Adhesion wear and Abrasive wear

Abrasive wear happens when the particular material is being removed from one surface, by another harder

material. In results, hard particles of the debris between the 2 surfaces are formed. The terms scratching, gouging

or scoring are used depending on the degree of abrasive wear. In simple words, the harder material scratches the

softer material.

There are 2 condition in which abrasive wear occurs. The 2 body abrasion and 3 body abrasion. In the former, the

harder surface rubs the other. Examples of these include mechanical grinding, cutting and machining. The latter

involves a third body. This third body is generally a small particle of abrasive between the 2 softer rubbing

surfaces.

Microscopically, abrasive wear causes asperities of the harder surface to press into the softer surface, with plastic

flow of the softer surface formed around the harder asperities. These result in 'microploughing' and

'microcracking' where tangential motion is imposed.

This abrasive wear can be reduced by applying 'hydrodynamic' or 'elastohydrodynamic' lubricants at various film

thickness. This separates the surfaces and wash out any contaminant particles in between. Using the correct

coating material and various thermally sprayed techniques greatly benefits the resistance to abrasive wear.

Adhesive wear is often referred to 'scuffing'. This happens when adhesive junctions that are newly formed lock

together and as 2 surfaces slide across each other under pressure. When normal pressure is being applied, local

pressure at the asperities become extremely high. Often times, the yield stress is exceeded. Then these

asperities deform plastically until the real area of contact has increased sufficiently to support the earlier, applied

load.

If no lubricants are used, asperities are to be cold welded together. Otherwise, junctions will shear and form new

junctions. This said wear mechanism not only destroys the sliding surfaces, but permits the generation of wear

particles. In turn, these wear particles lead to cavitation that can cause component failure.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/4049102

Adhesive wear, Abrasive wear, metal fatigue and corrosion wear
There are many terms used to describe wear (fretting, pitting, spalling, scuffing, scoring, abrasion, and
many others). This suggests that several physical phenomena are involved. There are essentially four
main types of wear: adhesive, abrasive, surface fatigue and corrosive-wear.

The complexity of the wear process is compounded by a number of influential factors, including
a) Metallurgy Variables (i.e. hardness, toughness, microstructure, chemical composition), and b) Service
Variables (i.e. contacting material, pressure between contacting parts, relative speed of the parts,
temperature of the parts, surface finish of the parts, atmosphere) and others such as c) Lubrication and
d) Corrosion.
Adhesive Wear (sometimes called scuffing or galling) involves several steps. When two surfaces press
together, the microscopic bumps on the surfaces squeeze together and form a solid junction when the
atoms of the two surfaces bond. When one surface moves relative to the other the weaker material breaks
at some distance from the junction and forms a lump of wear material.

Introduction
Enhanced surface durability is desired for new bearing materials, including corrosion resistant materials.
Development of advanced bearing materials is generally focused on material microstructure for rolling
contact fatigue resistance. The challenge is to develop surface durability attributes that complement
fatigue resistance attributes.

One can categorize surface deterioration into three basic modes: wear, scuffing and fatigue. The term
“adhesive wear” is commonly used when failed surfaces appear to have undergone plastic flow due to
local “adhesion” at the interface. When attempting surface fatigue simulation tests with advanced bearing
materials having corrosion resistant properties, local adhesive events have been found to prevent
operation when the EHD film thickness (h) is small relative to surface roughness height (?). If the
chemistry of the material does not allow the formation of surface films from reactions with the oil,
adhesive wear can supersede surface deterioration due to surface initiated fatigue. In addition, material
properties that affect plastic flow, like hardness, seem to influence the onset of adhesive wear. The
mechanisms that control the ability of a surface to handle high normal and tangential stress and to recover
subsequent to local damaging events are a mystery. Testing for these mechanisms and associated surface
durability attributes is essential for material development and assurance of performance in service.

It was found that surface failure by adhesive wear is initiated at microscopic sites of insufficient surface
film lubrication or at sites of debris encounters. With limited chemical reactivity between lubricating oil
and some corrosion resistant materials, local adhesion events, which are not able to recover, propagate
into broad patches of adhesive wear damage. With sufficient sliding velocity and contact stress, adhesive
wear can transition into a major scuffing event. A scuffing event is characterized by a rapid rise in friction
and temperature. These tribological features, as measured with an adhesive wear test method, correlate
with experience in full-scale bearing tests.

At the heart of surface durability is material compatibility with lubricating oil chemistry to form surface
films, which prevent local adhesion. The adhesive wear test method described below progressively
increases the degree of asperity encounter at the interface under rolling/sliding conditions. The test
method invokes tribological interactions, which are measured in terms of friction (traction), gentle
polishing wear of surface features, adhesive wear events and scuffing. The test protocol described below is
an attempt to simulate the adhesive wear mechanisms that believed to occur in rolling element bearings.

