Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 89–93

Heat transfer across a solid–solid interface obtained

by machining in a lathe
A. Baı̈ri∗ , N. Laraqi
Department of Heat Transfer, University of Paris 10, LEEE, EA. 387 1, Chemin Desvallières, 92410 Ville d’Avray, France

Received 6 July 2004; received in revised form 10 February 2005; accepted 10 February 2005

Abstract
In this paper the heat transfer across the interface between two cylinders in axial contact for which the surfaces are obtained by machining
in a lathe was studied. The macro-contact generated by this process has a spiral shape. The governing equations being difficult to solve for this
geometric configuration, the spiral was simulated by multiple concentric circular annular contacts. Thus, the problem is two-dimensional and
hence easier to solve. An exact explicit analytical solution was developed in order to calculate the temperature distribution and the thermal
contact resistance Rc between the two cylinders. The Rc is expressed as a function of the ratio of real contact area to the apparent one, and
the number of contacts. A simple correlation is also proposed to calculate the Rc with high accuracy.
© 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Machining; Lathing; Heat transfer; Contact; Interface

1. Introduction An analytical solution is developed by using the finite Han-

Heat transfer across a solid–solid interface is an impor-
tant phenomenon in a wide range of mechanical technolo-
gies. This phenomenon is usually modeled by the thermal
contact resistance, which has received much attention over
the last decades. Several models [1–5] have been developed
to calculate its evolution as a function of geometric and ther-
mal characteristics of materials. These models are generally
based on a unique or multiple contacts with various arrange-
ment or shape (elliptic, circular, rectangular and square).
In this paper, the thermal phenomenon due to annular con-
tacts was studied. This configuration is encountered in ma-
chine tools when the circular surfaces of cylinders are ob-
tained by machining in a lathe (Fig. 1). The macro-contact
generated by this process has a spiral shape which is due to
the combination of rectilinear and rotative motions between
the tool and the work-piece. In order to study the macro-
constriction phenomenon due to this contact, the spiral is
approximated by multiple concentric circular annular con-
tacts.
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 1 47 09 70 30; fax: +33 1 47 09 30 67.
E-mail address: abairi@u-paris10.fr (A. Baı̈ri).
kel transform for solving the governing equations in steady
state. In order to calculate the total thermal constriction re-
sistance, we consider that all the contacts are subjected to
the same average contact temperature. The heat flux applied
to each annular contact is assumed to be uniform over the
contact and its value depends on the contact location. The
average contact temperature being the same for all contacts,
we calculate the total constriction resistance of cylinder by
adding the individual constriction resistances in parallel. This
procedure has been recently used with success in random con-
tacts problems [6]. The micro-constriction was assumed to be
lower than the macro-constriction.
2. Description of the contact
Let us consider two cylinders in axial contact, as shown
in Fig. 2. The real contact area is modeled by multiple an-
nular contacts (a) which simulate the spiral generated by the
machining in a turn. The flux lines converge to the annu-
lar contacts (b). Thus, the temperature field presents a jump,

Tc , at the vicinity of the interface (c). This phenomenon is

0924-0136/$ – see front matter © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.02.261
90 A. Baı̈ri, N. Laraqi / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 89–93

Nomenclature

a radius of annular contact

A area
b radius of cylinder
k thermal conductivity
N number of contacts
q heat flux density
Q heat flux
r,z cartesian coordinates
R thermal resistance
T temperature

Greek letters Fig. 2. Heat transfer between two cylinders across multiple circular annular
ε ratio of real contact area to apparent one contacts.

Subscript
a apparent When the thermal resistance of the interstitial medium is
c contact high and the one of the asperities is negligible (which is often
cs constriction the case in several practice configurations) the thermal con-
tact resistance Rc is essentially due to the thermal constriction
Superscript resistances, Rcs , as:
(i) index of contact, i ≡ 1 to N Rc = R(1)
cs + Rcs
(2)
(2)
∗ dimensionless
(1) (2)
where Rcs and Rcs are the total thermal constriction resis-
tance of solid (1) and solid (2), respectively.
characterized by the thermal contact resistance, Rc , as

Tc
Rc = (1) 3. Problem formulation
Q
where Q is the heat flux across the interface. Taking into account of Eq. (2) it is sufficient to calculate
Rcs for each cylinder in order to determine Rc . For this pur-
pose, we consider a semi-infinite cylinder, as shown in Fig. 3,
with a radius b and thermal conductivity k. The surface z = 0
is subjected to N uniform annular heat sources qj regularly
spaced (which simulate the heat flux from the other cylinder).

