3 views

Uploaded by Bib Gmz

contact stresses

- Stress and Strain
- Axial Load - Handout
- Mathematical Theory of Elasticity
- Supported Contact Mechanics Models
- Simulación de Movimiento
- Chamber ANSYS[1]
- As 1774.31.1-2000 Refractories and Refractory Materials - Physical Test Methods Modulus of Elasticity - Flexu
- Theory of Elasticity
- asae.1997.pdf
- Carga en punta
- 26
- Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beams_Zhong
- Study of Contact of Rough Surfaces Modeling and Experiment 2014 Wear
- Som Nol
- Tutorial 2
- Parameter Sensitive Analysis of f 2016 International Journal of Pavement Res
- Stress Analysis
- A Mathematical Model for Calculating Cross-sectional Properties of Modern Wind Turbine Composite Blades
- Stoeckel - A Survey of Stent Designs
- Shears Karet ;Gi

You are on page 1of 13

www.elsevier.com/locate/engfailanal

laterally one side restrained O-ring

a,*

Hyung-Kyu Kim , Sung-Han Park b, Hwan-Gyu Lee b, Dong-Ryun Kim b,

Young-Ho Lee a

a

Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 150 Dukjin-dong, Yuseong-ku Daejeon 305-353, Republic of Korea

b

Agency for Defense Development, 462 Jochiwongil, Yuseong-ku Daejeon, Republic of Korea

Available online 22 January 2007

Abstract

This paper revisits the classical O-ring problem by using an experimental, ﬁnite element analysis and conventional the-

ories. Especially, the elastic moduli, deformation shape, friction coeﬃcient and extrusion behaviour were investigated in

detail during the experiments. A computed tomography was used to detect the deformed shape of the O-ring. The used

ﬁnite element method results were validated by comparing them with the experimental results. For an application to

the present study, an actual case of a compressed and laterally one side restrained condition was analyzed experimentally

and numerically. As a result of the ﬁnite element analysis, the friction coeﬃcient aﬀects the contact stress proﬁle and mag-

nitude considerably. Lindley’s formulae for a contact (compressive) force underestimated the measured force but it showed

similar results to the ﬁnite element analysis results. Applicability of the Hertz theory to the contact stress ﬁeld was dis-

cussed by comparing it with the ﬁnite element analysis results in the case of a compressed and laterally one side restrained

condition. Consequently, it was found that the normalized results with respect to the peak stress and contact width fol-

lowed the typical Hertzian proﬁle. So an implementation of the appropriate factors to the Hertz equation can yield an

approximate solution of the contact stresses.

2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

An elastomeric O-ring is one of the most widely used sealing components in mechanical systems. These

seals are mainly classiﬁed as a static seal and a dynamic seal. One of the application examples is found in a

solid propellant engine which supports a high pressure. The important property which maintains an O-ring

seal in contact with a seal face is an elastic reaction subjected to an imposed deformation. A general concern

of the O-ring is how to establish the relationship between a deformation and its lifetime. If it is possible to

*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 42 868 2111; fax: +82 42 863 0565.

E-mail address: hkkim1@kaeri.re.kr (H.-K. Kim).

1350-6307/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2006.11.061

H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692 1681

obtain a correct relationship, it will be very useful from the viewpoint of its economy and safety in the indus-

tries. This goal can be achieved through a solid mechanical analysis to evaluate the stresses and deformations.

The stress ﬁeld in an O-ring and the contact pressure distribution are good indicators of a seals’ performance

as well as of its sealing characteristics [1]. Tensile stress in the interior region and the shoulder of the O-ring

can cause a failure. Center crack appears along the vertical direction due to expanding (tensile) stresses and

surface crack occurs along the hoop direction due to high hoop stress [2]. These stresses can be analyzed

by an analytical method, a ﬁnite element method and an experimental analysis.

The ﬁnite element analysis (FEA) for elastomers has been much less developed. The reason is that the elas-

tomer applications incorporate large displacements, large strains, a non-linear elastic behavior and the Poisson

ratio, approaching 0.5. Hence the FEA results cannot be assumed to be reliable without a reasonable level of

veriﬁcation. Various experimental and analytical methods for analyzing the stresses in a compressed and lat-

erally unrestrained O-ring can be found in the literature [3–5]. Many researches have only focused on analyz-

ing the reaction force of a rubber material and the contact stresses. However most of the O-rings are used in a

pressurized, laterally restrained application. Few researches are found for case of a problem with a pressurized

and laterally restrained O-ring [6]. Because an O-ring problem becomes more complex, an analytical solution

is rarely found.

