Advertisement

Surface texturing to control friction and wear for energy efficiency and sustainability

  • Pradeep L. Menezes
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

Precise control of friction and wear is very important for energy efficiency and sustainability in manufacturing processes. In this research, different kinds of surface textures have been created on steel surfaces to vary the frictional conditions at the interface. The surface textures were varied from unidirectional pattern to criss-cross pattern by rubbing the steel surfaces under dry conditions against different grits of emery papers for various numbers of cycles. The sliding experiments were conducted at a velocity of 2 mm/s using an inclined pin-on-plate apparatus with Al–Mg alloy pins against steel plate surfaces of different textures with roughness under dry and lubricated conditions at ambient conditions. Results showed that the coefficient of friction (COF) and transfer layer formation on the plate surfaces were controlled by the surface textures of the steel materials under both dry and lubricated conditions. Analyzing the surfaces in terms of various roughness parameters, it was found that the asperity angle of the steel surface played a key role in controlling the COF and transfer layer during sliding. The friction and wear performance can be accurately controlled by creating appropriate surface textures and understanding their surface roughness parameters in order to enhance energy efficiency and the quality of finished products in manufacturing processes.

Keywords

Roughness parameters Surface texture Friction coefficient Al–Mg alloy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Menezes PL, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (2013) Fundamentals of engineering surfaces. In: Menezes PL, Nosonovsky M, Ingole SP, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (eds) Tribology for scientists and engineers. Springer, New York, pp 3–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Menezes PL, Nosonovsky M, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (2013) Friction and wear. In: Menezes PL, Nosonovsky M, Ingole SP, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (eds) Tribology for scientists and engineers. Springer, New York, pp 43–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Menezes PL, Reeves C, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (2013) Tribology in metal forming. In: Menezes PL, Nosonovsky M, Ingole SP, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (eds) Tribology for scientists and engineers. Springer, New York, pp 783–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hawkyard JB, Johnson W (1967) An analysis of the changes in geometry of a short hollow cylinder during axial compression. Int J Mech Sci 9:163–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Robinson T, Ou H, Armstrong CG (2004) Study on ring compression test using physical modelling and FE simulation. J Mater Process Technol 153–154:54–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xu WL, Rao KP (1997) Analysis of the deformation characteristics of spike-forging process through FE simulations and experiments. J Mater Process Technol 70:122–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang XW, Zhu XH (1995) Numerical simulation of deep-drawing process. J Mater Process Technol 48:123–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang Z, Lu J, Wang ZR (2001) Numerical and experimental research of the cold upsetting–extruding of tube flanges. J Mater Process Technol 110:28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lazzarotto L, Dubar L, Dubois A, Ravassard P, Oudin J (1997) Identification of Coulomb’s friction coefficient in real contact conditions applied to a wire drawing process. Wear 211:54–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Menezes PL, Kishore, Kailas SV, Lovell M (2015) Influence of surface texture and roughness of softer and harder counter materials on friction during sliding. J Mater Eng Perform 24:393–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wagner S (2001) Optimizing friction between die and sheet metal. In proceedings of second global symposium on innovations in materials, Processing and manufacturing, TMS, New Orleans, February 12-15, United States, p 245–267Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bello DO, Walton S (1987) Surface topography and lubrication in sheet-metal forming. Tribol Int 20:59–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schedin E (1994) Galling mechanisms in sheet forming operations. Wear 179:123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barber GC, Gao H, Tung SC (2005) Experimental study on the friction characteristics of lasertex steel sheets during metal forming process. Tribol Trans 48:245–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rasp W, Wichern CM (2002) Effects of surface-topography directionality and lubrication condition on frictional behaviour during plastic deformation. J Mater Process Technol 125–126:379–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saha PK, Wilson WRD, Timsit RS (1996) Influence of surface topography on the frictional characteristics of 3104 aluminum alloy sheet. Wear 197:123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wihlborg A, Crafoord R (2001) Steel sheet surface topography and its influence on friction in a bending under tension friction test. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 41:1953–1959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kumar CP, Menezes PL, Kailas SV (2008) Role of surface texture on friction under boundary lubricated conditions. Tribol Online 3:12–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Costa HL, Hutchings IM (2009) Effects of die surface patterning on lubrication in strip drawing. J Mater Process Technol 209:1175–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Malayappan S, Narayanasamy R (2004) An experimental analysis of upset forging of aluminium cylindrical billets considering the dissimilar frictional conditions at flat die surfaces. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 23:636–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Määttä A, Vuoristo P, Mäntylä T (2001) Friction and adhesion of stainless steel strip against tool steels in unlubricated sliding with high contact load. Tribol Int 34:779–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hu ZM, Dean TA (2000) A study of surface topography, friction and lubricants in metal forming. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 40:1637–1649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lakshmipathy R, Sagar R (1992) Effect of die surface topography on die-work interfacial friction in open die forging. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 32:685–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Staph HE, Ku PM, Carper HJ (1973) Effect of surface roughness and surface texture on scuffing. Mech Mach Theory 8:197–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Koura MM (1980) The effect of surface texture on friction mechanisms. Wear 63:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wakuda M, Yamauchi Y, Kanzaki S, Yasuda Y (2003) Effect of surface texturing on friction reduction between ceramic and steel materials under lubricated sliding contact. Wear 254:356–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Xie Y, Williams JA (1996) The prediction of friction and wear when a soft surface slides against a harder rough surface. Wear 196:21–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pottirayil A, Menezes PL, Kailas SV (2010) A parameter characterizing plowing nature of surfaces close to Gaussian. Tribol Int 43:370–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Menezes PL, Kishore, Kailas SV (2008) Influence of roughness parameters on coefficient of friction under lubricated conditions. Sadhana 33:181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sedlaček M, Podgornik B, Vižintin J (2009) Influence of surface preparation on roughness parameters, friction and wear. Wear 266:482–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Myers NO (1962) Characterization of surface roughness. Wear 5:182–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wieleba W (2002) The statistical correlation of the coefficient of friction and wear rate of PTFE composites with steel counterface roughness and hardness. Wear 252:719–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Singh R, Melkote SN, Hashimoto F (2005) Frictional response of precision finished surfaces in pure sliding. Wear 258:1500–1509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Menezes PL, Kishore, Kailas SV (2009) Study of friction and transfer layer formation in copper-steel tribo-system: role of surface texture and roughness parameters. Tribol Trans 52:611–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Menezes PL, Kishore, Kailas SV (2009) Influence of roughness parameters and surface texture on friction during sliding of pure lead over 080 M40 steel. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 43:731–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Menezes PL, Kishore, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (2010) Response of materials as a function of grinding angle on friction and transfer layer formation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 49:485–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gadelmawla ES, Koura MM, Maksoud TMA, Elewa IM, Soliman HH (2002) Roughness parameters. J Mater Process Technol 123:133–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Koura MM, Omar MA (1981) The effect of surface parameters on friction. Wear 73:235–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Torrance AA (1995) Using profilometry for the quantitative assessment of tribological function: PC-based software for friction and wear prediction. Wear 181–183:397–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Menezes PL, Kishore, Kailas SV, Lovell MR (2011) Friction and transfer layer formation in polymer–steel tribo-system: role of surface texture and roughness parameters. Wear 271:2213–2221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Black AJ, Kopalinsky EM, Oxley PLB (1988) An investigation of the different regimes of deformation which can occur when a hard wedge slides over a soft surface: the influence of wedge angle, lubrication and prior plastic working of the surface. Wear 123:97–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Challen JM, Oxley PLB (1979) An explanation of the different regimes of friction and wear using asperity deformation models. Wear 53:229–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Nevada RenoRenoUSA

Personalised recommendations