Fig. 1. View of the cylinder surface obtained by machining in a lathe. Fig. 3. Description of the problem domain and its parameters.
 A. Baı̈ri, N. Laraqi / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 89–93 91

The remainder of the surface z = 0 and the surface r = b are spectively. The parameter ε = Ac /Aa denotes the ratio of the
assumed to be insulated. The temperature at z → ∞ is zero. real contact area Ac to the apparent one Aa .
The steady-state heat conduction into the cylinder is two- The solution of Eqs. (11)–(13) can be written as
dimensional, T (r, z), and can be described by
N

 1 
1 ∂ ∂T ∂2 T T̃ = qj [aj+ J1 (βn aj+ ) − aj− J1 (βn aj− )]e−βn z (14)
r + 2 = 0, (0 ≤ r ≤ b; z ≥ 0) (3) kβn2
r ∂r ∂r ∂z i=1

with the boundary conditions By using the inverse finite Hankel transform [7]

 ∞
∂T 2  J0 (βn r)
=0 (4) T = T̃ (15)
∂r r=0 b2 J 2 (β b)
n=0 0 n


∂T we deduce the expression of T (r, z) as
=0 (5)
∂r r=b
∞

  2  J0 (βn r)e−βn z
∂T qj : at contact j T (r, z) =
−k = kb2 βn2 J02 (βn b)
(6) n=0
∂z z=0 0 : elsewhere  
 N 
Tz→∞ = 0 (7) × qj [aj+ J1 (βn aj+ ) − aj− J1 (βn aj− )] (16)
 
j=1

4. Temperature solution
5. Thermal resistance
In order to solve the above system, it is convenient to use
the finite Hankel transform [7] as The thermal constriction resistance of a contact (i) is de-
 b fined by
T̃ = r T J0 (βn r) dr (8) (i) (i)
0
Tc Tc − Ta
R(i)
cs = = (17)
where J0 is the Bessel function of first kind and order zero, qi A (i) qi A(i)
and βn are the roots of (i)
where Tc and Ta are the average temperatures of the real
J0 (βn b) = 0 (9) contact area (i) and the apparent contact area, respectively.
Considering the boundary condition, Tr,z→∞ = 0, in Eq. (7),
The successive values of βn are provided by McMahon’s (i)
we have Ta = 0. The expression of Tc is obtained by inte-
expansions given in the reference [8] as gration of Eq. (16) over the contact area (i) as follows
 
1 3 36 113184 37463488 ∞
βn = σn − + − + · · · 2N  ai+ J1 (βn ai+ ) − ai− J1 (βn ai− )
b 8σn 3(8σn )3 15(8σn )5 105(8σn )7 Tc(i) =
kai (βn b)3 J02 (βn b)
(10) n=0
N

with σn = π(n − 3/4) and n = 1, . . . , ∞. × qj [aj+ J1 (βn aj+ ) − aj− J1 (βn aj− )] (18)
The particular case n = 0 exists and corresponds to β0 = j=1
0. Eqs. (3)–(7) are reduced to a simple differential equation
of second order as Putting that all contacts have the same average tempera-
(i)
ture, i.e., Tc − Ta =
Tc = Cst in Eq. (17), the total con-
∂2 T̃
− βn2 T̃ = 0 (11) striction resistance Rcs can be calculated by adding all ele-
∂z2 (i)
mentary resistances Rcs in parallel as

 N
∂T̃ 1   −1
−k = qj [aj+ J1 (βn aj+ ) − aj− J1 (βn aj− )] N
 1
∂z z=0 βn Rcs = (19)
j=1 (i)
i=1 Rcs
(12)
Then, by writing Eq. (18) as
T̃z→∞ = 0 (13)
N

where aj+
= [(2j − 1) + ε]b/2N and aj−
= [(2j − 1) − Tc(i) = Gij qj (20)
ε]b/2N are the outer and the inner radii of contact (j), re- j=1
92 A. Baı̈ri, N. Laraqi / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 89–93

where Gij are the other terms of the Eq. (18) as

∞
2N  ai+ J1 (βn ai+ ) − ai− J1 (βn ai− )
Gij =
kai (βn b)3 J02 (βn b)
n=0

× [aj+ J1 (βn aj+ ) − aj− J1 (βn aj− )] (21)

which are known, we obtain a linear matrix system of order N,
for which the unknowns are (qj /
Tc ). This system is written
under the following form
N
 qj
Gij =1 (i = 1 to N) (22) Fig. 5. Dimensionless thermal constriction resistance.

