I79

WEAR

ON THE EFFECTS OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS IN THE HYDRODYNAMIC

LUBRICATION THEORY OF A SHORT JOURNAL BEARING

S. T.

TZENG

AND

E.

SAIBEL

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York (U.S.A.)

(Received

August

2, 1966;

amended October 24, 1966)

SUMMARY

The effect of roughness of the surfaces of a journal bearing on the pressure

development, load-carrying capacity, attitude and friction is studied. Roughness is
treated as a random quantity, characterized by a probability density function which
can be determined experimentally. If, for example, a beta distribution is assumed,
which by the way can be made to approximate a Gaussian distribution very closely,
results can be obtained in closed form. A numerical example is given.
INTRODUCTION

The effects of surface roughness on the important parameters in hydrodynamic

lubrication theory have been discussed by a number of authorsi~2~3.In these works,
notably the one by MICHELLE, sinusoidal surfaces are assumed to represent the
roughness, for reasons of mathematical simplification. From a practical point of
view, however, the results thus obtained indicate only a crude estimate of the
magnitude of the effect of surface roughness. In general, the surface roughness,
which may be of the order of the magnitude of the film thickness, must be considered
as randomly distributed over the surfaces. In the present paper, solutions in closed
form have been obtained by means of a statistical approach with the assumption of
randomly-distributed roughness on the bearing surface. For the sake of illustration, a
numerical example has been worked out. So far as the authors are aware, there has
not been any publication on the experimental work corresponding to our results.
FORMULATION

OF THE PROBLEM

In a short journal bearing, the pressure-induced circumferential flow is small

compared with the velocity-induced flow in the circumferential direction. Thus,
neglecting the term corresponding to the former, the Reynolds equation for the short
bearing can be written as?

where x is the circumferential distance, z the axial distance from the reference frame,
Wear,

IO

(1967)

179-184

p the pressure, ,u the viscosity, fJ the circumferential velocity of the journal, and H
the film thickness. If we consider the film thickness H to depend only on the circumferential coordinate x and the roughness E, then H is a random variable. Let h(x)
denote the nominal film thickness, then (Fig. I)
H(X,F)

= h(x) + F(X)
=a+ecos/!I+E

(2)

where a =rz -_yl is the clearance and e is the eccentricity.

Fig. I. Definition

of geometrical

quantities.

The roughness variable E in most cases can be characterized by the probability

density of a symmetrical beta distribution expressed in the form
f(E) = A[C2-&Z]m ,

---cl

E<

(3)

elsewhere

f(E) = o
where,

m is a positive integer and c a constant.

It is widely regarded as a common practice to accept any set of unknown
random data as one of Gaussian distribution, although few published data exits to
substantiate this notion in the exact sense. A comparison of a unit beta distribution
for m = 2 of the type proposed here with unit Gaussian (normal) distribution in Fig. 2
shows their close resemblance in character. In the following discussion, the beta
distribution with m = z will be adapted throughout for simplicity.
Simple consecutive integration of eqn. (I) yields
6,iJJ
P=--- Hs
The constants
Weav,

JO (1967)

dH 22
+ C1z+Ce
dx 2
of integration

Iig-184

(4)

Cr and Cz can be evaluated by the conditions that

HYDRODYNAMIC

LUBRICATION

THEORY

OF SHORT JOURNAL

181

BEARING

d@/dz=o at the center of the bearing and p =;ba at z= +1/z, where 1 is the total
length of the bearing. The expected pressure distribution is obtained as follows:
(p-p,)

(+t$ g (22- $,,

-$

=---

$(&,(z2_!3

3W
2

c A (G-&2)2
d
de(z - ;)
dx s --c
IX4 + El2

= - fjpu($

- ;)

2 c-$kh-(3h24)

h(E)]

(5)

where the symbol ( ) indicates statistically expected values. The expected loadcarrying capacity of the bearing is then obtained first by calculating its components

Unit beta distribution

-3

-2

-1

-8

Fig. z. Comparison of distributions.

in two perpendicular directions, noting that the positive pressure exists only in the
converging portion of the film, namely from ,!I=0 to p=n,
with x= R@, R=
(r1+

r2)

12 = Yl

(w

~0s #)

Substituting

= -2

s,

~Oz2(~-~cz)

eqn. (5) for (p-p,)

cos@dxdz

and integrating

with respect to z and /?

gives
Wear,

IO (1967) 179-184

w cos

$5) =

(361n,-sl-&-3,

~pL'i3e3[(&+1)(;)2+1)
645

.ln[sj--(&-I)

(62-1)

+z(&-da)

u+c

where 61 = --

( W sin 4)

>

5m3P3[

in(s)

(S1&+3)]

((,)

S2=fy>1

and

. In

(361&+Sl+&-3)

-3(S

1~-&~)--~(&--&)~

&+(612--I)&
)+(dl2-622)-~l(dl"-I)++b2(S22-I)q

( 82+ (w-I)*

+$(&+82)2(&2-~22-8l(8l2-I)~+sz(822-1)~
-4(61+82){81~-d2~

++

~(61-S2)-(612-1)t+(~22-1)9)

{2(&4-d24)-2(&2-622)-&(2812-1)(812-I)*

II

+82(2822-1)(822-I)*

We will define the average total load-carrying

capacity

by

lV=[(Wcosf$)2+(Wsinf$)2]~
and the average attitude

angle $ through the following relationship

(Wsin#)

tan 4 =

(W cos q5)