Abrasive Wear occurs when a hard particle digs into a softer surface and plows out material. This is
called two-body abrasion. Three body abrasion may happen when free particles are trapped between the
two surfaces. As the surfaces move relative to each other, the hard foreign particles plow out material
from the softer surface areas.

Abrasive wear occurs when a hard rough surface slides across a softer surface. [ ASTM International
(formerly American Society for Testing and Materials) defines it as the loss of material due to hard
particles or hard protuberances that are forced against and move along a solid surface.
Abrasive wear is commonly classified according to the type of contact and the contact environment. [10] The
type of contact determines the mode of abrasive wear. The two modes of abrasive wear are known as two-
body and three-body abrasive wear. Two-body wear occurs when the grits or hard particles remove
material from the opposite surface. The common analogy is that of material being removed or displaced
by a cutting or plowing operation. Three-body wear occurs when the particles are not constrained, and
are free to roll and slide down a surface. The contact environment determines whether the wear is
classified as open or closed. An open contact environment occurs when the surfaces are sufficiently
displaced to be independent of one anotherDeep ‘groove’ like surface indicates abrasive wear over cast
iron (yellow arrow indicate sliding direction)
There are a number of factors which influence abrasive wear and hence the manner of material removal.
Several different mechanisms have been proposed to describe the manner in which the material is
removed. Three commonly identified mechanisms of abrasive wear are:

1. Plowing
2. Cutting
3. Fragmentation
Plowing occurs when material is displaced to the side, away from the wear particles, resulting in the
formation of grooves that do not involve direct material removal. The displaced material forms ridges
adjacent to grooves, which may be removed by subsequent passage of abrasive particles. Cutting occurs
when material is separated from the surface in the form of primary debris, or microchips, with little or no
material displaced to the sides of the grooves. This mechanism closely resembles conventional machining.
Fragmentation occurs when material is separated from a surface by a cutting process and the indenting
abrasive causes localized fracture of the wear material. These cracks then freely propagate locally around
the wear groove, resulting in additional material removal by spalling

Abrasive wear can be measured as loss of mass by the Taber Abrasion Test according to ISO 9352 or
ASTM D 1044.

Metal Fatigue is the third mechanism of wear. It occurs when continuous sliding, rolling, or impacting
motions subject a surface to repeated stress cycling. The stress cycle starts with very small cracks on or
near the surface. These cracks spread and eventually link up to form a free wear particle. Surface fatigue is
also involved in spalling and pitting wear. Surface fatigue wear depends strongly on the stress at the
surface and the roughness of the surface.

Corrosive Wear involves both chemical activity and mechanical action. It is a modifier of adhesion,
abrasion or fatigue wear. The presence or the rate of formation of an oxide film can greatly alter the wear
characteristics of a material. The oxide usually has properties quite different from the base metal,
therefore, the wear rate is affected by the oxide layer. Failure may occur at the oxide-metal interface.

Adhesive wear is where one bodies slides over another (also known as sliding wear). Micro-welds
form by the asperity contact and break. eg. cylinder piston.

In abrasion a harder material tries to remove material from softer surface. Eg.- Road and tyre.

Adhesive wear is a very serious form of wear characterized by high wear

rates and a large unstable friction coefficient. Sliding contacts can be rapidly
destroyed by adhesive wear and, in extreme cases; sliding motion may be
prevented by very large coefficients of friction or seizure. Metals are
particularly prone to adhesive wear hence its practical significance. Most
lubricant failures in sliding metal contacts result in adhesive wear, because
this relates to a breakdown in the lubricant's basic function of providing
some degree of separation between the sliding surfaces. If sliding surfaces
are not separated, adhesion and subsequent wear are almost inevitable. The
earth's atmosphere and terrestrial organic matter provide layers of surface
contaminant on objects that suppress very effectively any adhesion between
solids. Adhesion is also reduced with increasing surface roughness or
hardness of the contacting bodies. Actual observation of adhesion became
possible after the development of high vacuum systems that allowed
surfaces free of contaminants to be prepared. Adhesion and sliding
experiments performed under high vacuum showed a totally different
tribological behavior of many common materials from that observed in
open air

Module 3 : Wear
Introduction of Wear

Undesirable removal of material from operating solid surface is known as wear. There are two
definitions :

(1) Zero wear : Removal of material which causes polishing of material surfaces may be known as
"Zero wear". It may increase performance. It is for betterment, so it is not undesirable.