Tc
j=1
Table 1
By solving this system, we determine (qi /
Tc ) for i = 1 to Comparison between the exact solution and the proposed correlation
N, and by using Eqs. (17) and (19), we deduce the values of
(i) |R∗cs (exact) − R∗cs (correlation)|/R∗cs (exact) in (%)
Rcs and Rcs , respectively.
ε N=5 N = 10 N = 20 N = 30
0.01 1.6 1.4 1.1 0.9
6. Results and discussion 0.05 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3
0.1 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7
0.2 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.3
As a first step, we were interested in the behavior of indi-
0.3 2.9 3.2 3.3 3.3
vidual contacts. We have considered two values of ε (0.01 and 0.4 2.7 3.0 3.1 3.1
0.1) and two values of N (10 and 30). The individual dimen- 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2
(i)
sionless thermal constriction resistances, Rcs kb, are plotted in
Fig. 4. All graphics show that the contacts close to the center
of the cylinder have a higher resistance than those far from As a second step, we have calculated the total thermal
the center. The individual constriction resistance decreases constriction resistance as a function of ε (when εvaries be-
from the center of the cylinder and becomes approximately tween 0.01 and 0.5) for several values of N (5, 10, 20 and 30).
constant after the first third of contact points. This behavior We have plotted the evolutions of the dimensionless quantity,
is the same regardless of the number of contacts N and the R∗cs = Rcs kbN, versus ε in Fig. 5, using a semi-logarithmic
relative contact size ε. scale. For all values of N considered, the dimensionless con-
striction resistance R∗cs is the same for the same value of ε.
The quantity R∗cs corresponds to the average individual ther-
mal constriction resistance for each contact. Indeed, Rcs is the
total thermal constriction resistance. If the individual thermal
constriction resistances were all identical, then Rcs /N would
be the value of one individual resistance. Otherwise, the total
thermal constriction resistance is divided by 10 when ε varies
from 0.01 to 0.5.
To facilitate the use of the proposed solution, we give a
simple correlation, which allows the determination of R∗cs as
a function of ε with a high accuracy

R∗cs = −0.0978 logn (ε) − 0.0245 (for 0.01 ≤ ε ≤ 0.5)

(23)
The comparison between the proposed correlation and the
exact solution is given in Table 1. The relative difference
between the results does not exceed a 3.3%.

7. Conclusions

In this paper a two-dimensional analytical solution has

been developed to calculate the thermal contact resistance for
Fig. 4. Individual thermal constriction resistance. concentric circular annular contacts. It is shown that the con-
 A. Baı̈ri, N. Laraqi / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 89–93
tacts close to the center of cylinder have higher constriction
resistance than those far away from it. The individual ther-
mal constriction resistance decreases quickly from the center
and becomes constant beyond the first third of contact points.
Otherwise, a unique curve allows to represent the evolution of
dimensionless constriction resistance, Rcs kbN, as a function
of the relative contact size, ε, regardless of the number of con-
tact, N. The total constriction resistance decreases by a factor
of 10 when ε varies from 0.01 to 0.5. A simple correlation is
also given to calculate the thermal resistance as a function of
ε and N with a very good accuracy (less than 3.3%).
References
[1] J.P. Bardon, Introduction à l’étude des résistances thermiques de contact,
Revue générale de Therm. Fr. 125 (1972) 429–447.
93
[2] M.M. Yovanovich, General expression for circular constriction resis-
tances for arbitrary flux distribution, in: Proceedings of the AIAA 13th
Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Pasadena, California, 1976, pp. 381–
396.
[3] J.V. Beck, Effects of multiple sources in the contact conductance theory,
ASME J. Heat Transfer 101 (1979) 132–136.
[4] A. Degiovanni, C. Moyne, Résistance thermique de contact en régime
permanent. Influence de la géométrie du contact, Revue Générale de
Thermique Fr. 334 (1989) 557–563.
[5] K.K. Tio, S.S. Sadhal, Thermal constriction resistance: effects of bound-
ary conditions and contact geometries, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 35 (6)
(1992) 1533–1544.
[6] N. Laraqi, A. Baı̈ri, Theory of thermal resistance at the interface of solids
with randomly sized and located contacts, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 45
(20) (2002) 4175–4180.
[7] M.N. Özişik, Heat Conduction, 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons Inc., New
York, 1993.
[8] M. Abramowitz, I.A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions,
Dover Publication, Inc., New York, 1972.