a copy into ABAQUS for for
secondary development, to build a complete microscopic rough surface [18].
secondary development, to build a complete microscopic rough surface [18]. The complete
The complete
surface
surface model
model is shown
is shown in Figure
in Figure 6. 6.

Figure 6. Fractal
Figure surface
6. Fractal model.
surface model.

The friction surface of the slider is an ideal rigid plane, and the sliding substrate is a
metallic material with fractal surface characteristics whose physical parameters are set as
follows: Young's modulus 143,000 MPa, Poisson's ratio 0.291, yield stress 590 MPa. In or-
der to make the simulation more precise, the substrate uses a triangular grid, and the
slider uses a quadrilateral grid for computational convenience [13]. The slider is a quad-
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 9 of 11
Figure 6. Fractal surface model.

The
Thefriction
frictionsurface
surfaceofofthe
theslider
sliderisisan
anideal
idealrigid
rigidplane,
plane,andandthe
thesliding
slidingsubstrate
substrateisisaa
metallic
metallic material with fractal surface characteristics whose physical parametersare
material with fractal surface characteristics whose physical parameters areset
setasas
follows: Young's modulus 143,000 MPa, Poisson's ratio 0.291, yield stress 590
follows: Young’s modulus 143,000 MPa, Poisson’s ratio 0.291, yield stress 590 MPa. In order MPa. In or-
der to make
to make the the simulation
simulation more more precise,
precise, the substrate
the substrate uses uses a triangular
a triangular grid, grid, andslider
and the the
slider
uses auses a quadrilateral
quadrilateral grid
grid for for computational
computational convenience
convenience [13].slider
[13]. The The slider is a quad-
is a quadrilateral
rilateral
mesh for mesh for the
the same same reason.
reason.

3.2.2.
3.2.2.Analysis
AnalysisofofResults
Results
The
Thecalculation
calculationtime
timeisisset
settoto
sixsix
seconds, thethe
seconds, motion speed
motion is 1cm/s,
speed and the
is 1 cm/s, andtangen-
the tan-
tial forceforce
gential and friction coefficient
and friction are calculated
coefficient for each
are calculated for condition by taking
each condition different
by taking nor-
different
normal
mal forces
forces and fractal
and fractal dimensions
dimensions D, respectively.
D, respectively. FigureFigure 7 shows
7 shows some some
of theof the stress
stress con-
concentrations
centrations during
during the calculation.
the calculation.

Figure
Figure7.7.Schematic
Schematicdiagram
diagramofoftangential
tangentialstress
stressconcentration
concentrationof
ofsome
somemodels.
models.

Summingup
Summing upall
allthe
thetangential
tangentialstresses
stressesatatthe
thecontact
contactinterface,
interface,the
thefrictional
frictionalforce
forceonon
theslider
the sliderisisobtained
obtainedby bydividing
dividingititby
bythe
thecorresponding
correspondingnormal
normalforce
forceto
toobtain
obtainits
itsfriction
friction
coefficient[19].
coefficient [19].The
Thespecific
specificresults
resultsof
ofall
allsimulations
simulationsareareshown
shown inin Table
Table 2.
2.

Table 2. Simulation results of the friction coefficient for different normal forces and fractal dimensions.

Friction Coefficient Changing Rate of Friction Coefficient (1/N)

Normal Force (N)
D = 2.3 D = 2.4 D = 2.5 D = 2.3 D = 2.4 D = 2.5
10 0.98187 0.80004 0.76004 — — —
100 0.93519 0.77730 0.74301 −5.19 × 10−4 −2.53 × 10−4 −1.89 × 10−4
200 0.91853 0.49584 0.41757 −1.67 × 10−4 −2.81 × 10−3 −3.25 × 10−3
300 0.86853 0.42823 0.33837 −5.00 × 10−4 −6.76 × 10−4 −7.92 × 10−4
600 0.50164 0.29023 0.24023 −1.22 × 10−3 −4.60 × 10−4 −3.27 × 10−4
900 0.35007 0.22863 0.18675 −5.05 × 10−4 −2.05 × 10−4 −1.78 × 10−4
1200 0.2753 0.19942 0.16278 −2.49 × 10−4 −9.74 × 10−5 −7.99 × 10−5
1500 0.22905 0.18655 0.15655 −1.54 × 10−4 −4.29 × 10−5 −2.08 × 10−5
1800 0.19815 0.17387 0.15387 −1.03 × 10−4 −4.23 × 10−5 −8.93 × 10−6
2100 0.17606 0.16532 0.15032 −7.37 × 10−5 −2.85 × 10−5 −1.18 × 10−5
2400 0.15946 0.16166 0.14807 −5.53 × 10−5 −1.22 × 10−5 −7.52 × 10−6
2700 0.14652 0.15765 0.14765 −4.31 × 10−5 −1.33 × 10−5 −1.37 × 10−6
3000 0.13671 0.15434 0.14534 −3.27 × 10−5 −1.10 × 10−5 −7.71 × 10−6
3600 0.11727 0.14040 0.13840 −3.24 × 10−5 −2.32 × 10−5 −1.16 × 10−5