Zero wear is basically a polishing process in which the asperities of the contacting surfaces are
gradually worn off until a very fine, smooth surface develops. Generally, “polishing-in” wear is
desirable for better life of tribo-pair. Fig. 3.1(a) shows polished surface of helical gear which occurs
due to slow loss of metal at a rate that will have a little affect on the satisfactory performance within
the life of the gears.

Fig. 3.1(a): Zero wear of helical gear.

(2) Measurable wear : Removal of material from surface that increases vibration; noise or surface
roughness may be treated an "Measureable wear". Often we measure wear in volume/mass
reduction. Undesirable removal of material occurs in measurable wear.

Measurable wear refers to a loss of material which must be counted to estimate the life of tribo-pair.
The extent of measurable weardepends on the lubrication regime, the nature of the load, the surface
hardness and roughness, and on the contaminants in the lubricating oil. A typical example of
measurable wear in helical gear is shown in Fig. 3.1(b) which is typically known as pitting wear.

Fig. 3.1(b): Measurable wear of helical gear.

Pitting is a surface fatigue failure which occurs due to repeated loading of tooth surface and the
contact stress exceeding the surface fatigue strength of the material. Material in the fatigue region
gets removed and a pit is formed. The pit itself will cause stress concentration and soon the pitting
spreads to adjacent region till the whole surface is covered with pits. Subsequently, higher impact
load resulting from pitting may cause fracture of already weakened tooth. Sometimes impurities in
materials provide nucleus for crack generation as shown in Fig. 3.1(c). Fig. 3.1(d) shows merger of
generated cracks, which finally detaches from the surface as shown in Fig. 3.1(e). Such formation of
pits (removal of material) comes undermeasurable wear.
 Fig. 3.1: Formation of pit.

Many time the change in surface profile alters the optimum value of clearance and reduces load
capacity of machine components. Let us consider Fig. 3.2 of worn out rollers. Sliding to rolling ratio
for these worn out rollers increase with wear rate and usage of rolling element bearing loses its
purpose.

Fig. 3.2: Worn out rollers.

This Fig. 3.3 shows variation in bearing clearance due to abrasion of the bearing surface. With
increase in bearing clearance load capacity of bearing decreases as shown in Fig. 3.4. X-axis of Fig.
3.4 represents radial clearance which is given by 0.1% of radius multiplied with the factor depicting
increase in clearance due to wear.

Fig. 3.3: Abrasion marks on

bearing bore.
Fig. 3.4: Effect of clearence on load.

Removal of material from operating solid surfaces by solid particles depends upon Load, Velocity,
Environment, and Materials. Removal of material from operating solid surface by Fluid (liquid/gas)
depends upon Velocity, pressure, Environment and material.

As wear increases power losses increases, oil consumption increases, rate of component replacement
also inreases. Ultimately, it reduces efficiency of the system. Therefore, as far as possible wear
should be minimized.

Wear Mechanisms :

Wear can be classified based on the ways that the frictional junctions are broken, that is, elastic
displacement, plastic displacement, cutting, destruction of surface films and destruction of bulk
material. There are many types of wear mechanisms, but we shall discuss about common wear
mechanisms, which are:

• Abrasive Wear : polishing, scouring, scratching, grinding, gouging.

• Adhesive Wear : galling, scuffing, scoring.

• Cavitation (interaction with fluid).

• Corrosive Wear (Chemical nature).

• Erosive Wear.

• Fatigue : delamination.

• Fretting Wear.

Module 3 : Wear
Adhesive Wear

Adhesive wear is very common in metals. It is heavily dependent on the mutual affinity between
the materials. Let us take example of steel and indium [Fig. 3.5(a)]. When steel pin under load
is pushed [Fig. 3.5(b)] in indium block, and subsequently retracted [Fig. 3.5(c)], a thin layer of
indium transferred on the steel pin. Similar behavior is observed by pushing brass metal in indium
metal. This behavior demonstrates the loss of indium material, which occurs due to high value
of adhesive force between steel and indium. If steel pin is subjected to normal load as well as
tangential load [Fig. 3.5(d)] then severe wear of indium material occurs. By introducing a thin
layer of lubricant at the interface of indium and metal, the severe wear can be reduced to mild
wear. Shear strength of lubricant layer is much smaller than shear strength of indium metal,
therefore weak interface between steel and indium occurs which can be sheared easily and wear
rate reduces to mild value.

Fig. 3.5: Adhesive wear.