In this paper, the mechanics of an O-ring is revisited. A fundamental purpose of present work is to ﬁnd out

an approximate solution for the mechanics of O-ring by using contact mechanics. To this end, an experimental

study and an FEA are carried out at ﬁrst. Especially, the specially designed tests provide the elastic moduli,

compressive forces and deformed shapes. The method of FEA is validated through comparing its results with

the test results. Lindley’s formulae and the Hertz theory are used to investigate the applicability of the con-

ventional theories to the present O-ring problem. The validated FEA results for the contact width and peak

stress are compared with the theoretical ones in the case of a compressed and laterally one side restrained con-

dition. An approximate solution of the contact stress, which implements two factors to a function form of the

Hertz equation is considered and discussed.

2. Tests

The material of the O-ring is chloroprene rubber. First, it is necessary to establish the elastic modulus of it

to analyze the deformation behaviour. Although it might be obtained from the material data, tests were con-

ducted to measure an actual value by using a specimen. This test was also necessary to implement a ﬁnite ele-

ment analysis where the appropriate elastic moduli were used depending on the deformation behaviour of each

element. For this purpose, uni-axial and equi-biaxial tests were performed.

The results are illustrated in Fig. 1. From Fig. 1a, the coeﬃcients of the Ogden strain energy function were

determined for the FEA. While, Fig. 1b shows the compressive stress-strain curve, obtained from the equi-

biaxial test results. It is concluded that the elastic modulus is linear to a fractional compression of 30%.

The compressive elastic modulus for the theoretical analysis was evaluated as 0.59 kgf/mm2 (5785.92 kPa),

which was obtained by a linear ﬁtting of Fig. 1b up to a compressive strain of 30%.

The sealing force for a full size O-ring was measured by using a screw compression device of a compression

stress relaxation tester developed by the Agency for Defense Development in Korea. An intrinsic purpose of

this test is to compare the measured compressive forces with the present FEA results for its validation. Of

course, the compressive force is a fundamental data for the present analytical solution approach. The dimen-

sions of the full size O-ring were: a chord diameter of 6.98 mm and a mean diameter of 123.19 mm. The O-ring

was compressed up to 35% of its chord diameter (the fractional compression) during this test. Fig. 2 shows the

results during a loading and an unloading phase. The relationship between the fractional compression and

compressive force is nonlinear but it is found that the degree of nonlinearity is not signiﬁcant in the test range

of 35%.

1682 H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692

Fig. 1. Test results of the elastic moduli for the chloroprene rubber specimen: (a) measured tensile stress vs. strain; (b) compressive stress

vs. strain deduced from the equi-biaxial test result.

Fig. 2. Test result of the compressive force with respect to the fractional compression.

A series of tests was carried out to investigate the behaviour of an extrusion (i.e. so-called ‘‘forcing-out’’)

into a gap of 1 mm formed between an O-ring groove and its cover when a test block was assembled. Internal

H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692 1683

pressure was exerted by using a hydraulic (water) force to the O-ring which was increased slowly. Then, a con-

stant fractional compression of 23% was maintained. Extrusion displacement measurement was achieved by

using an experimental setup presented in Fig. 3, which was specially devised for the present work. The setup

was composed of a test ﬁxture, in which an O-ring was installed, a CCD laser displacement sensor, and a mea-

surement system. The resolution of the sensor was within 1 lm. Four tests with a CCD laser sensor and one

test with tomography were performed. The extrusion depth of the full size O-ring was measured by using the

CCD laser displacement sensor and the computed tomography.

Simultaneously, the deformed shapes of the O-rings were examined by the computed tomography. The

schematic of the tomography equipment (the second generation) is illustrated in Fig. 4. The measurement con-

dition of the computed tomography was that the X-ray energy was 350 kVp, the tube current was 2 mA and

the focal size was 0.8 mm. The resolution of the image was 1024 · 1024 pixels (51 · 51 mm) so the size of a

pixel was 50 · 50 lm. The section dimension of the test block for measuring the O-ring displacement was

designed to be 20.41 mm in width and 34.6 mm in length to optimize the X-ray’s transmission energy. The

edge of the test block was rounded oﬀ to minimize the amount of artifacts. The displacements of the O-ring

Fig. 3. The schematic of test setup for friction coeﬃcient and extrusion depth.

Oring

Water Pump

Detectors

PC & Graphical

Display System

1684 H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692

Fig. 5. Transient behaviour in the extrusion test from which a static friction coeﬃcient was evaluated.

were measured for internal pressures of 0 kPa and 1378.95 kPa, which were applied to the computed tomog-

raphy. The deformed shape including the expanded diameter and the extrusion depth were compared with the

FEA results for a validation of the method in addition to the compressive force.