With the normal force as the horizontal coordinate and the friction coefficient as the
vertical coordinate, the above table can be transformed into a graph, as shown in Figure 8,
and the changing rate of the friction coefficient in the above table refers to the slope between
the current node and the previous node.
 3600 0.11727 0.14040 0.13840 −3.24 × 10−5 −2.32 × 10−5 −1.16 × 10−5

With the normal force as the horizontal coordinate and the friction coefficient as the
vertical coordinate, the above table can be transformed into a graph, as shown in Figure
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 8, and the changing rate of the friction coefficient in the above table refers to the 10
slope
of 11
between the current node and the previous node.

1.2

D=2.3 D=2.4 D=2.5

1
friction coefficient

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
normal force

Figure
Figure 8. Simulation resultsof
Simulation results ofthe
thefriction
frictioncoefficient
coefficientforfor different
different normal
normal forces
forces andand fractal
fractal dimen-
dimensions.
sions.
From the above graphs it can be seen that:
(1) From the aboverate
The changing graphs it can be
of friction seen that:represents the change trend of the friction
coefficient
(1) The changing
coefficient rate ofthe
between friction
current coefficient
node and represents
the previousthe change
node. trendIt canof bethe friction
seen from
coefficient between the current node and the previous node. It
Table 2 that all the rates of change are negative numbers, indicating that the friction can be seen from Table
2coefficient
that all theisrates of change
decreasing from are negative to
beginning numbers,
end; indicating that the friction coeffi-
(2) cient is decreasing
The friction fromdoes
coefficient beginning
changetoslowlyend; at the beginning of the gradual increase of
the normal
(2) The friction force from 0,
coefficient doeswhich is different
change slowly fromat thethe completeofinvariance
beginning the gradual expected
increasein
Figure
of 4, but the
the normal forcedifference
from 0, whichis not is significant.
different from the complete invariance expected
(3) inThe change
Figure in the difference
4, but friction coefficient does have a clear inflection point, exactly as
is not significant.
(3) The change in the friction coefficient doesevident
expected in Figure 4, which is particularly have awhenclearDinflection
takes values 2.4 exactly
point, and 2.5.as It
can be seen from Table 2 that when the normal force changes
expected in Figure 4, which is particularly evident when D takes values 2.4 and 2.5. from 10N to 100N, the
Itslope
can beis quite
seen different
from Table from that when
2 that near the theelastoplastic
normal force critical
changes point, and10N
from eventothere
100N, is
an order
the slope of is magnitude
quite different difference
from that when D isthe
near 2.4elastoplastic
and 2.5; critical point, and even
(4) there
The change trend
is an order of of the friction
magnitude coefficient
difference when after
D isthe2.4inflection
and 2.5; point is exactly the
same as that of Figure 4, which both show a
(4) The change trend of the friction coefficient after the inflection sharp decrease and then pointlevel off, and the
is exactly the
different fractal dimensions D have little effect on the final
same as that of Figure 4, which both show a sharp decrease and then level off, and friction coefficient.
the different
It can fractal dimensions
be concluded that this model D have is little effect accurate
generally on the finalfor friction coefficient.
the prediction of the
change trend of the friction coefficient; the friction coefficient change trend is completely
consistent with the model prediction, particularly after the elasto-plastic critical point,
while the initial part before the elasto-plastic critical point is not exactly the same, but the
difference is not huge.

4. Conclusions
Through the above analysis and derivation, the main work of this paper can be
summarized as follows.
(1) A more explicit and specific distribution model of the micro-convex body truncation
area is proposed. The fractal contact model is analyzed and advanced, and the micro-
convex truncated area distribution function and probability distribution density are
obtained by applying mathematical and statistical methods.
(2) A correction factor is proposed. The plastic contact area differs from the ideal plastic
contact area when microscopic contact is considered, and a correction factor is thus
proposed to correct the model.
(3) A new friction coefficient model based on the fractal dimension, normal force and
correction factor is proposed. Based on the principle of elastic-plastic stress continuity
at the critical point, a new critical cut-off area model is proposed, which leads to a
new friction coefficient model.
(4) Simulation calculations were performed to verify the friction coefficient of the fractal
surface, and the analysis and verification of the proposed model were compared with
the simulation results to prove the correctness of the new model in predicting the
trend of the friction coefficient change.
There are still some areas for improvement and further research. Although the new
model can predict the trend of the friction coefficient, there is confusion at the elastic-plastic
Coatings 2022, 12, 1386 11 of 11