All theories which predict wear rates start from the concept of true area of contact. It is usually
assumed that the true area of contact between two real metal surfaces is determined by the
plastic deformation of their highest asperities. Severity of adhesive wear is based on the area of
contact which is given by A = W/H. Here, W is load applied to press one surface over other
surface and H is hardness of soft material. This expression provides appropriate results if whole
load is supported due to plastic deformation of the surface. However, for elasto-plastic
deformation, the expression needs to be slightly modified. (A = (W/H)n where (2/3 < n < 1).
Here assumption is that higher asperities could be deformed plastically, while the lower
contacting asperities are subject to within elastic limits. In addition, the adhesive wear will
depend on the shear strength of friction junctions. This means total true area of contact consists
of plastic and elastic asperity contacts and shear strength of the contacting asperities vary in
shear strength and thus influence the rate of adhesive wear. If the junction is weaker than the
material on either side of it, shearing occurs at the interface itself Fig. 3.6(a). There will be little
surface damage and little wear. This situation occurs if sliding occurs within the surface oxide
layer. If the junction is stronger than one of the metals, shearing will not occur at the interface
but at a little distance within the softer metal [Fig. 3.6(b) and Fig. 3.6(c)]. This may lead to an
enormous increase in wear rate.

Fig. 3.6: Location of shear plane.

Scoring wear, a severe form of adhesive wear, occurs due to tearing out of small particles that
weld together as a result of overheating (due to high contact pressure and/or high sliding
velocity) of the tooth mesh zone, permitting metal to metal contact shown in Fig. 3.6(d). After
welding, sliding forces tear the metal from the surface producing a minute cavity in one surface
and a projection on the other. The wear initiates microscopically, however, it progresses rapidly.
Scoring is sometimes referred to as galling, seizing or scuffing.

Fig. 3.6(d): Scoring.

 Fig. 3.7(a): Contaminant layers on metal surface.

Fig. 3.7(b): Surface asperities on metal surface.

Fig. 3.7(c): Interaction between contaminant layers and surface asperities

on metal surface.

Steps leading to Adhesive Wear :

It is well known that macroscopically smooth surfaces are rough on micro scale as shown in Fig.
3.7(a) and Fig. 3.7(b). When two such surfaces are brought together as shown in Fig. 3.7(c),
contact is made at relatively few isolated asperities. As a normal load is applied, the local
pressure at the asperities becomes extremely high. In the absence of surface films the surfaces
would adhere but a small amount of contaminant prevents adhesion under purely normal loading.
However, relative tangential motion at the interface disperses the contaminant films at the points
of contact, and welding of the junctions can take place. Continued sliding causes the junctions
to be sheared and new junctions to be formed. The amount of wear depends on the position at
which the junction is sheared as shown in Fig. 3.6(a) to (c). If shearing occurs at the interface
then wear is negligible. If shear takes place away from the interface then metal is transferred
from one surface to the other. With further rubbing, some of the transferred material is detached
to form loose wear particles. We can summarize these steps as :

• Deformation of contacting asperities Fig. 3.8(a).

• Removal (abrasion) of protective oxide surface film.

• Formation of adhesive junctions Fig. 3.8(b).

• Failure of junction by pulling out large lumps and transfer of materials Fig. 3.8(c).

Fig. 3.8: Steps leading to adhesive wear.

Fig. 3.9: Wear transition[1].

Laws of Adhesive Wear :

• Wear Volume proportional to sliding distance of travel (L)

- True for wide range of conditions except where back transfer occurs.

• Wear Volume proportional to the load (W)

- Dramatic increase beyond critical load as shown in Fig. 3.9.

• Wear volume inversely proportional to hardness(H) of softer material

Using these laws, wear volume is given by V = K1WL/3H. This equation is known as Archard’s
Wear Equation.

The value of k1 depends on elastic plastic contacts, shearing of those contacts, effect of
environment, mode of lubrication, etc. This expression of wear volume is a simple expression,
as it does not require to estimate constant n(A = (W/H)n), individual shear strength of elastic
and plastic junctions, effect of lubricant thickness, roughness, etc.

Archard assumed that the contact between tribo-pair involve formation and breakage of
junctions. In other words, contacts occurs only at asperities. The real area of contact of
contacting surfaces, as distinguished from the apparent or geometric area of contact, is the
instantaneous sum of the areas of all junctions. The Archard model is demonstrated in Fig. 3.10,
where cross section of asperities after plastic deformation is assumed to be circular. First sketch
demonstrates the approach of junction forming asperities. Area of contact increases with sliding
distance and subsequently decreases. But this process is continuous and happens among number
of asperities. On average, it is assumed that n asperities will be in contact at any frame of time.

Fig. 3.10: Archard wear model.

