Bayer R.G. Mechanical Wear Fundamentals and Testing, Revised and Expanded

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

increase in friction results from the viscous ﬂow of the lubricant. The improvement in wear

behavior is related to reduction in sliding wear that lubrication produces. In rolling con-

tacts, there is always some sliding, if only on a micro-scale as a result of deformation that

occurs (2). As a result, some sliding wear is involved and adhesion can play a role in rolling

wear behavior. A lubricant will tend to inhibit the adhesive contribution to the wear, limit

and reduce surface traction (stresses), and provide separation, all of which tend to reduce

sliding wear.

The ability of a material to lubricate is a function of its thickness and indirectly the

amount. There is a minimum thickness or amount required for maximum effectiveness.

This behavior with ﬂuid lubricants is illustrated in Figs. 6.1–6.3. With solid lubricants,

the behavior is somewhat different. There is often an optimum thickness range, as illu-

strated in Fig. 6.4.

Lubricants can be liquids, gases, or solids (6–8) . Examples of solid lubricants are

PTFE, molydisulﬁde (MoS

), graphite, and soft metals, such as lead. Oils are examples

of liquid lubricants but this category is not necessarily limited to them. For example, water

coolants, refrigerants, and even inks, can provide some lubrication (6,9,10). Also, greases,

which are mixtures of oils and thickening agents, are generally considered to be liquid

lubricants. Greases are thought to function in two ways. One is as a very viscous ﬂuid

and the other is as a reservoir for the oil component. For this latter mode, the concept is

that oil leaches out of the grease that surrounds the contact to cover the contact zone (11).

The class of liquid lubricants includes a wide range of materials with signiﬁcantly different

rheological properties. As classes, liquid and gaseous lubricants generally have the prop-

erty of self-healing, which is the tendency to ﬂow back into the region of contact, reple-

nishing any of the lubricant that is displaced during the wearing action. Solid lubricants

do not have that ability and, as a result, the durability of the soli d lubricant is often a

Figure 6.1 Behavior of wear rate and friction coefﬁcient as a function of the thickness of liquid

lubricant.

factor in engineering situations. Local wear-through of the solid lubricant layer can result

in degraded or complete loss of lubrication in the contact region. When this type of lubri-

cant is used, an underlying friction or wear problem is translated into a wear concern with

the solid lubricant itself.

This is illustrated by the behavior of a MoS

coating used in a band printer appli-

cation (12). When present, the coating signiﬁcantly reduced the wear of the interface.

A sharp increase in wear occurred with the local depletion of the MoS

coating. The

durability of this coating was found to be dependent on the processing parameters and

the initial wear problem of the interface was converted to optimizing the process for the

coating to obtain adequate life. The inﬂuence of the MoS

coating on wear and the inﬂu-

ence of processing parameters on durability of the MoS

are shown in Fig. 6.5.

Liquid lubricants can also exhibit ‘‘wear-out’’ characteristics but for different

reasons. Liquids can evaporate and spread over available surfaces so that, with time,

the amoun t of lubricant available to the contact interface can decrease. Therefore, if an

adequate supply is not maintained, the system will ultimately go dry. Also , the lubricant

Figure 6.2 Effect of the amount of lubricant on the friction and wear of an electrical contact.

The contacts were coated with the lubricant diluted with different amounts of a solvent, which after

evaporation of the solvent, resulted in different amounts of residual lubricant on the surfaces.

(From Ref. 33.)

may degrade with time as a result of oxidation, polymerization, or some other mechanism,

with the consequence that the ability of the ﬂuid to lubricate the contact may degrade (13).

Another aspect of lubrication is that the ability of a material to provide lubrication

can change as a result of the conditions surrounding the contact. Pressure, temperature,

Figure 6.3 Effect of lubricant supply rate on the wear of a type carrier in a high speed line printer.

(From Ref. 34.)

Figure 6.4 Illustration of the general effect of the thickness of a solid lubricant ﬁlm on friction

coefﬁcient and wear rate. (From Ref. 35 reprinted with permission from Oxford University Press.)

sliding speed at the interface, and material compatibility can all be factors in determining

the degree to which any material can function as a lubricant or, as will be discussed later

in this section, the manner by which it provides lubricati on. As a consequence, there is

generally more distinction in lubricant perfor mance when they are used in harsher, more

challenging wear and friction environments, such as in tribosystems with high speeds,

pressure and temperature, than in milder wear situations. However, even in the milder

situations, there can be signiﬁcant differences in performance (1). Many of the tests used

Figure 6.5 Micrographs of MoS

conversion coatings resulting from poor (‘‘A’’) and good (‘‘B’’)

processing conditions. The graph shows the effect of processing conditions on the durability and

performance of the coating. (From Ref. 12.)

to evaluate, compare, and characterize lubricants focus on their ability to survive as effec-

tive lubricants under harsh or challenging conditions (14). These aspects of lubrication,

as well as others, such as supply of lubrication to the interface, make the selection of

lubricants and lubrication techniques a discipline in itself. Discussi ons of many of these

aspects can be found in references on lubricants and lubrication, such as Handbook of

Lubrication (15).