threshold due to the existence of unmeasurable variables in the model, which needs to
be improved to eliminate such variables. In addition, the model is only simulated in this
paper, and further experiments are needed to validate the model.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.C. and M.Z.; methodology, B.L.; software, X.L.; valida-
tion, H.L., M.G. and H.C.; formal analysis, F.W.; investigation, Z.X. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: Thank you for the support of the equipment pre research project (41426030107), the
construction project of key universities and key disciplines (430183), and the key construction project
of universities and disciplines (430618).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Zhang, Q. Fractal Model of Static Friction Coefficient of Joint Surface Based on Multi-Scale Contact; Taiyuan University of Science and
Technology: Taiyuan, China, 2020.
2. Majumdar, A.A.; Bhushan, B. Role of Fractal Geometry in Roughness Characterization and Contact Mechanics of Surfaces. Trans.
ASME J. Tribol. 1990, 112, 205–216. [CrossRef]
3. Wang, S.; Komvopoulos, K. A Fractal Theory of the Interfacial Temperature Distribution in the Slow Sliding Regime: Part
II—Multiple Domains, Elastoplastic Contacts and Applications. J. Tribol. 1994, 116, 824–832. [CrossRef]
4. Benabdallah, H.S. Static friction coefficient of some plastics against steel and aluminum under different contact conditions. Tribol.
Int. 2007, 40, 64–73. [CrossRef]
5. Zhang, X.; Xu, Y.; Zhao, H. A joint surface static friction factor model considering the interaction of asperities. Comb. Mach. Tool
Autom. Mach. Technol. 2022, 5, 62–66.
6. Pimenov, S.M.; Zavedeev, E.V.; Zilova, O.S. Tribological Performance of Diamond-like Nanocomposite Coatings: Influence of
Environments and Laser Surface Texturing. Coatings 2021, 11, 1203. [CrossRef]
7. Han, C.; Li, G.; Ma, G.; Shi, J.; Li, Z.; Yong, Q.; Wang, H. Effect of UV Radiation on Structural Damage and Tribological Properties
of Mo/MoS2-Pb-PbS Composite Films. Coatings 2022, 12, 100. [CrossRef]
8. Ai, Y.; Yin, Y. Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics; Chongqing University Press: Chongqing, China, 1986; p. 178.
9. Chen, L. Using Probability Theory to Study and Research to Cultivate Mathematical Thinking. J. Taiyuan City Vocat. Tech. Coll.
2021, 12, 109–111.
10. Yan, W.; Komvopoulos, K. Contact analysis of elastic-plastic fractal surfaces. J. Appl. Phys. 1998, 84, 3617–3624. [CrossRef]
11. Kumar, B.R. Strength of Materials; Taylor and Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2022.
12. Popov, L.V. Principles and Applications of Contact Mechanics and Tribology, 2nd ed.; Li, Q.; Luo, J., Translators; Tsinghua University
Press: Beijing, China, 2011.
13. Su, L.; Jing, J. Numerical simulation analysis method of micro-contact area distribution of joint surface. Noise Vib. Control 2019, 39,
23–27+56.
14. Shuang, C.; Yongjie, W.; Shihua, L. Mathematical model study on friction coefficient and wear amount of MoS2 thin film. Surf.
Technol. 2021, 2, 1–9.
15. Yingjia, Y.; Ying, C.; Hongxiang, Z. Rough surface contact model of static metal seal considering substrate deformation. J. Tribol.
2022, 144, 1–13.
16. Anling, Z. Optimal Solution of Transcendental Equations. Pract. Underst. Math. 2014, 44, 172–176.
17. Lifeng, F.; Lu, Z.; Wen, N. Research on the influence of interface fractal parameters on normal contact stiffness. Eng. Mech. 2021,
38, 207–215.
18. Binghui, W.; Kun, S.; Yunpeng, W. Finite element simulation calculation of friction coefficient of high-speed dry sliding. J. Xi’an
Jiaotong Univ. 2020, 54, 82–89.
19. Xiong, X.; Hua, L.; Wan, X.; Yang, C.; Xie, C.; He, D. Experiment and simulation of friction coefficient of polyoxymethylene. Ind.
Lubr. Tribol. 2018, 70, 273–281. [CrossRef]