Static friction coeﬃcient (l, termed as ‘‘friction coeﬃcient’’, afterwards) measurement was achieved by

using the extrusion displacement measurement device as already shown in Fig. 3. A friction coeﬃcient was

measured from a movement of the O-ring as the internal pressure of the test ﬁxture was increased, which

was exerted after a 23% fractional compression of the O-ring.

During the extrusion tests described above, the pressure at which the O-ring began to move was also mea-

sured. This critical value of the pressure identiﬁes the force required to overcome a static friction caused by the

compression force (FN) of a squeezed O-ring in a joint. The measured results are shown in Fig. 5. The pressure

when the O-ring began to move was 144.79 kPa. The pressure increase rate seems to have little eﬀect on the

friction coeﬃcient. It was evaluated as l = 0.13 from FN and the pressure at which the O-ring began to move.

When an O-ring is installed in a groove and compressed by a cover, the contact conﬁguration is regarded as

the Hertz contact generally if a plane strain state is assumed. In this case, the contact pressure proﬁle along the

horizontal direction of an O-ring’s cross section becomes a semi-ellipse, which is the well-known Hertz pres-

sure. By adopting the Hertz contact, Lindley derived simple formulae of the relationship between a compres-

sive force and a fractional compression theoretically and empirically, which are given in Eqs. (1) and (2),

respectively [3,7]. From the tests with the O-rings of the gum compound and the black-ﬁlled compound whose

elastic moduli were 0.195 and 0.596 kgf/mm2 (1912.30 and 5844.76 kPa), respectively, the formulae have been

veriﬁed. During the derivation, the elastic modulus of the ﬁxture material was regarded to be inﬁnite when

compared with that of the O-ring. The material of the O-ring was also regarded as incompressible (i.e., the

Poisson ratio m = 0.5).

F P

¼ ¼ 1:25 C 1:5 ; ð1Þ

pDdE dE

F P

¼ ¼ 1:25 C 1:5 þ 50 C 6 ; ð2Þ

pDdE dE

where F is the compression load, D and d are the mean and cross section diameters of an O-ring, respectively.

E is the elastic modulus of an O-ring and C (= x/d where x is the diametric compression) is the fractional com-

pression. If we consider a plane problem (i.e., plane strain state), the compressive force exerted at the bound-

H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692 1685

ary of the O-ring cross section, i.e. the compressive force to the unit thickness of an O-ring is F/pD, which is

designated as P in Eqs. (1) and (2).

Using Eq. (1) or (2) and the Hertz theory, the contact width, b and the peak contact stress (the highest value

of the Hertz pressure proﬁle), po can be obtained by

rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

6

b¼d gðCÞ; ð3Þ

p

4P

po ¼ ; ð4Þ

pb

where g(C) is the right hand side of Eqs. (1) and (2). It should be noted that b may be obtained from the Hertz

theory such that [8]

rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

16PR

b¼ : ð5Þ

pE

1m21 1m22

In Eq. (5), R and E* are deﬁned as R1 ¼ R11 þ R12 and E1 ¼ E1

þ E2

in which the subscripts 1 and 2 designate

the diﬀerences of the contacting bodies such as the ﬁxture and the O-ring. Since the contact region of the ﬁx-

ture is ﬂat, R simply becomes the radius of the O-ring’s cross section (R = d/2). Again, the elastic modulus of

the ﬁxture can be regarded to be inﬁnitely larger than that of the O-ring and an incompressibility (m = 0.5) is

applied for the O-ring material, Eq. (5) is written as

rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

6Pd

b¼ : ð6Þ

pE

It is recognized that equating Eqs. (3) and (6) can yield Eqs. (1) and (2). Consequently, the Hertz theory was

used in Lindley’s derivation. There may be diﬀering views on this since the O-ring problem violates some of the

assumptions of the Hertz theory. It is validated if the contacting bodies are assumed to be semi-inﬁnite when

compared with the contact dimensions; the strains in the contact region must be inﬁnitesimal to apply the the-

ory of linear elasticity; and the contact surface is frictionless. None of these are suﬃciently validated for the O-

ring’s contact problem. This has previously been discussed [9], but the results showed that the Hertz theory

was applicable until a fractional compression of up to 25% [3] or 30% [10]. It implies that a linear elasticity

can be applied approximately to the O-ring problem without a signiﬁcant error up to the above mentioned

fractional compressions. To investigate this, the maximum fractional compression of 35% was applied in

the present tests and the analysis was done up to 32%, slightly larger than 30%.