δW = k1 H(πa2)

W = k1 HΣ(πa2) for n asperities.

δV = k2(2πa3/3)

δV = (δV/2a) = k2(πa2/3)

v = k2 Σ(πa2/3)

v = k1W/3H

V = k1(WL/3H)

Understanding of wear constant k1 :

k1 is a dimensionless constant expresses the probability of removing a wear particle. Factor

k1 (often referred as index of severity) represents the fraction of the friction junctions producing
wear.

• k1 = 1. Every junction involved in the friction process produces a wear fragment.

• k1 = 0.1. One tenth of the friction junctions produce wear fragments. For clean gold surfaces
k1 is between 0.1 and 1. For clean-copper surfaces k1 is between 0.1 and 0.01. Clean gold
surfaces wear about ten times more rapidly than clean copper surfaces.

• k1 = 10-7 means that of the junctions responsible for friction only one in ten million produces a
wear fragment.

Relation between Coefficient of Friction and Wear Constant :

 Table 3.1: Data related to friction coefficient and wear rate.

Table 3.1 shows some relation between coefficient of friction and wear rate. To establish relation
between µ and k1, Rowe proposed modified adhesion theory. In Eq.(3.1) k m is constant and β is
fractional surface film defect. This means β fraction of contact area is under dry lubrication, while
one minus β contact area is under lubricated condition. Here lubricated condition means shear
strength of interface lower than shear strength of bulk material.

ν = km √(1+μ2) β(W/H)...Eq.(3.1)

ν = wear volume per unit sliding distance.

v = K1W/3H ...Eq.(3.2)

It is interesting to compare Rowe`s equation(3.1) with Archard`s equation(3.2). There are three
constants in equation(3.1) while only one constant in equation(3.2).

Equation(3.3) provides a modified form of wear constant k1. In this equation, 'h' represents the
thickness of asperity while 'l' represents the length of asperity. P is the probability of wear particle
formation. For spherical asperity, l = 2*h which means k1 is equal to probability of wear particle
formation. But if h is greater than radius of sphere then k 1 will be greater than P. Similar if h is
lesser than sphere radius than k1 will be lesser than P. This relation has its merits but difficulties
lies in determining h, l and P.

K1 = 2(h/l)P....Eq.(3.3)

In literature there are many wear equations[2], but the most popular equation is Archard`s
equation(3.2).

Some Guidelines based on Adhesive Wear :

For longer service life or reliability of devices/machines, designers always aim for mild wear
regime. It means wear particle coming out from the surfaces need to be much smaller in size.
For getting this conditions dissimilar metals are usually chosen to run together as they do not
weld together easily. If the metals are already at their maximum hardness, as in rolling bearing
steel, no further work hardening is possible, so identical metals can be used for both elements.

If severe wear behavior cannot be avoided, such as in ore processing or earth moving
equipments, routine maintenance is essential. For example, outer ring of rolling element
bearings, if subjected to severe wear, then it can be rotated by few degrees to avoid wear of
same localized surface. Many plastics undergo a transition from mild to severe wear as a function
of sliding speed (that increases temp.) or combination of sliding and contact pressure. For better
life of those plastics, load & speed conditions must be closely controlled.

Fig. 3.11: Pin on disk arrangement.

Example : To find the best material for a dry journal bearing few tests were conducted on pin on
disk machines(Fig. 3.11). Disk material remained AISI 1040 steel. While pin materials were: A
(225), B(30), C(50), D (70), and E (100). Numbers in bracket for materials A,B,.....E are surface
hardness BHN. Find the best material for following experimental results. The wear on the pin can
be measured with a toolmaker’s microscope by measuring the size of wear scar.

Table 3.2: Experimental data.

As per Table 3.2, wear scar(d) is maximum for test 7(20.83 mm) and minimum for test 2(8.81
mm).

To find the best material following equation can be used.

Wear volume, V = k1 W L/3H = πd4/64R

where sliding distance, L = test duration * sliding speed.

Table 3.3

Wear constant(K12345) for various tests has been listed in Table 3.3. The result of tests 4 & 5 are
favorable therefore material B may be treated as best material. The values corresponding to
material A in the table represent the transition behavior of metal(A) from mild wear to severe
wear.

Mild Wear :

In mild adhesive wear, small wear fragments (0.01 to 1 μ m) mostly of metal oxides are
generated.

This kind of wear occurs at flow contact pressure (below transition limit) and sliding velocity.
Formation of black powdered oxide is typical example of mild wear.

At higher velocities more oxidation replenishes losses due to break-away of oxide fragment as
wear debris, therefore at higher velocities mild wear is possible.