In calculating the friction of short bearings, which follows, the term dP/dx can be
neglected for the reason given at the beginning. Thus the shearing stresses become4
r=

+iu
-H

(10)

where the positive sign corresponds

the rotating surface of the journal.
then obtained

to the stationary bearing and the negative sign to

The magnitude of the expected shearing stress is

as

CT>=Pqc4c2-d2
(la(z;+E)
d&
= g
Integrating
becomes

(F)

[(/z~-c~)~ ln(+J-1

+ $

over the bearing

surface,

= 2~,,z2/02n(t)R

Wear, IO (1967) 179-184

d/3dz

(5C2-3h2)]
the expected

(11)
total

friction

force now

HYDRODYNAMIC

.In

LUBRICATION

61I- (&2-

IIf

THEORY

+(&+62)

82+(B22--I)*
+(&2+B22+46162f1)

OF SHORT JOURNAL

(4&52+3)

(-&2+W+&

+ (61+ Sa) (4(613 - 622) - 3 (81 - 62) -

(S1-82-(512--I)+(1/22--I)f)

(&2-I)&-S2
&(4612-

(Sl2-

-~(~14-~24)+~(~12-~22)+~~~(2~12-I)

-$da(zd22-

I)

(S22-

183

BEARING

(622-I)*)

5) + 1 +

&(4&2-5)

I)*

+I

(622-I)*

(81z-I)*

I)t+~(Sl2--22)(~(S1-82)2-3

(61+62)2-911

(12)

The average coefficient of friction will be defined as

<F)
f am --

(13)

(W)

The expected value of the frictional torque is then

(14)

<T)=R<F)
NUMERICAL

EXAMPLE

A set of curves may be obtained from the above results in terms of nondimensional parameters. These curves, when plotted, will reveal the precise details
of the effect, both qu~itatively and quantitatively. For our present discussion, it is
sufficient to illustrate the results by a numerical example.
Consider the following example.
a=Io -10-4 in., e=7 ~10-4 in., R=r in., c=z - 10-4 in., I=2 in., ,~u=I.2 *IO-~
reyn ; U= 209.404 in./sec (speed, N = 2000 rev./min), from which
61 = 1.714286,

82 = I.142857

Substitution of these values into eqns. (6)-(g) and (12)-(14) yieIds

(W cos 4) = 4846 lb.,

(W sin 4) = 4Igo lb.

W = 6406 lb.,

7 = 4051

(F> = 4.7 lb.,

j-ave= o.ooo739

(T) = 4.7 in. lb.

The effect of roughness can be found by comparing the results of the corresponding deterministic problem4 in which the bearing surface is assumed to be perfectly smooth. Substitution of the same set of data yields, for perfectly smooth short
bearings

w cos $5=

yU13
---&

n2
(1-n)

= 3787 lb.
Weav,

IO

(1967) 179-184

Q = tan-l($$

= 3842

F JLURl

25X

a
f

(I-?-22)+

4.42

lb.

= F/W = O.OOO~II

7 = RF = 4.42 in. lb.

where
n = e/a = 0.7
DISCUSSION

AND

CONCLUSION

The foregoing

numerical

comparison

shows that

an increase

of the loading

capacity occurs when the roughness of the surface is taken into account. The frictional force also increases but less significantly
than the loading capacity.
As a
consequence, the coefficient of friction decreases, contrary to what one might expect.
This may well be of use to the bearing designer since it appears that the effort and
expense of producing
hydrodynamic

a very smooth surface leads to a less satisfactory

point of view. It should be pointed

out however

bearing from a

that

the effect

of

roughness in most practical problems, though not as marked as shown in the above
example, does have a tendency to increase load carrying capacity.
It must

be pointed

out that

the stochastic

limited to the case of the beta distribution.

method

employed

For other types of distribution,

here is not
the solu-

tion will generally be more complex, however. It may well be worth the effort, therefore, to fit the data into a beta distribution (even into a skewed beta distribution, if
necessary) and see if an acceptable degree of accuracy can be attained. If that is
not the case, one might find it necessary to rely on numerical integrations,
with the
aid of digital computers. In finding expected values, as in eqns. (5) and (II),
singularities in the integrand may exist for some distributions, It is one of the advantages of
the method used above that such singularities
tion is applied.

can be avoided when the beta distribu-

REFERENCES
I A. G. M. MICHELL, Lubrication; Its PrinciPles and Practice, Blackie, London, 1950.
2 S. J. CITRON, Slow viscous flow between rotating concentric infinite cylinder with axial roughness, J. Applied Me&, q (1962) I88-192.
3 R. A. BURTON, Effect of two-dimensional,
sinusoidal roughness on the load support characteristics of a lubricant film, J. Basic Eng., 85 (2) (1963) 258-264.
4 E. E. BISSON AND W. J. ANDERSON, Advanced Bearing Technology, NASA, Washington, D.C.,
1964.
5 M. C. SHAW AND E. F. MACKS, Analysis and Lubrication of Bearings, McGraw-Hill Book CO.,
Inc., New York, 1949.
6 A. PAPOULIS, Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Prccesses, McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
Inc., New York, 1965.
Wear. IO (1967) 179-184