Besides the compressive force, width and peak stress, the applicability of the Hertz pressure proﬁle is con-

sidered. The well-known Hertz proﬁle is written as

sﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

2

2x

pðxÞ ¼ po 1 : ð7Þ

b

It has been found that the contact width decreased and the peak stress increased from the Hertz solution as the

semi-inﬁniteness was violated [11]. They found that the semi-inﬁniteness was validated if the ratio of the con-

tact width to the thickness of the indented body exceeded 5. The overall shape of a parabola was maintained

even though the semi-inﬁniteness was validated. In the present O-ring problem, the dimensions of the ﬁxture

(cover and grooved device) are suﬃciently larger than that for the ratio of 5. However, it may be compared

with the value d/b in the case of the O-ring itself although the O-ring is an indenter rather than an indented

body when an O-ring’s contact conﬁguration is considered. This will be discussed later.

In the previous works, the internal stresses of a compressed O-ring have seldom been analyzed theoretically

when compared with a contact stress evaluation. A few analyses have been carried out by using the FEA and

experiments (e.g., photoelasticity) [12] rather than the analytical method. However, if the contact stress ﬁeld is

known, Muskhelishvili’s complex potential approach [13,14] or Timoshenko and Goodier’s solution [15] can

be used for the internal stresses. Curro and Salazar presented a precious clue to it [16]. Present paper does not

deal with the internal stresses either since the primary concern was to investigate the validity of the conven-

tional theories and the FEA on the contact behaviour by comparing their results with the test results.

1686 H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692

4.1. Method

The basis of the stress analysis programs is that when an elastomer is deformed in a given way, the eventual

overall geometric form and stress conditions will be consistent with a minimum strain energy of the whole

body. The deﬁnition of the strain energy density function in terms of the strain invariants is known as a con-

stitutive relation. The choice of it is determined through specimen tests such as uni-axial and equi-biaxial tests.

A least-square interpolation permits a deﬁnition of the material constants.

It is known that, if the ratio between the toroidal seal mean diameter and the cross section diameter is larger

than 5, the in-plane strain ﬁeld in the O-ring cross section can be solved in terms of a plain strain model [17].

Presently used ﬁnite element program was the MARc [18], which can cope with ﬁnite deformation and hyper-

elastic materials. To be consistent with the full size O-ring tests, an axisymmetric model was adopted. Updated

Lagrangian energy minimization approach was used and the contact element was applied at the contact inter-

faces. The strain energy function used in the FEA was the Ogden form and the Ogden coeﬃcients were cal-

culated by a least square interpolation of the uni-axial and equi-biaxial tests as provided in Fig. 1a. The

friction model used in the FEA was a stick-slip model and the friction coeﬃcient was 0.13 which was deter-

mined from the tests. To solve the convergence problem under a high pressure, an automatic remeshing was

adopted. The remeshing criteria were determined iteratively.

4.2. Validation

To validate the present FEA, the compressive force was investigated at ﬁrst. This was carried out by com-

paring the obtained reaction force from the FEA with the test results (Fig. 2) and Lindley’s formula (Eqs. (1)

and (2)). The results are given in Table 1. It is found that the FEA underestimates somewhat the compressive

force under a fractional compression of 24% and it overestimates the force at 32%. The closest result appears

at 24%. It is also found that the variation of the friction coeﬃcient has little eﬀect on the compressive force. In

Table 1, the compressive force obtained by Lindley’s formulae is also provided for a comparison. It is inter-

esting to note that the diﬀerences between the results by the FEA and the Lindley’s are smaller than those

between the test results and the FEA or Lindley’s formulae. The results by Lindley’s formulae are slightly clo-

ser to the test results than the FEA results. It is somewhat diﬃcult to say that the present FEA is validated

from the investigation of the compressive force. So other comparisons were attempted such as the deformed

shape, the expanded diameter and the extrusion depth of the O-ring.

Figs. 6 and 7 show the deformed shapes obtained from the FEA and tests for a fractional compression of

22.3% with an internal pressure of 0 and 1378.95 kPa, respectively, in the case of the compressed and laterally

one side restrained condition. The FEA and tomography results appeared to be almost the same. Fig. 8 shows

a histogram from which the present images of the computed tomography were analyzed. With a consideration

of this, it is regarded that the present FEA technique can simulate an O-ring deformation. Fig. 9 shows the

expanded diameter of the O-ring obtained from the FEA and tests during a fractional compression increase.

It is found that both results agreed well with each other. Fig. 10 shows the extrusion depth calculated from the

FEA and measured by the tomography and the CCD laser sensor during an increase of the internal pressure.

Table 1

Comparison of the contact force (in N) obtained from the tests, Lindley’s formulae and FEA

Fractional compression (%) Tests FEA Lindley’s formulae

l* = 0.1 l = 0.3 l = 1.0 Eq. (1) Eq. (2)

8 622.53 425.61 426.30 426.39 442.08 442.28

16 1417.36 1176.80 1183.07 1183.96 1250.35 1263.49

24 2537.86 2472.26 2537.96 2517.66 2297.11 2446.46

32 4074.96 4831.05 5081.51 5113.87 3536.57 4375.73

l is a static friction coeﬃcient.