In some cases at higher loads, a hard surface layer (most likely martensite) is formed on carbon-
steel surfaces because of high flash temperatures, followed by rapid quenching as heat is
conducted into underlying bulk, and mild wear in such situation is possible. In short if oxide or
contamination layers remain throughout operating time, wear will be in mild regime.

Fig. 3.12: Mild wear.

Severe Adhesive Wear : If load increases, the oxide film cracks off, exposing fresh metal which
welds and wear rate may increase several hundred fold. Typical debris size range 20 to 200 μm
metallic particles.
 Fig. 3.13: Debris in severe wear.

Seizure :

Seizure means “to bind” or “fasten together”. It is a result of mutual plastic deformation of
materials and it is an extreme form of adhesive wear. Let us take example of inner ring and
rollers of roller bearing, shown in Fig. 3.14. In ordinary cases after seizure, components do not
get separated on their own. Manual force is required to separate the parts. In other words,
after seizure tribo-pair loses its utility and cannot be used without proper reconditioning. The
figure clearly demonstrate the grooves made at inner ring and loss of material from roller
surfaces. The relative sliding motion between two contacting solids generally results in a loss of
mechanical energy due to friction. The power dissipation associated with friction results in an
increase in temperature of the sliding bodies. Causes for seizure are :

(1). Poor heat dissipation. It is related to material properties such thermal conductivity.

(2). Poor lubrication system or improper lubricant also cause seizure.

(3). Smaller clearances. It is related to improper design.

(4). Installation errors. It is related to maintenance.

(5). The ability of the metals to seize or to join in solid state.

Fig. 3.14: Seizure of rolling elements.

In others words, excessive loading & heating govern the Seizure phenomenon. To illustrate, all
wear requires wear map as shown in the Fig. 3.15, are used. The two variables bearing pressure
and sliding velocity, are under the control of the operator, and are easily measured. The field
boundaries are lines along which two mechanisms give the same wear-rate. The contours show
the total wear rate V; it is the sum of the contributions from all the mechanisms. The thickness
of oxide layer is a function of three factors, the time required to rupture the oxide layer, time
available to re-oxidize and rate of formation of the oxide layer.

Fig. 3.15: Wear-Mechanism Map[3].

References :

1. Archard J F and Hirst W, The Wear of Metals under Unlubricated Conditions, Proc. R. Soc.,
London, A 236, 397-410, 1956.

2. Ludema K C, Friction, Wear, Lubrication: A textbook in Tribology, CRC Press, 2010.

3. Lim S C and Ashby M F, Wear Mechanism Maps, Acta Metall., Vol. 35 (1), 1-24, 1987.
 Module 3 : Wear
Abrasive Wear

Abrasive wear, sometimes called cutting wear, occurs when hard particles slide and roll under
pressure, across the tooth surface. Hard particle sources are: dirt in the housing, sand or scale from
castings, metal wear particles, and particles introduced into housing when filling with lube oil.
Scratching is a form of abrasive wear, characterized by short scratch-like lines in the direction of
sliding. This type of damage is usually light and can be stopped by removing the contaminants that
caused it. Fig. 3.16(a) shows abrasive wear of a hardened gear.

Fig. 3.17: Two-Body abrasion

Fig. 3.16: Abrasive wear of gear.

Abrasive wear is caused by the passage of relatively hard particles/asperities over a surface.
Following are few well-known reasons of abrasive wear mechanisms :

- Micro-cutting : sharp particle or hard asperity cuts the softer surface. Cut material is removed as
wear debris.

- Micro-fracture : generally occurs in brittle, e.g. ceramic material. Fracture of the worn surface
occurs due to merging of a number of smaller cracks.

- Micro fatigue : When a ductile material is abraded by a blunt particle/asperity, the worn surface
is repeatedly loaded and unloaded, and failure occurs due to fatigue.

- Removal of material grains : Happens in materials (i.e. ceramics) having relatively week grain
boundaries.

Two other mechanisms, very similar to abrasive wear are :

- Erosive wear : Impact of particles against a solid surface is known as erosive wear.

- Cavitation wear : Localized impact of fluid against a surface during the collapse of bubbles is known
as cavitation wear.

Basic modes of abrasive wear are classified as two body abrasion and three body abrasion.

Two – Body Abrasion :

This wear mechanism happens betweent two interacting asperities in physical contact, and one of it
is harder than other. Normal load causes penetration of harder asperities into softer surface thus
producing plastic deformations. To slide, the material is displaced/removed from the softer surface
by combined action of microploughing & micro-cutting.