The primary way by which a lubricant inﬂuences friction and wear is by reducing

adhesion (5,9,14,16,17) and there are three general mechanisms for this. One is by absorp-

tion on the contact surfaces. The second is by chemically modifying the surface. The third

is by physical separation of the surfaces. These three ways are illustrated in Fig. 6.6. The

ﬁrst two mechanisms tend to reduce the strength of the bonds at the junctions, while the

third tends to reduce the number of junctions. Secondary effects of lubrication are cooling

of the interface, modiﬁcations of the stresses associated with the contact, and ﬂushing of

wear de bris or contamination from the contact region. Since lubricants tend to lower

friction, the heat and shear action developed at the contact interface is reduced. For ﬂuid

lubricants, additional cooling occurs as a result of the lubricant transporting heat out of

the contact area. The lubricant can also inﬂuence the distribution of load within the

contact by supporting some of the load.

For ﬂuid lubricants, mechanical separation results from the response of the lubricant

to being trapped between two surfaces under relative motion. Under such conditions,

a ﬂuid can support a normal load, thus providing separation between the two surfaces

(5). Two exampl es of this type of response are shown in Fig. 6.7. In one case, the effect

is caused by the constriction of the ﬂuid as a result of tangential relative motion between

Figure 6.6 Lubrication mechanisms.

the surfaces, which is referred to as the physical wedge mechanism or simp ly the wedge

mechanism. The second mechanism is referred to as the squeeze ﬁlm mechanism and

results from normal or perpendicular relative motion between the two surfaces. In both

cases, the ﬁlm thickness that results is dependent on the load, geometry, and velocity of

the contact and rheological properties of the ﬂuid .

For the wedge mechanism and a simple Newtonian ﬂuid,

h /



; 0:5  m  1 ð6:1Þ

where h is the minimu m thickness; V, the velocity; P, the normal load; and t, is the

viscosity. For more complex ﬂuids, for example non-Newtonian ﬂuids, the relationships

are more involved. Temperature gradie nts within the ﬂuid and a pressure dependency

on viscosity can have signiﬁcant effects on the existence and the thickness of these ﬂuid

ﬁlms. Under these conditions, sufﬁcient pressure can be produced in the ﬂuid so that

the surface can be deformed, resulting in local geometry changes (18–21). These changes

tend to enhance ﬁlm formation and the ability of the ﬂuid to support a normal load. With-

out deformation, lubrication by these types of ﬂuid ﬁlms is frequently referred to as hydro-

dynamic lubrication. For deformation of the surface within the elastic range, it is termed

elasto-hydrodynamic lubrication. If plastic deformation is involved, it is referred to as

elasto-plasto-hydrodynamic lubrication.

Investigations suggest that these additional aspects of deformation, temperature

distribution, pressure dep endency of viscosity, and non-Newtonian ﬂuid pro perties, play

signiﬁcant roles in this type of lubrication. The amount of lubricant available is also a

major factor. If there is not an adequate supply to the inlet of the contact, the ﬁlm will

not form. As an illustration of the signiﬁcance of some of these aspects in lubrication,

the pressure distributions and wedge shapes for a hydrodynamic model and an elasto-

hydrodynamic model for two spheres in sliding contact, are shown in Fig. 6.8 (22,23).

The equations for the ﬁlm thickness are

h ¼ 4:9R



ð6:2Þ

for the hydrodynamic model and

h ¼ 2:65

0:54

VðÞ

0:7

0:43

0:13

0:03

ð6:3Þ

Figure 6.7 Squeeze ﬁlms and physical wedges in ﬂuid lubrication.

for the elasto-hydrodynamic model. t

is the absolute viscosity at the inlet; a is the pressure

coefﬁcient of viscosity (allowed for in the elastohydrodynamic model); E’, the reduced

elastic modulus for Hertzian contacts; and R is the equivalent radius for the contact.

Overall, lubrication as a result of these types of ﬁlm formation with ﬂuid lubri-

cants is referred to as ﬂuid lubrication. As can be seen, surface separation is the primary

way that this type of lubrication effects the amount of adhesion and the degree of separa-

tion is directly related to the relative speed between the two surfaces and the geometry. The

higher the speed and the ﬂatter the geometries , the thicker the ﬁlm formed. The other two

ways in which a ﬂuid effects adhesive components of friction and wear, the formation of

absorption and chemical reacted layers, are generally referred to as boundary lubrication

and are not as directly sensitive to these two parameters. The formation, strength, and

tenacity of these ﬁlms are primarily related to the chemical nature of the surfaces and

the lubricant (14,16,17,24,25). Boundary lubrication is frequently the key factor in lubri-

cation, especially under extreme conditions. The situation in which both boundary and

ﬂuid lubrication occur is normally referred to as mixed lubrication.

