Investigation on Thermal Distress and Scuffing Failure Under Micro EHL Conditions

  • A. Polacco
  • G. Pugliese
  • E. Ciulli
  • G. M. Bragallini
  • M. Facchini
Conference paper
Part of the Solid Mechanics and Its Applications book series (SMIA, volume 134)

Abstract

Scuffing is a degenerative form of adhesive wear caused by local welding between mating surfaces. Classical methods for scuffing prediction indicate the surface temperature rise (flash temperature) due to friction generated heat as the most important index to assess the risk of scuffing. Nowadays numerical analyses constitute a useful tool to provide a good knowledge in mixed lubrication. However, the difficulties of taking into account the many parameters involved in wear, such as mechanical and chemical changes, do not allow us to use them to simulate a wear process or as a practical design tool. Moreover the model used to represent the surface roughness is of great importance since scuffing is associated with asperity interactions. Some roughness models are discussed. Aramaki and co-worker’s roughness model has been chosen and implemented in a numerical code for the assessment of contact temperature and pressure in lubricated rough contacts. The new simplified approach proposed seems to be promising as a tool for a practical and easy to apply scuffing criterion.

Keywords

scuffing flash temperature roughness characterization numerical analysis micro-EHL 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aramaki, H., Cheng, H. S., and Chung, Y. (1993a). The contact between rough surfaces with longitudinal texture part I: Average contact pressure and real contact area. ASME J. of Tribology, 115:419–424.Google Scholar
  2. Aramaki, H., Cheng, H. S., and Chung, Y. (1993b). The contact between rough surfaces with longitudinal texture part ii: Flash temperature. ASME J. of Tribology, 115:425–431.Google Scholar
  3. Bhushan, B. (1998). Contact mechanics of rough surfaces in tribology: multiple asperity contacts. Tribology Letters, 4:1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blok, H. (1937). General discussion on lubrication. Institution Mechanical Engineers, 2:222.Google Scholar
  5. Cameron, A., Gordon, A. N., and Symm, G. T. (1965). Contact temperatures in rolling/sliding surfaces. Proc. R. Soc., A286:45–61.Google Scholar
  6. Castro, J. and Seabra, J. (1998). Scuffing and lubricant film breakdown in FZG gears part I. analytical and experimental approach. Wear, 215(12):104–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng, H. S. and Dyson, A. (1978). Elastohydrodynamic lubrication of circumferentially ground rough disks. ASLE Trans., 21(1):25–40.Google Scholar
  8. Dowson, D. and Higginson, G. R. (1966). Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication. Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Ganti, S. and Bhushan, B. (1995). Generalized fractal analysis and its applications to engineering surfaces. Wear, 180 (12 SU):17–34. TY JOUR.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gao, J., Lee, S. C., Ai, X., and Nixon, H. (2000). An FFT based transient flash temperature model for general three-dimensional rough surface contact. ASME J. of Tribology, 122(51923).Google Scholar
  11. Greenwood, J. A. and Williamson, J. P. B. (1966). Contact of nominally flat surfaces. Proc. R. Soc. London, A295:300–319.Google Scholar
  12. Grosberg, J. and Lee, C. S. (1977). A critical review of gear scoring criteria. Wear, 43(1):237–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. HandzelPowierza, Z., Klimczak, T., and Polijaniuk, A. (1992). On the experimental verification of the Greenwood-Williamson model for the contact of rough surfaces. Wear, 154(1):115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Iida, K. and Ono, K. (2003). Design consideration of contact/near contact sliders based on a rough surface contact model. Transactions of the ASME F Journal of Tribology, 125(3):562–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jaeger, J. C. (1942). Moving sources of heat and the temperature at sliding contacts. Proc. R. Soc. New South Wales, 56:203–24.Google Scholar
  16. Jang, J. Y. and Khonsari, M. M. (2004). On the growth rate of thermoelastic instability. Transactions of the ASME F Journal of Tribology, 126(1):50–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson, K. L., Greenwood, J. A., and Poon, S. Y. (1972). A simple theory of asperity contact in elastohydrodynamic lubrication. Wear, 19(1):91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kato, K. (2000). Wear in boundary or mixed lubrication regimes. In Leeds-Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Volume 40, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 3–17.Google Scholar
  19. Kuhlman-Wilsdorf, D. (1987a). Demystifying flash temperatures, Part I: analytical expression based on a simple model. Materials Science and Engineering, 93:119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kuhlman-Wilsdorf, D. (1987b). Demystifying flash temperatures, Part II: first order approximation for plastic contact. Materials Science and Engineering, 93:119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lin, Y. and Ovaert, T. C. (2004a). A rough surface contact model for general anisotropic materials. Transactions of the ASME F Journal of Tribology, 126(1):41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lin, Y. and Ovaert, T. C. (2004b). A two-dimensional thermoelastic rough surface contact model. Transactions of the ASME F Journal of Tribology, 126(3):430–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lopez, J., Hansali, G., Zahouani, H., Le Bosse, J. C., and Mathia, T. (1995). 3d fractal-based characterisation for engineered surface topography. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 35:211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Majumdar, A. and Bhushan, B. (1991). Fractal model of elastic-plastic contact between rough surfaces. ASME Journal of Tribology, 113.Google Scholar
  25. McCool, J. I. (1986). Comparison of models for the contact of rough surfaces. Wear, 107:37–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Siripuram, R. B. and Stephens, L. S. (2004). Effect of deterministic asperity geometry on hydrodynamic lubrication. Transactions of the ASME F Journal of Tribology, 126(3):527–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tao, J., Hughes, T. G., Evans, H. P., and Snidle, R. W. (2002). Elastohydrodynamic response of transverse ground gear teeth. In Leeds-Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Volume 40, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 447–458.Google Scholar
  28. Tian, X. and Kennedy, F. E. (1994). Maximum and average flash temperatures in sliding contacts. ASME J. of Tribology, 116:167–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tomanik, E., Chacon, H., and Teixeira, G. (2003). A simple numerical procedure to calculate the input data of Greenwood-Williamson model of asperity contact. In LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 205–215.Google Scholar
  30. van der Heide, E. and Schipper, D. J. (2004). On the frictional heating in single summit contacts: Towards failure at asperity level in lubricated systems. Transactions of the ASME F-Journal of Tribology, 126(2):275–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Venner, C., Napel, W., and Bosma, R. (1990). Advanced multilevel solution of the EHL line contact problem. ASME Journal of Tribology, 111:426–432.Google Scholar
  32. Wang, W.Z., Liu, Y.C., Wang, H., and Hu, Y.Z. (2004). A computer thermal model of mixed lubrication in point contacts. Journal of Tribology, 126(1):162–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Willner, K. (2004). Elastoplastic normal contact of three-dimensional fractal surfaces using halfspace theory. Transactions of the ASME F Journal of Tribology, 126(1):28–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yu, N. and Polycarpou, A. A. (2004). Combining and contacting of two rough surfaces with asymmetric distribution of asperity heights. Transactions of the ASME F Journal of Tribology, 126(2):225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Polacco
    • 1
  • G. Pugliese
    • 1
  • E. Ciulli
    • 1
  • G. M. Bragallini
    • 2
  • M. Facchini
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica, Nucleare e della ProduzionePisa UniversityItaly
  2. 2.Avio Propulsione Aerospaziale S.p.A.Rivalta (TO)Italy

Personalised recommendations