Fig. 3.18: Three-Body abrasion

“Rabinowicz’s Quantitative Law for Two-Body Abrasive Wear :

Assume conical asperities indenting soft surface during traverse motion(as shown in Fig. 3.16) and
all the material displaced by the cone is lost as wear debris. Here basic assumptions are :

• All asperities can be represented by equal dimensions cones.

• All the material displaced by the conical asperity in a single pass is removed as wear particles.

Load carried by nth asperity

wn = H(0.5 * πa2)

where H is the hardness.

• Volume swept by penetrated asperity.

Total wear is sum of the wear caused by individual asperity.

Three Body Abrasion :

Three body abrasion is material removed from softer surface by hard loose particles(Fig. 3.18), which
are free to roll as well as slide over the surface, since they are not held rigidly. The hard particles
may be generated locally by oxidation or wear from components of tribological system. Iron oxides
wear debris produced during adhesive wear cause further damage due to abrasion. Due to rolling
action, abrasive wear constant is lower compared to 2-Body abrasion. Generally K2B = 0.005 to 0.05;
and K3B = 0.0005 to 0.005;

From above values of wear constants, one can conclude that wear rate is lesser in three body
abrasion than two body abrasion. The reduction in 3-body abrasion occurs due to energy consumed
in rolling motion of free hard particles.

Abrasion by Magneto-Rheological Particles :

Fig. 3.19: M.R.Particles.

M.R.Fluids are known as smart fluids, which varied viscosity due to magnetic attraction among
particles. If MR particles(Fig. 3.19) are spherical and relatively smaller in size compared to available
clearance then abrasion by MR particles is negligible. But larger particle size and irregular shape of
particles, may wear off contacting surfaces. Therefore a good design must use spherical/regular
shape of MR particles having size much smaller than provided clearance.
 Module 3 : Wear
Fretting Wear

Fretting Wear coined in 1927 by Tomlinson. It refers to small amplitude(1 to 300 μm), with high
frequency oscillatory movement mainly originated by vibration. This generally occurs in mechanical
assemblies (press fit parts, rivet / bolt joints, strands of wire ropes, rolling element bearings), in
which relative sliding on micron level is allowed. It is very difficult to eliminate such movements and
the result is fretting. Fretting wear and fretting fatigue are present in almost all machinery and are
the cause of total failure of some otherwise robust components.

Fig. 3.32: Fretting wear.

Fretting occurs wherever short amplitude reciprocating sliding between contacting surfaces(Fig.
3.32) is sustained for a large number of cycles. The centre(Fig. 3.32) of the contact may remain
stationary while the edges reciprocate with an amplitude of the order of 1 micron to cause fretting
damage. One of the characteristic features of fretting is that the produced wear debris is often
retained within the contact due to small amplitude sliding. The accumulating wear debris gradually
separates both surfaces(Fig. 3.33) and, in some cases, may contribute to the acceleration of the
wear process by abrasion. The process of fretting wear can be further accelerated by temperature.
Reciprocating movements as short as 0.1 micron in amplitude can cause failure of the component
when the sliding is maintained for one million cycles or more.

Fig. 3.33: Process of Fretting wear.

More details related to fretting wear is described by Waterhouse[1].

References :
1. Waterhouse R B, Fretting Wear, Wear Vol. 100(1-3), 107-118, 1984.
Module 3 : Wear
Wear Analysis

Generally, wear does not involve a single mechanism, are therefore it is advisable to take an
integrated wear analysis approach assuming the wear behaviour as a system property. In other
words wear analysis is not limited to the evaluation of the effects of materials on wear behaviour,
but recommends changes in contact geometry, roughness, tolerance, and so on so that overall
favourable results can be achieved. Prof. Ludema’s quoted [1991] that “Overall, it is probably
accurate to say that there is little incentive for a designer to use any of the wear-equations available
in the literature. A scan of many wear models shows considerable incongruity. Equation have either
too many undefined variables or too few variables to adequately describe the system”. Most of
available equations are derived/made for mild wear rate of components. Therefore; it can be said
that to estimate wear theoretical equations, experimental coefficients are required.

Example : Cam Wear Analysis

Cam having pits on surface as shown in the Fig. 3.34 was rejected because it was making noise and
it was not performing intended function. It is necessary to digout the cause of failure of such pitting
so that in future service life is improved.

Fig. 3.34: Cam wear.

How does pitting failure occur ?