In Fig. 6.9, the Streibeck Diagram is used to illustrate these three regions of lubri-

cation (18,26,27). This diagram shows the relationship between the coefﬁcient of friction

and wedge formation under sliding condition s. It can be seen that the abscissa of this

diagram, the Sommerfeld Number, is related to the thickness of the lubricant layer, based

on ﬂuid lubrication concepts [see Fig. 6.1 and Eq. (6.2)]. In the ﬂuid lubrication region,

the ﬁlm thickness is great enough so that the two surfaces do not interact at the asperity

Figure 6.8 Comparison of hydrodynamic and elasto-hydrodynamic models for wedge formation.

level. In the mixed region, the ﬁlm thickness allows occasional asperity interacti on. In the

boundary region, the ﬂuid ﬁlm thickness is so smal l that it is ineffective in preventing

complete asperity interaction. Generally, wear decreases monotonically as ﬁlm thickness

increases. In the ﬂuid range, wear woul d be limited to repeated cycle deformation mecha-

nisms associated with the pressure transmitted through the ﬂuid and is generally negligible.

As the ﬁlm thickness decreases and more and more asperity contact occurs, the potential

for different wear mechanisms is introduced.

The trans ition from the mixed region to the ﬂuid region is governed by the ratio of

the asperity heights to the ﬁlm thickness. Conceptually, the ﬁlm thickness should be

greater than the combined asperity heights of the two surfaces for complete separat ion

and to be in the ﬂuid lubrication regime. For two rough surfaces, the ﬁlm thickness

required for full ﬂuid lubrication is given by

O ¼ bs

þ s



1=2

ð6:4Þ

where the s’s are the center line average (CLA) roughness of the two surfaces. Studies have

indicated that an average value for b is approximately 3 (18,19,28).

The basic concept of solid lubrication or lubrication by solids is that the lubricant or

lubricant=counterface junction is easier to shear than the base material or base materi-

al=counterface junction (26,29). In the case of solid ﬁlm lubrication, a relationship between

Figure 6.9 Relationship of viscosity, t

, speed, V, and load, P, to the coefﬁcient of friction and oil

ﬁlm thickness. (t

V=P) is called the Sommerfeld Number and the lower diagram is referred to as the

Streibeck Diagram.

friction and ﬁlm thickness also exists and is shown in Fig. 6.4. While the shap e of the curve

is quite similar to the shape of the curve in the Streibeck Diagram for ﬂuids, the reasons

are quite different. Initially, for very small thickness of the solid lubricant, the coefﬁcient is

reduced by reducing the number of strong adhesive junctions, without increasing the total

number of junctions or real area of contact. The real area of contact is controlled by the

harder substrate and the real area of contact is thought to be composed of a mixture of

junctions, ones without the solid lubricant present and ones with the solid lubricant

present. As the percent of junctions with the lubricant increases, the coefﬁcient of friction

decreases. Mathematically, the situation is expressed by

m ¼ a

þ 1  aðÞ

ð6:5Þ

where a is the fraction of non-lubricated junctions; t

, the shear strength of the non-

lubricated junction; t

, the shear strength of the lubricated junction; d

, the ﬂow stress

of the substrate. Since d

is greater than t

, m decreases as a decreas es.

In the second region, the ﬁlm is continuous and all junctions involve the lubricant

and the lubricant inﬂuences the real area of contact. Because the solid lubricant is softer

than the substrate, the real area of contact would tend to increase, leading to increased

friction. For very thick ﬁlms, the coefﬁcien t of friction would be the coefﬁcient of friction

associated with the solid lubricant and the counterf ace. Since the coefﬁcient of friction

involves the ratio of the shear strength to the compressive strength, the friction between

the lubricant layer an d the counterface may be higher than that between the substrate

and the coun terface. Models indicate that the approximate relationship between friction

and thickness is

m /



1=2

ð6:6Þ

where h is the thickness of the solid lubricant and P is the normal load (30).

While effective friction behavior as a function of thickness is similar for ﬂuid and

solid lubrication, wear behavior is different. Generally for solid lubricati on, there is an

optimum thickness for wear behavior. If there is not enough solid lubricant, the wear of

the surfaces is not signiﬁcantly effected; if there is a very thick layer, the wear of the system

will be the wear of that layer. Since solid lubricants generally have poorer wear properties

than the base materials, the effective wear will be initially higher than without lubrication.

