TRIBOLOGY: THE SCIENCE OF COMBATTING WEAR

By William A Glaeser (Member, STLE), Richard C Erickson (Member, STLE), Keith F Dufrane (Member, STLE) and
J errold W Kannel Battelle Columbus, Ohio

Reprinted with permission of Dr Sheldon R Simon, Manager, Battelle Technical Inputs to Planning Program, Battelle,
Columbus, Ohio

PART 2 FRICTION AND WEAR

FRICTION
The role of friction

Friction which is actually the resistance to sliding of two contacting surfaces is encountered in all machine
elements. It must be controlled in order to either:
Minimise energy losses in mechanical systems e.g., in internal combustion engines, or to
Aid system operation by keeping the friction level high and constant e.g. in brakes or wheel-rail traction
systems.

Its relation to wear
During operation of most tribological systems, friction, wear and noise are normally undesirable and good design
practices attempt to reduce or control these conditions. In some cases, reducing or controlling one will also alleviate or
eliminate another. For example, by controlling friction, wear and noise may also be reduced; controlling wear may
result in lower energy losses from friction. On the other hand, increased noise and friction in a bearing is usually
followed by excessive wear.

Friction and wear are related; both are products of solid contact between moving surfaces. But since friction is caused
by a somewhat different set of mechanisms than wear, devices can be designed for low wear and high friction or for
low wear and low friction.

How friction is produced
Actual solid-to-solid contact occurs only between high points in the microtopography of each surface. As these small
contact areas shear, friction results. Shearing may involve plowing of hard particles through a softer material or
scraping of soft surface layers. Thus, the real area of contact is only a fraction of the total surface. By increasing the
load, the real contact area is also increased, which in turn, increases friction force. (The coefficient of friction,
however, remains constant.)

Determining friction levels
In hydrodynamic and elastohydrodynamic bearings, where surfaces are separated by a viscous lubricant film, friction
levels can be estimated by calculating the amount of energy required to shear the film. In solid-sliding-on-solid
systems, however, where the basic friction process is not yet well understood, friction levels are more difficult to
predict. Under this type of contact, or during boundary lubrication conditions, friction levels must be determined by
experimentation.

How it is measured and predicted
Friction levels are expressed in terms of the friction coefficient, which is the ratio of frictional force and the normal
load between two contacting elements or


Friction coefficient is measured by determining the tangential force resisting the sliding of two contacting bodies under
a known constant load. Thus, friction force which resists sliding motion and requires a translation force to overcome
generally is proportional to the load, while the friction coefficient is independent of load and total surface area.

Influence on friction
The amount of friction is a function of the area or volume being displaced, work hardened mechanical properties of the
near surface region, and surface composition. Although mechanical properties of material influence friction behaviour,
surface composition also is a significant factor, and can be effected by
Environment For the same material, the coefficient of friction for steel can be 0.2 in air but can reach 1.0 or
more in a hard vacuum.
Temperature The phenomenon of brake fade or reduction in gripping power of brakes during high speed
stops is the result of surface changes caused by frictional heating.
Type and thickness of coatings When a soft material like tin is coated on a steel surface, friction is reduced.
For example, a tin coating of just 0.0001 inch will substantially minimise the friction level.

Friction coefficient ranges
Expected friction coefficient ranges for various contact conditions can be summarised as follows:


Contact
condition
Hydro-
dynamic
lubrication
Elastohydro-
dynamic
lubrication
Boundary
lubrication and
some plastics
Dry Ultra clean
surfaces in high
vacuum

Friction
coefficient
range


.001 to 0.1

.0005 to .003

.02 to .3

.2 to .8

1.0 to 100


Energy loss in shearing a hydrodynamic oil film can also be expressed in terms of friction coefficient. While rolling
contact conditions do not allow for a totally frictionless bearing during EHD lubrication, very low friction is
produced, and arises from the inherent sliding action that also occurs between rolling elements.

In solid-sliding-on-solid systems, surfaces exposed to air become covered with thin oxide films, adsorbed gases, and
hydrocarbons. Though these natural films provide some reduction in sliding fiction via boundary lubrication,
deliberate boundary lubrication can further reduce friction by as much as an order of magnitude. Equipment
designers and operators have a relatively wide range of friction level control.