Pitting is a fatigue wear. Reversible stresses are main cause of such failure. To illustrate it, a sketch
(Fig. 3.35) is shown. Yellow block, which is supported on blue block, is subjected to reversible
stresses. Due to this arrangement, blue block will experience compressive and shear stresses. The
variation in magnitude of shear stress is shown by a free curve, which shows maximum shear stress
below the surface. Now question comes from where reversible stresses are induced. We estimated
normal compressive force applied on the cam surface and is plotted with cam angle. This Fig. 3.36
shows that maximum force occurs at 90 and 270 degrees, remains constant in magnitude between
120 to 240 degrees. This means applied load on cam surface is dynamic and shall induced dynamic
stresses.

Fig. 3.35: Sketch to Fig. 3.36: Normal load vs Cam angle.

illustrate pitting.

Can dynamic load be reduced ?

It is very obvious to explore whether this dynamic load can be reduced or not. Variation in pressure
angle with cam rotation is given in Fig. 3.37. It is possible by redesigning cam so that pressure angle
remain lesser than 10 degrees. Pressure angle Φ is angle between direction of motion (velocity of
follower) and axis of force transmission.

- ø = 0 --> Transmitted force is completely utilize to move the follower

- ø = 900 --> No motion of the follower. Gross sliding.

Fig. 3.37: Pressure angle vs cam angle.

....Eq.(3.4)
Convex/Concave Interaction ?

• Fig. 3.38 shows cam follower interface at various angular positions. One rotational cycle has been
divided into twenty five divisions. Cam and follower remain in convex contact from point 8 to 18.
Contact between points 1 to 7, and 19 to 25 can be modeled as “concave contact" using Eq.(3.4).
Values of contact stresses are given in table 3.4.

Table 3.4: Contact stress.

• Transition from convex to concave contact introduces sliding. Present cam - follower mechanism
is subjected to variable stresses and sliding conditions, which repeat at frequency of cam rotation.
Increasing rotational speed will reduce operating life of cam-surface.

• Further clearance between groove & follower(required to avoid jamming) reduces support area.
Follower contacts only one side of groove. Red color thick curve indicates contact curve between
follower and cam. Sudden change in velocity of roller follower particularly at areas shown by green
colored hatched ellipse in Fig. 3.39 occurs. Sudden change in the velocity causes gross sliding at
interface. Therefore, cam-follower interface needs proper lubrication.
 Fig. 3.38

Fig. 3.39: Cam-follower mechanism.

How sliding reduces life ?

Pitting, a fatigue wear, initiates on or near the surface of component. Tangential force not only
increases (Fig. 3.40) τmaxbut also shifts position of τmax to the surface. The pitting occurs if τmax > Sys.

where Sys is yield shear strength of the material.

Total pitting life(Nf) = non-cracking life (NO) + crack propagation life(Np)

In lubrication, τmax is reduced in magnitude and occurs below surface. This means lubrication delays
the crack to reach at the surface.

Fig. 3.40: Effect of tangential force.

3-D stress analysis of cam follower mechanism :

Frictional force causes normal as well as tangential loading. Finding location of incipient crack is quite
unpredictable. Therefore, it is more difficult to accurately predict the condition of stress at an
expected point of failure. Therefore, contact zone stress as a reference value to compare to material
strength is used. Strength needs to be compared with largest negative principal contact stress. In a
pure rolling case, its magnitude will be equal to maximum contact pressure. But it will be greater
than that value if sliding is present. When rolling and sliding are both present, stresses due to normal
and tangential loading need to be accounted.

Table 3.5: Stresses accounting tangential

force.

Table 3.5 lists the calculated stresses at various cam angles. This table clearly indicates increase in
contact stresses due to frictional force.
Failure of Cam System :

• Evaluated stresses(Table 3.5) must be compared with materials reference stress.

• Reference strength[1].

Table 3.6: Material strength data for rolling with 9% sliding[1].

 Table 3.7: Material data for pure rolling case.

Finding location of incipient crack is quite unpredictable. Therefore contact zone stress as a reference
value to compare to material strength is used. Strength needs to be compared with largest negative
principal contact stress. In a pure rolling case, its magnitude will be equal to maximum contact
pressure. But it will be greater than that value if sliding is present. From maximum principal stress
we can calculate value of K ,then we can calculate life in number of cycles. This will be relative not
absolute. Relative reduction in life due to increases in speed is given in Table 3.8.

Stress vs. Cam life :

Table 3.8: Cam life for various materials.

Conclusions :
• Theoretical study shows 25-30% reduction in cam life on increasing speed from 60 rpm to 65 rpm.

• Nodular cast iron provide much higher life compared to CI 45 material. Therefore, nodular cast
iron will be a better choice if cam is operated at higher rpm.

References :

1. Norton R L, Cam Design and Manufacturing Handbook, Industrial Press Inc., 2009.