Module 2 : Friction

Junction Growth

Bowden and Tabor were motivated to think that contact area(shown in Fig. 2.16) might
become much enlarged under the additional shear force and they proposed junction growth
theory. They considered two rough surfaces subjected to normal load W and friction force at
the interface. To explain their hypothesis they considered two dimensional stress
system(Eq.(2.1)). If W force is in y-direction and force in x-direction is zero, then principle
stresses can be expressed by Eq.(2.2) and Eq.(2.3).

....Eq.(2.1)

Fig. 2.16: Two contacting surfaces.

....Eq.(2.2)

Where σ1 is first principal stress, and δ is elemental area.

....Eq.(2.3)

Substracting Eq.(2.3) from Eq.(2.2)

Where σ2 is second principal stress.

....Eq.(2.4)

If yield strength of material is σy = σ1 - σ2

and shear strength and τy = 0.5τy. On substituting and rearranging.

....Eq.(2.5)

In Eq.(2.5) τy and W remain constant and this indicates that area of contact will increase with
increasing friction force, till force reaches its limiting value. We can state that on application
of additional incremental tangential force, there will be further plastic flow at constant shear
stress, resulting in an incremental contact area of A. Bowden and Tabor called this increase
the junction growth. Assume τi is shear stress of fractured interface.

...Eq.(2.6)

Using Eq.(2.6) coefficient of friction can be calculated from ratio τi / τy, as given in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4
The above analysis applies only to clean surfaces. Understanding this mechanism motivates
to apply thin film of low shear strength materials to the surfaces. Therefore in order to reduce
maintenance cost and increase bearing life, interface shear strength of contacting surfaces
need to be as low as possible.

How to reduce Junction Growth ?

Two methods to reduce junction growth are contaminations (reducing adhesion) and
lubrication.

Contamination : A few molecules thick oxide layer (encountered with metals in air) on the
surface(as shown in Fig. 2.17) can reduce the friction (i.e. μ = 0.1 to 0.3).

Fig. 2.17: Surface contamination

The surface film prevents the surfaces from sticking together strongly and allows only a small
amount of junction growth to occur. The formation and breakage of contamination layer is a
dynamic process; therefore, there is possibilities of variation in μ.

• Weak(ductile) metal, weak oxide : Film easily broken, rapid junction growth, and high μ
Examplesa: indium, gold.
• Weak metal, strong oxide : Transition from low to high μ as load increases(as shown in Fig.
2.18) e.g. Copper, Iron.

• Strong metal, strong oxide : Low μ at all loads. Examples: steel, chromium.

Fig. 2.18: Variation in μ with load.

Note : Both junction growth and ploughing (two/three) effects play role, and either of these
may dominate friction behavior.

Lubrication to reduce Junction Growth :

1. To reduce junction growth minimum value of ratio τ i/τy(Eq. 2.1) must be selected.

2. Lubricant: Presence of liquid lubricant reduces chances of junction growth. One way is to
choose liquid lubricant which has a low value of τ.

3. Use of suitable contacting materials : Using less reactive material (but high hardness)
materials, which result in low shear strength of interface.

4. Never use same metal or closely similar metals in tribo-pair : (μCopper on copper = 1.0,
μAluminum - lowcarbonsteel = 0.8, μSilver - lowcarbonsteel = 0.3).

5. Ductility : Use materials of limited ductility. These materials after a small amount of
junction growth will fracture rather than flow further.

Sliding Dry Friction with Time :

Sliding in dry contact starts with running-in period :

• High rate of ploughing of softer surface by asperities :

- Relatively low adhesion.

• Rupture/breakage of asperities polish surface :

- Reduce ploughing coefficient but increase coefficient of adhesion.

- On removal of contaminating layers, adhesion coefficient increases.
 Fig. 2.19: Sliding friction vs time.

Coefficient of friction varies with sliding time. Essentially, a dry contact starts with a running
in period(as shown by 'Line 1' in Fig. 2.19). Initially, the friction force is largely a result of
ploughing of the surface by asperities. Adhesion does not play much significant role due to
surface contamination. Asperity deformation takes place and affects the static coefficient of
friction and surface is easily polished. This is the main reason of reduction in friction
coefficient, as shown in Fig. 2.19 by 'Line 1'. Consequently the coefficient of friction in the
initial stage is largely independent of the material combination. But if polishing wear process
is able to remove the contaminating layers, elements of bare surface will appear, resulting in
increase in the coefficient of friction due to increased adhesion as shown by 'Line 2'. In
addition the coefficient of friction increases due to rapid increase in the number of wear
particles entrapped between the sliding surfaces as a consequence of higher wear rates as
shown by 'Line 3', 'Line 4', 'Line 5' and 'Line 6' in Fig. 2.19. The deformation of asperities
continues and the adhesion effect increases due to larger clean interfacial areas. Some of the
wear particles are trapped between the surfaces, causes ploughing. A steady state friction
conditions arrives depending on the worn out surfaces.
Module 2 : Friction
Laws of Rolling Friction

Coefficient of friction due to rolling (μr) is generally smaller than that caused by sliding action.
Therefore wherever possible rolling friction compared to sliding friction is desired. μ r is
defined as the force required to maintain steady rolling, divided by the load carried by the
roller. Rolling friction coefficients often depend on hardness of contacting solids. On
increasing hardness, elastic deformation under load decreases. Therefore, hysteresis loss and
so the value of μr decreases. For hard smooth steel rollers, the coefficient of rolling friction
ranges between 0.01 and 0.001. A roller or sphere made of soft material(as shown in Fig.
2.20) when rolled over other soft surface, generates a higher level of rolling friction.