H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692 1687

Fig. 6. The deformed shape obtained from (a) FEA and (b) computed tomography at the fractional compression of 22.3%.

Fig. 7. The deformed shape obtained from (a) FEA and (b) computed tomography at the fractional compression of 22.3% and internal

pressure of 1378.95 kPa.

The prediction by the FEA also agrees well with the measured results. From the above investigations, it was

concluded that the present FEA method was validated.

4.3. Contact stress evaluation for the compressed and laterally one side restrained condition

After the completion of the FEA validation, contact widths and stresses were evaluated for the case of com-

pressed (by 22.3%) and laterally one side restrained condition, which has seldom been treated previously. The

two parameters which can describe the deformed shape are the contact width between the O-ring and the top

(or bottom) surface of the ﬁxture, and that between the O-ring and the lateral groove wall. Fig. 11 displays the

results, where the variation of the contact width with respect to the fractional compression is provided. The

1688 H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692

Fig. 9. Comparison of the expanded diameters evaluated from the FEA and measured from tests (l is the friction coeﬃcient).

Fig. 10. Comparison of the extrusion depth evaluated from FEA and measured from tests (l is the friction coeﬃcient).

FEA results are the average values of the last nodes in contact and the ﬁrst nodes not in contact. The FEA

predicts the contact width at the lateral wall very well. However, there exists some discrepancy in the widths

at the top and bottom surfaces. The cause of the discrepancy between the FEA and tomography results may

H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692 1689

Fig. 11. Comparison of contact widths composed between the O-ring and the top (A), bottom (B) surfaces and side wall (C) obtained from

the FEA and tests (l is the friction coeﬃcient).

be attributed to the pixel size and the resolution accuracy due to a small diﬀerence in the density between the

water (1.0) and the O-ring (1.1). It was diﬃcult to determine the boundary of the O-ring and water especially

at the contact edges of the top and bottom surfaces. As the fractional compression increases, the diﬀerence in

the contact width at the top and the bottom surfaces increases. However, the variation of the friction coeﬃ-

cient does not really aﬀect the result as seen in Fig. 9.

The contact stresses were also evaluated for the same case (22.3% compression and laterally one side

restrained condition). As is generally accepted, the seal contact stress is an important factor for evaluating

a seals’ performance [19]. Fig. 12 shows the contact pressure proﬁles calculated on the contacts between

the O-ring and the groove top and bottom surfaces. pT and pB designate the contact stresses on the contacts

between the O-ring and the top surface, and that at the bottom surface, respectively. Contact stress distribu-

tion shows a parabolic shape like the Hertzian proﬁle. The friction coeﬃcient does not inﬂuence the proﬁle

shape itself. However, as the friction coeﬃcient increases (say, at l = 1.0), the maximum contact stresses

and the diﬀerences between pT and pB increase. Fig. 13 shows the contact pressure proﬁles evaluated for

the contact at the lateral wall (designated as pL), which was simultaneously found during the FEA calculation

for Fig. 12. In this case, the contact stress distribution seems to be diﬀerent from the Hertzian proﬁle. It is

thought that the edge radius formed at the top of the lateral wall caused a local irregular deformation at

Fig. 12. FEA result of the contact pressure proﬁles between the O-ring and the groove top ad bottom surfaces at the fractional

compression of 22.3%.

1690 H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692

Fig. 13. FEA result of the contact pressure proﬁles between the O-ring and the lateral wall at the fractional compression of 22.3%.

the rounded edge. Besides this, the inﬂuence of the friction coeﬃcient is considerable as was also found in the

results at the top and bottom surfaces.

The Hertz theory was applied to the above case, i.e. the compressed and laterally one side restrained con-

dition. The FEA solutions in the case of the fractional compression of 22.3% and l = 0.13 were compared

with the Hertz solution for the contact width (b) and peak stress (po). The results are summarized in Table

2. The FEA results were picked up from the data of Figs. 12 and 13, while Eqs. (4) and (6) were used in

the Hertz theory to obtain the peak stress and contact width, respectively.