For example, in data on 230 measurements of friction for a wide variety of dry sliding systems, 80 percent of the
friction coefficients were between 0.4 and 0.6. Unlike wear coefficients which cover several orders of magnitude,
dry sliding friction coefficients measured in air cover a much smaller range. However, when measured in high
vacuum, the range is similarly dramatic. (1).
In the following sections, we will talk more about friction and the part it plays in tribological systems.

Growing impact and value of tribology
We have, indeed, pressed far beyond the era where the almost casual use of a lubricant was sufficient to alleviate wear
problems. In a report from the Hanniker Conference on National Materials Policy, wear is listed as one of three major
technical areas affecting materials utilisation and cost reductions. As a direct result of these and other studies, several
U.S. government agencies, and a number of universities and technology institutes worldwide are in the process of
establishing centres for co-ordinating and increasing practical applications of tribological principles to energy and
materials conservation in industry. And several research institutes including Battelle, are working intensively in this
area both in the in the basic science of tribology and its practical applications. A universal conclusion can be drawn
from these studies. With current technology alone, significant savings can be achieved by applying accumulated
tribology know-how to control wear in todays industrial processes and products.

WEAR
Impact of wear
Wear is a familiar phenomenon: tyres wear out, faucet gaskets deteriorate, lawn mower blades become dull, carpeting
wears down many examples come to mind. In this context, wear is taken for granted; and its effect on the useful life
of our possessions is accepted.

In industry, however, the economic implications of wear are severe. In fact, according to recent estimates, billions of
dollars per year could be saved if the life of components could be increased.

Here is a particularly illustrative example of the detrimental effects and waste caused by wear. Wire rope in
dragline earth moving equipment used in strip mining must often be replaced after only a few months in operation. Re-
roping large 100 to 150 yard dragline is hard work, time-consuming and expensive about $100,000 for the rope and
$30,000 in labour.

As shown in Fig. 1, wire notching reduces rope diameter. When the rope diameter is reduced by a given percentage,
the rope is taken out of service before it breaks.

Here, wearing away a relatively tiny amount of material possibly two ounces of steel makes it necessary to discard
nearly a ton of wire rope! (Used rope, unfortunately, has little scrap value). Other industrial examples abound, where
a small amount of wear destroys the usefulness of a critical mechanical component.


Fig 1 Notching in wire rope worn during dragline operations.

Cost of wear
We intuitively recognise that any wear which reduces equipment precision and efficiency will be reflected as financial
loss. Bus as a prerequisite to analytically dealing with its economic effects, a value must be assigned to wear or its
costs must be documented. Unless wear can be quantified, a company cannot determine the level or extent to which it
is economically attractive to reduce wear costs. Yet, little has actually been done in this area. The published literature,
in fact, deals mainly with wear costs in a global sense, rather than on the company or even on the industry level.


In 1976, however, a major attempt to quantify wear costs was undertaken during a workshop on Wear Control to
Achieve Product Durability sponsored by the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment. (2). Here, tribology experts
and representatives from various industries concluded that very little effort on any level was being directed toward
monitoring wear costs. As a result, they attempted to estimate wear costs for six specific areas: metal cutting
machinery and tools, heavy construction equipment, automobiles, railroad equipment, naval aircraft structures, and
aircraft propulsion equipment. Some results are listed below:

Estimated Wear Costs
Category Costs*
Naval aircraft $243.87 per flight hour
Naval aircraft litres $1,853,200 per year
Naval ships $38.92 per hour
Cutting tool wear $9000,000,000 per year
Auto Maintenance and
repair costs
$40,000,000,000 per year
*1976 dollars

These costs included:
Replacement costs due to wear
Scheduled maintenance costs
Unscheduled maintenance or repair costs.

On the company level

General estimates of industry-wide costs and savings, however, provide little insight for individual companies
attempting to calculate wear costs. This lack of specific information is usually compensated for by early discard or
overdesign of components. On the other hand, a few standard techniques are available for conducting economic
appraisals that would aid in evaluating wear costs. One of the most common of these is life cycle costing. However,
few companies actually use this method; and those that do, tend to apply it inconsistently, reserving it only for key
phases in decision making.

A second appraisal technique employs the National Academy of Corrosion Engineers standards for corrosion
economics. (3).