Sources of Rolling Friction :

It is important to know the source of rolling friction, so that proper actions may be
implemented to control the rolling friction. Let us consider a hard steel ball which rolls over a
softer rubber such as shown in Fig. 2.20. As it rolls along, the ball displaces rubber elasto-
plastically around and ahead of it. The force required to display rubber is almost equal to the
observed rolling friction. Thus, the rolling friction is essentially a measure of the force
required to deform other material. With a very bouncy rubber rolling friction will be lesser
compared to a very soggy rubber.

The main contributions to friction in rolling contacts are :

1. Micro-slip effect within the contact area.

2. Elastic hysteresis of the contacting materials.

3. Plastic deformation of the materials, and

4. Adhesion effects in the contact.

It is important to note that lubricant cannot reduce deformation of surface; therefore,

lubricants have very little effect(except reduction in adhesion effects) on the rolling friction.

Fig. 2.20: Rolling friction in rubber.

Examples of Rolling Friction :

• Ball bearings :

Rolling are made of high strength (induced stresses are lesser than elastic compressive
strength) materials having hystereis losses lesser than one percent. Due to such materials(μ
= 0.001).

In practice, the balls must be surrounded by cage to separate them and prevent the rubbing
on one another. But sliding between the cage and balls occurs, and this sliding friction is
often far greater than the rolling friction. Lubricants are used to reduce the sliding friction
between balls and cage and to prevent corrosion of the metal parts.

• Automobile Tires :

In free rolling, the tire is deformed as it meets the road surface and recovers as it leaves. If
there is negligible slip between tire and road the energy loss is not large and μ = 0.01 to
0.03. However, If the tire is made of a rubber with a higher hysteresis loss (or filled with
lesser air-pressure), the rolling friction is larger and there is a larger power loss. High
hysteresis loss by tire, increases controllability (better gripping of the road during
accelerating, decelerating or cornering) and comfort (acts as shock absorber in passing over
rough road). Therefore, automobile tire material provides trade off between "rolling friction",
"Controllability" and "Comfort".
 Module 2 : Friction
Friction Instability

Friction instability generally occurs due to large difference in the value of static and kinetic
coefficient of friction. Ideally lubricated condition having coefficient of friction equal to
0.00025 shall be preferred, but there is a possibility of variation in static and kinetic
coefficient of frictions. If we assume that static coefficient of friction under lubricated
conditions is equal to 0.01 and kinetic coefficient of friction is equal to 0.00025, then this
lubricated contact may not be preferred.

Friction Induced Vibrations (Instability) :

Difference between static and kinetic friction coefficients, initiates a “stick-slip” process.
Instantaneous sliding speed of an object does not remain close to the average sliding speed
and friction torque coefficient decreases as velocity increases as shown in Fig. 2.21. With
respect to Fig. 2.21 (Torque = coefficient of friction * normal load * torque arm).
Since normal load and torque arm remains constant, hence Fig. 2.21 shows the variation of
coefficient of friction with speed.

Fig. 2.21: Friction performance of MR brake.

Possible reasons for stick-slip phenomenon :

• Interlocking of asperities during stick phenomenon but separation during sliding.

• Adhesion during stick action and breakage of weld joint during sliding.

• Electrostatic charge during stick event.

To avoid this phenomenon either :-

• Increase operating speed or

• Reduce the difference between μs and μk.

Due to difference in static and dynamic friction forces (as shown in Fig. 2.22), unbalance
force (static–dynamic friction force) cause a sudden acceleration. The velocity of M increases
until the drive force falls to dynamic friction force. Eventually M comes to rest as shown in
Fig. 2.23.

• Overall stick-slip behavior of systems depends on stiffness, inertia, damping and magnitude
of unbalanced force.

Fig. 2.22: Stick slip.

Fig. 2.23: Variation of vibration parameters.

Friction can be modeled in two ways :

(a) Stiction case : Instantaneous reduction in friction force as shown in Fig. 2.24. A
hypothetical case.

(b) Negative and gradient case : Gradual reduction in friction force as shown in Fig. 2.25 is a
practical case. Often this friction model is used to find possibility of friction instability.
 Fig. 2.24: Stiction case[1]. Fig. 2.25: Negative and gradient case[1].

Damped vibration[1] :

To understand friction instability let us consider system shown in Fig. 2.22.

A mathematical model of system is given in Eq.(2.7)

....Eq.(2.7)

Introducing damping factor.

....Eq.(2.8)

There are three possible situations, which we can derive from Eq.(2.8)

....Eq.(2.9)
....Eq.(2.10)

Eq.(2.11)

All three cases(underdamped, overdamped and critical damped) reduce vibration amplitude
with time as shown in Fig. 2.26. But there is a possibility of negative damping (ζ < 0)

Fig. 2.26: Positive damping.

 Fig. 2.27: Negative damping.

Negative damping causes instability. If this happens due to friction, then we term it as
“Friction Instability”.

Forced damped vibrations[1] :

....Eq.(2.12)

In the present case external force, F(t) is friction force.

....Eq.(2.13)

Let us assume friction force is represented as

....Eq.(2.14)

Substituting Eq.(2.14) in Eq.(2.13),

....Eq.(2.15)
 ....Eq.(2.16)

If system damping, C is low and λ is large then overall negative damping results, and motion
may become instable.

Fig. 2.28: Friction instability.

To avoid friction instability :

• Increase, the system damping(C).

• Lubricate or otherwise form a surface film to ensure positive friction versus velocity
relationship(reduce gap between static and kinetic coefficient of friction).

References :

1. J Halling, Principles of Tribology, The Macmillan Press Ltd, London, 1975.