For the contact width, the FEA always gives larger values than the Hertz theory. On the contact at the top

and bottom surfaces, the contact width by the FEA is very similar to the Hertz theory. However, it is larger by

almost twice on the contact at the lateral wall. On the other hand, the peak stress results appear oppositely

except the contact at the lateral wall. In short, if we disregard the contact at the lateral wall, the FEA results

gave lower peak stress and larger contact width compared with the prediction by the Hertz theory. It is oppo-

site result to the case of the semi-inﬁniteness violation aforementioned in Section 3 although d/b is much less

than 5 (it can be calculated by using the contact width in Table 2 and the section diameter of 6.98 mm) in the

present contact conﬁguration. So it can be said that the above phenomenon (larger width and lower peak) is

not due to the dimensions. It may be said to be a speciﬁc phenomenon of the O-ring’s contact. It is found that

the ratios between the results from the FEA and that from the Hertz theory are nearly the same on the top and

bottom surfaces.

However, those results are very diﬀerent on the contact at the lateral wall. A considerable discrepancy

appears in the contact width as well as peak stress between the FEA and the Hertz theory. There may be sev-

eral reasons of it, for instance, the rounded edge at the top of the groove wall and an irregular expansion that

may happen during the compression. Nevertheless, it can be said that the deviation of the contact width and

Table 2

Comparison of the contact width and peak stress evaluated from the FEA and the Hertz theory in the case of compression (22.3%) only

Contact location Compressive force (N) Contact width (mm) Peak stress (kPa)

FEA Hertz Ratio FEA Hertz Ratio

Top 2402.43 4.40 3.78 1.16 1930.73 2090.63 0.92

Bottom 2290.54 4.40 3.69 1.19 1924.21 2041.37 0.94

Lateral 208.49 2.21 1.11 1.99 939.24 615.88 1.53

Note: l = 0.13 is used in the FEA.

H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692 1691

Fig. 14. Investigation of the FEA result on the applicability of the Hertz proﬁle in the case of the compressed (22.3%) and laterally one

side restrained condition (for l = 0.13).

peak stress apart from the Hertz theory is resolved by a certain factor if a pressure proﬁle of the FEA results

follow the Hertzian proﬁle. It was attempted and the result is provided in Fig. 14.

Fig. 14 shows the contact stresses on the top and bottom surfaces, and lateral wall evaluated from the FEA

normalized with respect to contact width (b) and peak stress (po). The normalized Hertzian proﬁle is also illus-

trated for comparison. The used function for the normalized Hertzian proﬁle is as follows:

rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ rﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

pðxÞ 4 x x x

¼ x 1 ¼2 1 : ð8Þ

po b b b b

It is apparently found that the FEA results follow the function form of the Hertzian very well. Therefore, it

is concluded that the contact stress proﬁles composed between the O-ring and ﬁxture (groove as well) surfaces

are a typical Hertzian proﬁle. The discrepancy can be resolved by appropriate factors that change the contact

width and peak stress. If we designate a and b as control factors for the peak stress and contact width, respec-

tively, and introduce normalized variables pðxÞ ¼ pðxÞ=po and x ¼ x=b, the following equation becomes an

approximate solution of the contact stress ﬁeld:

pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

pðxÞ ¼ 2a bxð1 bxÞ:

ð9Þ

It is easy to recognize that the peak stress and contact width are linearly proportional to a and 1/b, respec-

tively. On the other hand, it can be said that a and b include the uncertainty of the compressive force as well as

the dimension and the elastic modulus of an O-ring as well if Eqs. (4)–(6) are considered. For the above prob-

lem of the compressed and laterally one side restrained condition (Figs. 12 and 13 for l = 0.13), the ratios of

the contact width and the inverse of those of the peak pressure in Table 2 can be applied to a and b for the

approximate solution of the contact stress ﬁeld.

6. Concluding remarks

For the purpose of understanding the deformation behaviour of an elastomeric O-ring and its sealing per-

formance, experimental, ﬁnite element and contact mechanics analyses were carried out in this research.

Although the O-ring problem has been treated many times and the subject is a relatively common one, it is

worth visiting the problem again with modern technology. For instance, the tests were carried out to obtain

more precise values of the elastic modulus for a more accurate ﬁnite element analysis and a computed tomog-

raphy was used to investigate the O-ring deformation when it was compressed and then laterally pressed as

well as when it was compressed only. The present ﬁnite element method was validated through comparing with

these test results such as the contact force, deformed shape including extrusion behaviour of an O-ring. In the

analysis of the extrusion behaviour, the inﬂuence of the friction coeﬃcient was considerable. It implies that the

friction force should be less to maintain the O-ring’s life. Besides, it was found that the compressive forces

1692 H.-K. Kim et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 14 (2007) 1680–1692

obtained by Lindley’s formulae were similar to the ﬁnite element results but they were comparatively diﬀerent

from the test results. The present ﬁnite element analysis dealt with an O-ring’s deformation when it was com-

pressed and laterally restrained at one side, which has seldom been treated even though it often occurs actually

when an O-ring is inserted into a groove. When we focused on the friction coeﬃcient of 0.13 for the case of the

compressed (22.3%) and laterally one side restrained condition, which was actually measured from the tests, it

was found that a typical function form of the Hertzian pressure proﬁle was apparently found on the contacts

between the O-ring and the top and bottom surfaces as well as that and the lateral wall although the contact

widths and the peak stresses appeared to be diﬀerent from those in the Hertz theory. So an implementation of

appropriate factors (designated as a and b presently) to the function of the Hertz pressure proﬁle can yield an

approximate solution of the contact stress for an O-ring contact problem.