Companies attempting to estimate wear can look at costs from three major viewpoints:
Capital
Labour
Technology

Capital considerations can minimally include equipment replacement costs, and maximally, replacement costs plus all
downtime costs related to that replacement. Wear costs can thus be divided into direct and indirect costs. Direct costs
entail:
Equipment replacement
Equipment rental
Standby maintenance.

Indirect costs include those incurred as a result of:
Loss of production
Product liability
Incompleted work
Damage to or loss of additional equipment.

Labour costs also should be considered in assessing wear costs. Maintenance programs, for example, often are labour
intensive. Even if only a few pieces of equipment require attention, a base level of labour is needed to perform that
maintenance. As long as interest rates remain high and short-term depreciation is allowed, long-term maintenance and
wear reduction will be measured in comparison to those labour costs.

Technological obsolescence reflects yet a third area of consideration in assessing wear costs. The cost of keeping wear
to a minimum on older equipment will be balanced against technological change for that equipment.

While it is true that most companies have not taken advantage of wear control benefits offered by tribology, one
notable exception is the British Steel Corporation. In the late 1960s, this company established a tribology section
which cost approximately $200,000 during its first two years of operation but produced a net savings of
approximately $4 million in hot mill roll production costs alone!

Similarly, the use of chemical vapour deposition (CVD) in the production of carbide cutting tools in the U.S. during the
same time period improved tool life by as much as 10 times. In an address to the wear control workshop, R.F.
Bunshah* estimated that the development of the CVD program cost $1-2 million over a three year period, but saved
$7.5 billion in machining costs and $30 million in tool costs (2).

(*The Problem of Wear in Metal Cutting Proceedings from Workshop on Wear Control to Achieve Products
Durability, OTS, U.S. Congress, 1976.)


Surface topography of wear Sub-surface deformation
Associated with wear

Fig. 2 Surface and Sub-sirface defpr,atopm diromg wear.


Here we have highlighted several principle areas where costs are incurred, and identified two techniques for conducting
economic appraisals of wear. Clearly, companies will increasingly need to look to wear reduction as a direct,
immediate avenue for maintaining output quotas and for cutting production costs.

But to effectively cut costs of wear, we need to know how wear occurs.

Mechanisms of wear
Even though wear is a familiar occurrence and its impacts are well known, the mechanisms that cause wear are not yet
well understood. However, accumulated research results are steadily increasing our understanding of these
mechanisms and enhancing our ability to control wear.


When two surfaces rub together, the generation and release of wear debris is a complex process involving
c deformation
ration
Adhesion.
irtually impossible. Most of what is known about wear has been inferred
by c e g the products of wear:
ars
tructural alterations
Hardness changes
wn above in Fig.2. A materials plastic strain
ehaviour, therefore, is considered to be related to its wear properties.
to use hardness as a rough indicator of wear resistance. Other properties that
app t include:
ss
t
Thermal shock resistance
Ref
(1)
ce on the Fundamentals of Tribology, Edited by N.P Suh and N.Saka, the MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
(2) ct Durability Workshop, U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, Washington,
(3) orrosion in the United States A Report to NBS by Battelle Columbus Laboratories, U.S.
Depart. Of Commerce, (1979).
ations are formed in the stacking sequence between crystal
planes, and influences the way in which plastic deformation proceeds.
Surface chemistry
Fracture mechanics
Elastic and plasti
Heat gene
Transfer

Because of the sequence of events that produces wear debris occurs at and below the interface of contacting asperities,
direct observation of the process has been v
los ly examinin
Wear sc
Debris
Micros
Noise
Thermal effects

For instance, microscopic examination of wear scars has shown that most wear processes involve scratching and
plowing of the surface, with considerable plastic deformation as sho
b

But wear cannot be accurately predicted solely via some basic material property or group of properties. While
considerable research has been and continues to be directed at how various material properties influence wear, the
simplest approach thus far has been
ear o exert an influence
Fracture toughne
Elastic modulus
Stacking fault energy*
Strain hardening coefficien

erences
Rabinowicz, E., Friction Especially Low Friction, Fundamentals of Tribology, Proceedings of the International
Conferen
(1980).
(2) Wear Control to Achieve Produ
D>C>, February 23 through 25, 1976.
Economic Effects of Metallic C

*Stacking fault energy (SFE) is a measure of the ease by which alter