Proceedings of SerbiaTrib '13

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONFigure 2 shows the variation of friction coefficientwith the duration of rubbing at different normal loadsfor gear fiber sliding against smooth mild steelconterface. During experiment, the sliding velocityand relative humidity were 1 m/s and 70%respectively. Curves 1, 2 and 3 of this figure aredrawn for normal laod 10, 15 and 20 N respectively.Curve 1 of this figure shows that during the starting,the value of friction coefficient is 0.104 and thenincreases very steadily up to 0.147 over a duration of20 minutes of rubbing and after that it remainsconstant for the rest of the experimental time. Thesefindings are in agreement with the findings ofChowdhury and Helali [4]. At starting of experiment,the friction force is low due to contact betweensuperficial layer of pin and disc. As rubbingcontinues, the disc material becomes worn andreinforced material comes in contact with the pin,roughening of the disc surface causes the ploughingand hence friction coefficient increases with durationof rubbing. After certain duration of rubbing theincrease of roughness and other parameters may reachto a certain steady value hence the values of frictioncoefficient remain constant for the rest of the time.Curves 2 and 3 show that for the high normal load, thefriction coefficient is less and the trend in variation offriction coefficient is almost the same as for curve 1.From these curves, it is also observed that time toreach steady state values is different for differentnormal load. From the obtained results it is found thatat normal load 10, 15 and 20 N, gear fibre takes 20, 17and 15 minutes respectively to reach steady friction. Itindicates that the higher the normal load, time to reachconstant friction is less. This may be due to the factthat the higher the normal load, the surface roughnessand other parameters take less time to stabilize.Friction coefficient0.250.200.150.100.0510 N15 N20 N0.000 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32Duration of rubbing (min)Fig. 2. Friction coefficient as a function of duration ofrubbing at different normal loads (sliding velocity: 1m/s, relative humidity: 70%, test sample: gear fiber, pin:mild steel, smooth).Figure 3 shows the effect of the duration ofrubbing on the value of friction coefficient atdifferent normal loads for gear fiber sliding against123rough mild steel counterface at sliding velocity 1m/s and relative humidity 70%. Curve 1 of thisfigure drawn for normal load 10 N, shows thatduring starting of the experiment, the value offriction coefficient is 0.153 which rises for 22minutes to a value of 0.195 and then it becomessteady for the rest of the experimental time. Almostsimilar trends of variation are observed in curves 2and 3 which are drawn for load 15 and 20 Nrespectively. From these curves, it is found thattime to reach steady friction is different fordifferent normal loads. At normal load 10, 15 and20 N, gear fiber-mild steel rough pair takes 22, 19and 16 minutes respectively to reach steady frictionThat is, higher the normal load, gear fiber-mildsteel rough pair takes less time to stabilize.Friction coefficient0.250.200.150.100.0510 N15 N20 N0.000 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32Duration of rubbing (min)Fig. 3. Friction coefficient as a function of duration ofrubbing at different normal loads (sliding velocity: 1m/s, relative humidity: 70%, test sample: gear fiber, pin:mild steel, rough).Friction coefficient0.250.200.150.100.0510 N15 N20 N0.000 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32Duration of rubbing (min)Fig. 4. Friction coefficient as a function of duration ofrubbing at different normal loads (sliding velocity: 1m/s, relative humidity: 70%, test sample: glass fiber, pin:mild steel, smooth).Figure 4 shows the effect of the duration ofrubbing on the value of friction coefficient atdifferent normal load for glass fiber sliding againstsmooth mild steel counterface. Curve 1 of thisfigure drawn for normal load 10 N, shows thatduring starting of the experiment, the value offriction coefficient is 0.123 which rises for 21minutes to a value of 0.167 and then it becomessteady for the rest of the experimental time. Almost12312368 13 th International Conference on Tribology – Serbiatrib’13
similar trends of variation are observed in curves 2and 3 which are drawn for load 15 and 20 N,respectively. From the obtained results, it can alsobe seen that time to reach constant friction isdifferent for different normal load and higher thenormal load, glass fiber takes less time to stabilize.Several experiments are conducted to observethe effect of duration of rubbing on frictioncoefficient at different sliding speeds for glass fibresliding against rough mild steel counterface andthese results are presented in Figure 5. Curve 1 ofthis figure drawn for normal load 10 N, shows thatduring starting of the experiment, the value offriction coefficient is 0.175 which rises for 22minutes to a value of 0.225 and then it becomessteady for the rest of the experimental time. Almostsimilar trends of variation are observed in curves 2and 3 which are drawn for load 15 and 20 Nrespectively. From these curves, it is found thattime to reach steady friction is different fordifferent normal loads. At normal load 10, 15 and20 N, glass fiber-mild steel rough pair takes 20, 18and 15 minutes respectively to reach steady frictionThat is, higher the normal load, glass fiber-mildsteel rough pair takes less time to stabilize.Friction coefficient0.250.200.150.100.0510 N15 N20 N0.000 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32Duration of rubbing (min)Fig. 5. Friction coefficient as a function of duration ofrubbing at different normal loads (sliding velocity: 