As the lubricant layer thins, the optimu m condition will be produced and improved wear

behavior achieved. However, since solid lubricants do not self-heal, there will be a ﬁnite

time for this period and eventually wear performance will degrade again. Graphically, this

behavior is shown in Fig. 6.4.

While the conceptually solid lubrication can be considered simply in terms of thick-

ness and coverage, the actual situation can be more complex. Optimum behavior may

involve the formation of a mixed layer on the surface, composed of elements from the

lubricant and the base materials. Thi s layer would function, much like a transfer or

third-body ﬁlm in inﬂuencing wear and friction. Unlike these ﬁlms, the solid lubricant

equivalent will have a ﬁnite life since the lubricant is not replenished.

In addition to the ﬁlm type of lubrication discussed to this point, lubrication to an

interface can also be provided by utilizing materials, which have lubricants ‘‘built-in’’.

Examples of this type would be polymers, which have lubricating ﬁllers, like PTFE,

MoS

, and graphite. An example in metallic systems would be metals, which have lubricat-

ing phases in them, such as leaded steels. These generally fall under the category of self-

lubricated or self-lubricating materials. In this case, lubrication is usually achieved by

transfer and third-body ﬁlm formation. Hard phases and ﬁllers can also be added to mate-

rials to improve wear resistance. Still another example would be porous materials ﬁlled

with a solid or liquid lubricant, such as oil impregnated sintered bronze journal bearings.

In this case lubrication can occur by boundary and ﬂuid lubrication mechanisms (27,31).

Circulation of the ﬂuid through the por ous media is an additional factor that needs to be

considered in the ﬂuid lubrication process of these types of bearings.

Because friction and wear are distinct, the ranking of lubricants in terms of their

ability to lubricate can be different for friction and wear. Within the realm of lubricated

systems, it is frequently found that while lubricant A gives lower friction than B, there

is less wear with B (1,32). While there are these differences in the effectiveness of lubri-

cants, they are generally not as signiﬁcant as the differences between lubricated and unlu-

bricated conditions. This can be paraphrased by saying that in most cases the biggest

improvement obtained in wear and friction performance is associated with the use of

any lubricant; a secondary improvement is associated with the selection of a particular

lubricant for the system. In terms of wear, the change from unlubricated to lubricated

wear generally results in improvement by more than one order of magnitude, with an

improvement of 100 times or more being typical. Differences between lubricants are often

smaller but can be signiﬁcant. For lubricated sliding, m is generally less than 0.3; under

unlubricated conditions, m frequently exceeds 0.6. For rolling, m is less than 0.01.

(see Table 5.2).

REFERENCES

1. R Bayer, T Ku. Handbook of Analytical Design for Wear. New York: Plenum Press, 1964.

2. F Bowden, D Tabor. The mechanism of rolling friction. The Friction and Lubrication of

Solids, Part II. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, pp 277–319.

3. F Bowden, D Tabor. The mechanism of rolling friction. The Friction and Lubrication of

Solids, Part II. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, pp 318.

4. M Todd. Solid lubrication of ball bearings for spacecraft mechanisms. Trib Intl 15(6):331–338,

1982.

5. M Neale, ed. Tribology Handbook. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1973.

6. E Booser, ed. Handbook of Lubrication, Vol. II. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1983.

7. F Ling, E Klaus, R Fein, eds. Boundary Lubrication. ASME, 1969.

8. N Soda, T Sasada. Mechanism of lubrication of surrounding gas molecules in adhesive wear.

Proc Intl Conf Wear Materials ASME 47–54, 1977.

9. F Bowden, D Tabor. The Friction and Lubrication of Solids. New York: Oxford U. Press,

Part I, 1964, and Part II, 1964.

10. R Bayer, J Sirico. Inﬂuence of jet printing inks on wear. IBM J R D 22(1):90–93, 1978.

11. I Rugge, E Booser, eds Lubricating greases-characteristics and selection. Handbook of

Lubrication. Vol. II. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1983, pp 255–267.

12. R Bayer, A Trivedi. Molybdenum disulﬁde conversion coating. Metal Finishing. Nov:47–50,

1977.

13. G Pedroza, C Pettus. NLGI Spokesman. Sept:203, 1972.

14. R. Fein. Presentation at the IRI Conference on Tribology. Warren, MI: GM Research Labs,

22–23 Jan 1985.

15. E Booser, ed. Handbook of Lubrication. Vols. I, II and III. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

16. A Beerbower. Boundary Lubrication, Scientiﬁc and Technical Applications Forecast. U.S.

Army Research and Development, Contract No. DAHC 19–69-C-0033, 1972.