Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:41:24.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stick-Slip\Smooth Slip as a Function of Ambient Gases and Pressures Disproving Previous Models of Adhesive Wear

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

Chao Gao ,
Doris Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf  and
David D. Makel
Chao Gao
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
Doris Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
David D. Makel
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
Get access

Abstract

Five different slip modes have been identified for bundles of copper fiberssliding on a smooth copper substrate in atmospheric air, argon and nitrogenat pressures from atmospheric to 0.01 Torr. These are stick-slip, variable sliding, intermittent stick sliding and two kinds of smooth sliding, one apparently a basic property of clean surfaces and the other due to contaminants. These forms of sliding are rather persistent once established, and they follow some trends. Specifically, low-pressure smooth sliding is coordinated with a value of the coefficient of friction (μ) near 0.15 and is seen when the surface film is exceptionally thin, while intermittent stick sliding appears to be due to “pads” on the substrate surface,and variable sliding to small particles caught in between the fibers and the copper substrate. However, the five slip modes are erratic in that under the same conditions one or another or yet a third may be observed, even though the electrical contact resistance (R) depends rather reproducibly on time, load, velocity, ambient atmosphere and pressure. That dependence indicates an equilibrium between film destruction through sliding and film formation, overwhelmingly through the presence of oxygen. In the stick-slip mode the difference between pst tic and ųK itic appears to be roughly proportional to ų 0.15, i.e. tfiee xcess of e average value of the friction coefficient above 0.15, being about 20% for ų 0.3 andvanishing near ų =0.15. During slip episodes, R spikes roughly in proportion to their magnitude. Some tentative interpretations are offered, based on the concept that ų consists of three additive components, namely due to the bulk (ųBulk), due to debris (ųDebris), and dueto scoring of surface films (ųFilm).At any rate, the conclusion that the results contradict all previous models of “adhesive” wearis inescapable.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 140: Symposium S – New Materials Approaches to Tribology: Theory and Applications , 1988 , 397
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Bowden, F. P. and Tabor, D., “Friction - An Introduction to Tribology” (Anchor Press/Doubleday, New York, 1973).Google Scholar
2. Bowden, F. P. and Tabor, D., “Friction and Lubrication” (Methuen, London, 1967, first published 1956).Google Scholar
3. Holm, R., “Electric Contacts” (Springer, New York, first published 1958).Google Scholar
4. Bikerman, J. J., Wear, 39, 1 (1976).Google Scholar
5. Feng, I.-Ming, J. Appl. Phys. 23, 1011 (1952).Google Scholar
6. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., in “Fundamentals of Friction and Wear of Materials” (D. A. Rigney, Am. Soc. Met., Metals Park, OH, 1981) p.119.Google Scholar
7. Buckley, D. H., J. Appl. Physics, 39, 4224 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Chang, Y. J. and Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., Wear of Materials - 1987 (Ed. Ludema, K. C., Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., NY, 1987) p.163; Wear 120, 175 (1987).Google Scholar
9. Chang, Y. J. and Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., in “Approaches to Modeling of Friction and Wear” (Eds. Ling, F.F. and Pan, C.H.T., Springer, NY, 1988) p.118.Google Scholar
10. Dautzenberg, J. H., Wear, 60, 401 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Rigney, D. A., Naylor, M. G. S., Divakar, R. and Ives, L. K., Mater. Sci. Eng., 81, 409 (1986).Google Scholar
12. Archard, J. F., J. Appl. Phys. A24, 981 (1953).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., ASME J. of Tribology, 109, 321 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., Makel, D. D. and Sondergaard, N. A., in “Engineered Materials for Advanced Friction and Wear Applications” (Eds. Smidt, F. A. and Blau, P. J., Am. Soc. Metals Interntl., Metals Park, OH, 1988) p.23.Google Scholar
15. Chang, Y.J. and Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., Trans. ASME J. Tibology, 110, 508 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Bredell, L. J., Johnson, L. B. Jr., and Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., Wear of Materials - 1987 (Ed. Ludema, K. C., Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., NY, 1987) p.861; Wear 120, 161 (1987).Google Scholar
17. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, D., Chang, Y. J. and Johnson, L. B. Jr., ASME J. of Tribology, 109, 321 (1987).Google Scholar
18. Schreurs, J., Johnson, J. L. and McNab, I. R., in “Electrical Contacts -1979” (Ill. Inst. Techn., Chicago IL, 1979) p.145.Google Scholar
19. Kjer, T., Wear of Materials - 1987 (Ed. Ludema, K. C., Am. Soc. Mech. Eng., NY, 1987) p.191.Google Scholar