References

[1] Theyse FH. The inverse hydrodynamic theory and its application in the design of controlled leakage seals between moving parts. in:

Proceedings of the third international conference on ﬂuid sealing BHRA, Cranﬁeld 1967. p. 17–32.

[2] Ebisu T, Yamamoto M, Maekawa H, Onodera A. Fundamental studies on the performance of O-ring for cask. PATRAM

1983;83:672–9.

[3] Lindley PB. Compression characteristics of laterally-unrestrained rubber O-rings. J IRI 1967;1:202–13.

[4] George AF, Strozzi A, Rich JI. Stress ﬁelds in a compressed unrestrained elastomeric O-ring seal and a comparison of computer

predictions with experimental results. Trib Int 1987;20(5):237–47.

[5] Strozzi A. Experimental stress-strain ﬁeld in elastomeric O-ring seals. In: Wieringa H, editor. Experimental Stress Analysis. The

Hague: Martinus Nijhoﬀ; 1986.

[6] Salita M. A simple ﬁnite element model of O-ring deformation and activation during squeeze and pressurization. AIAA/SAE/ASME/

ASEE 23rd Joint propulsion conference, San Diego, CA; 1987.

[7] Lindley PB. Load-compression relationships of rubber units. J Strain Anal 1966;1(3):190–5.

[8] Johnson KL. Contact mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1985.

[9] Blok H. Symposium on lubrication and wear, Houston; 1963.

[10] Fessler H, Ollerton E. J Appl Phys 1957:387–93.

[11] Nowell D, Hills DA. Contact problems incorporating elastic layers. Int J Solids Struct 1988;24(1):105–15.

[12] Dragoni E, Storzzi A. Analysis on an unpressurized, laterally restrained, elastomeric O-ring seal. J Trib 1988;110:193–200.

[13] Muskhelishvili NI. Some basic problems of the mathematical theory of elasticity. Leyden Noordhoﬀ: International Publishing; 1977.

[14] Sokolnikoﬀ IS. Mathematical theory of elasticity. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc; 1956.

[15] Timoshenko SP, Goodier JN. Theory of elasticity. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc; 1970.

[16] Curro JG, Salazar EA. Mechanical behavior of O-rings. Rubber Chem Tech 1973;46:530–9.

[17] Gorelik BM, Bukhina MF, Ratner AV. Variation of contact area in the deformation of rubber cylinders and rings. Sobiet Rubber

Tech 1961;1:10–4.

[18] MARc. General purpose ﬁnite element programm 2004 vol. A–D.

[19] Medri G, Strozzi A. Mechanical analysis of elastomeric seals by numerical methods. I&EC Product Res Dev 1984;23:596–600.

- Stress and StrainUploaded byShaktivell Letchumanan
- Axial Load - HandoutUploaded byDirajen Pullay Marday
- Mathematical Theory of ElasticityUploaded byRaghav Maini
- Supported Contact Mechanics ModelsUploaded byebrahimpan
- Simulación de MovimientoUploaded byZuko Carlos Jimenez Luis
- Chamber ANSYS[1]Uploaded byMuhammad Junaid Yusfzai
- As 1774.31.1-2000 Refractories and Refractory Materials - Physical Test Methods Modulus of Elasticity - FlexuUploaded bySAI Global - APAC
- Theory of ElasticityUploaded bySujay Dsouza
- asae.1997.pdfUploaded byDouglas Frabetti
- Carga en puntaUploaded byJavier Antonio Cardenas Oliveros
- 26Uploaded bypbldzcms
- Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beams_ZhongUploaded byOthman Bouaziz
- Study of Contact of Rough Surfaces Modeling and Experiment 2014 WearUploaded byadriano_rods
- Som NolUploaded byMohanraj Kulandasamy
- Tutorial 2Uploaded byPrashanth Shyamala
- Parameter Sensitive Analysis of f 2016 International Journal of Pavement ResUploaded byHanamant Hunashikatti
- Stress AnalysisUploaded byAwadh Kapoor
- A Mathematical Model for Calculating Cross-sectional Properties of Modern Wind Turbine Composite BladesUploaded byKaan Günay
- Stoeckel - A Survey of Stent DesignsUploaded byGeorge E. Bozinis
- Shears Karet ;GiUploaded byEddie Higgins Trio
- CE 14 Course SyllabusUploaded byChristian Galope
- ACE_GATE-2017-ME_Afternoon Session_Feb 4_Analysis.pdfUploaded byalagar krishna kumar
- Determination of internal state variables and constitutive modeling for type 316 stainless steel.pdfUploaded byjosej
- Ndamentals of MetalworkingUploaded byheru
- Hutchinson Fracture Delamination of beams under transverse shear and bendingUploaded byTashi Malhotra
- Wen-Yea Jang, Stelios Kyriakides and Andrew M. Kraynik- On the Compressive Strength of Open-Cell Metal Foams with Kelvin and Random Cell StructuresUploaded byFlaoeram
- Balu.resumeUploaded byvenumvjce
- IJRET - Studies and Mechanical Tries Regarding the Cutting Process by Punching of the Package Polyurethane-pad-protective Paper, Components of a Medical Device (Dressing)Uploaded byInternational Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology
- Stiffness Predictions for Unidirectional Short-fiber Composites Review and EvaluationUploaded byJérémy Crevel
- Normal StressUploaded byMohd Nor Jusoh

- 2009 a Comparative Study of Usefulness for Pad Reinforcement in Cylindrical Vessels Under External Load on NozzleUploaded byBib Gmz
- 1999 On the shakedown analysis of nozzles using elasto-plastic FEA.pdfUploaded byBib Gmz
- 1999 On the shakedown analysis of nozzles using elasto-plastic FEA.pdfUploaded byBib Gmz
- rt-asmeb31.3-withoutsecure.pdfUploaded bykishorekumar.animu
- 10683_Oktober_2014Uploaded byBib Gmz
- CatalogoUploaded byBib Gmz
- 2005 Direct Finite Element Route for Design-By-Analysis of Pressure ComponentsUploaded byBib Gmz
- Ship&OffshoreUploaded byBib Gmz
- FEA of Nonlinear Problems 2011 IvancoUploaded byhazemismaeelradhi
- math2034notes-10Uploaded byBib Gmz
- An Overview Ot He ASME Guide for Verification and Validation in Computational Solid MechanicsUploaded byBib Gmz
- Dieta_ Dislipemia - Hipercolesterolemia - Prevención ArteriosclerosisUploaded byBib Gmz
- Factores de JuntaUploaded byBib Gmz
- Manual Estufa point edilkaminUploaded byBib Gmz

- M1Uploaded bySajedul Hassan
- BearingUploaded bysyariza ismail
- 21948642 07 CB Conveyor Belt Design ManualUploaded byRavikanth Aluri
- Agricultural Mate 00 Pos jUploaded byBlooty
- Feed Mill InfoUploaded bySapel
- Nonconvergence in Caesar IIUploaded byMichael Robinson
- PHYSICS 2048_ PracticeUploaded byalphaceta
- SAES-L-440 Anchors Buried Pipelines 2005Uploaded byymaseda
- 2Aprob Sol 7Uploaded byGowrisankar Rao
- physicclass guide EASAUploaded byAngelo Martinez
- Tutorial - Soil Overburden and Seismic Wave Propagation in AutoPIPE v9_5Uploaded byFemi Richard Fakoya
- science motion unit wholeUploaded byapi-241736973
- Physics Mechanics help bookletUploaded bydj7597
- Review on the Effect of Corrugated Shapes on the BEHAVIOURS of FluidUploaded byjournal
- dow-corning-brochure-molykote-lubrication-solutions.pdfUploaded byqcselva
- lab reportUploaded byTamil Da Rasckalz
- Water Lubrificated.pdfUploaded byRichard Castro
- A Review paper on Lubricating Oil AnalysisUploaded byiaetsdiaetsd
- AGMU 11.1-Overturning Torsional Shaft AnalysisUploaded bychrtrom
- Modelling and Simulation of Machining ProcessesUploaded byCarvalho
- Kecukupan Latihan YEAR 6Uploaded byAkula Dia
- Journal - Application of FEA in DentistryUploaded byHamdani Nurdin
- Festo documentUploaded byFikret Bašić
- Bearings for pumpsUploaded bymartin.ruben
- CapacitanceUploaded byraghu ram
- Physics Malaysian Matriculation Semester 1 Notes CompleteUploaded byJay Bee
- Jenikes’ TheoryUploaded byMohammad Bataineh
- Solutions ManualUploaded bySunilkumar Reddy
- Zheng 2016Uploaded byEric Toro
- Influence of Vane Size and Equipment on the Results in the Vane Shear TestUploaded byNabucodonosor1980