1m/s, relative humidity: 70%, test sample: glass fiber, pin:mild steel, rough).Figure 6 shows comparison of the variation offriction coefficient with normal load for gear fibermildsteel smooth, gear fiber-mild steel rough, glassfiber-mild steel smooth and glass fiber-mild steelrough sliding pairs. Curves of this figure are drawnfrom steady values of friction coefficient shown inFigures 2-5 for gear fiber-mild steel smooth, gearfiber-mild steel rough, glass fiber-mild steel smoothand glass fiber-mild steel rough sliding pairs,respectively (to ensure the reliability of test results,each test was repeated five times and curves 1-3 ofFigures 2-5 represent average value of fiveexperiments). It is shown that the friction coefficientvaries from 0.147 to 0.108, 0.195 to 0.127, 0.167 to0.123 and 0.225 to 0.135 with the variation of123normal load from 10 to 20 N for for gear fiber-mildsteel smooth, gear fiber-mild steel rough, glass fibermildsteel smooth and glass fiber-mild steel roughsliding pairs, respectively. From the obtained results,it can be seen that the coefficient of frictiondecreases with the increase in applied load. It isknown that tribological behavior of polymers andpolymer composites can be associated with theirviscoelastic and temperature-related properties.Sliding contact of two materials results in heatgeneration at the asperities and hence increases intemperature at the frictional surfaces of the twomaterials which influences the viscoelastic propertyin the response of materials stress, adhesion andtransferring behaviors [27]. From the obtainedresults, it can also be seen that the highest values ofthe friction coefficient are obtained for glass fibermildsteel rough pair and the lowest values offriction coefficient are obtained for gear fiber-mildsteel smooth pair. The values of friction coefficientof gear fiber-mild steel rough pair and glass fibermildsteel smooth pair are found in between thehighest and lowest values. It is noted that the frictioncoefficients of gear fiber-mild steel rough pair arehigher than that of glass fiber-mild steel smooth pair.From this figure, it is also found that at identicalconditions, the values of friction coefficient of gearfiber and glass fiber sliding against smooth mildsteel counterface is lower than that of gear fiber andglass fiber sliding against rough mild steelcounterface. It was found that after friction tests, theaverage roughness of gear fiber-mild steel smoothpair, glass fiber-mild steel smooth pair, gear fibermildsteel rough pair and glass fiber-mild steel roughpair varied from 0.95-1.35, 1.25-1.65 and 1.55-1.75and 1.67-1.91 μm respectively.Friction coefficient0.250.200.150.100.05gear fiber-mild steel, smooth pairgear fiber-mild steel, rough pairglass fiber-mild steel, smooth pairglass fiber-mild steel, rough pair0.008 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24Normal load (N)Fig. 6. Friction coefficient as a function of Normal load forgear and glass fiber for different counterface surfaceconditions (Sliding velocity: 1 m/s, relative humidity: 70%).Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10 show the variation offriction coefficient with the duration of rubbingat different sliding velocities for gear fiber-mildsteel smooth, gear fiber-mild steel rough, glassfiber-mild steel smooth and glass fiber-mild steel13 th International Conference on Tribology – Serbiatrib’13 69
Page 1 and 2:
SerbianTribologySocietyFacultyofEng
Page 3 and 4:
Serbian Tribology SocietyUniversity
Page 5 and 6:
Supported byMinistry of Education,
Page 7 and 8:
PrefaceThe International Conference
Page 9 and 10:
ContentsPlenary Lectures1. THE GREE
Page 11 and 12:
27. WEAR CHARACTERISTICS OF HYBRID
Page 13 and 14:
Tribometry57. PRELIMINARY STUDY ON
Page 15:
Plenary Lectures13 th International
Page 18 and 19:
Serbian TribologySocietySERBIATRIB
Page 20 and 21:
Figure 4. Diagram of the height and
Page 22 and 23:
Realization of the approach is base
Page 24 and 25:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
edge without chamfer and smaller ra
Page 31 and 32: Figure 7. Accumulated tool life in
Page 33 and 34: Figure 13. Calculated and measured
Page 35 and 36: Serbian TribologySocietySERBIATRIB
Page 37 and 38: Friction deformation of the bronze
Page 39 and 40: engine cylinders of 2-cylinder-twot
Page 41 and 42: Table 1: Chemical composition of sa
Page 43 and 44: Table 4: Comparative wear-resistanc
Page 47 and 48: - measuring of coating thickness h
Page 49 and 50: Figure 5. Functional scheme of the
Page 53 and 54: Table 2. Test results for massive w
Page 55 and 56: knowledge transfer in the field ofm
Page 57 and 58: Table 1. Parameters of the electroc
Page 59 and 60: Figure 6. Wear resistance by linear
Page 61 and 62: coatings and observed their good we
Page 63 and 64: c)a)Figure 2: SEM images and micros
Page 65 and 66: Room temperature 300°CNi/µSiCNiNi
Page 67 and 68: COF [-] COF [-]Fig.9: COF graphs at
Page 71 and 72: about 260 nm is related to isolated
Page 73 and 74: contact’s conformity [18] they ob
Page 75 and 76: In order to calculate the metallic
Page 77 and 78: microscopic inspection of the Rp3 s
Page 81: otating plate. The shaft passes thr
Page 85 and 86: smooth, gear fiber-mild steel rough
Page 87 and 88: [2] Tabor, D.: “Friction and wear
Page 91 and 92: (10, 50 and 100 N) against surface
Page 93 and 94: [9] B.R. Gligorijevic, A. Vencl, B.
Page 95 and 96: dielectric properties, high resista
Page 97 and 98: parameter, Sv, was slightly influen
Page 99 and 100: dependence of roughness height and
Page 103 and 104: Polyethylenes with a molecular weig
Page 105 and 106: [9] K.S. Kanaga Karuppiah, A.L. Bru
Page 107 and 108: MgCO3•CaCO3 (13% Mg), and carnall
Page 109 and 110: fully compatible with MRI/MSCT imag
Page 111 and 112: 5. CONCLUSIONThe magnesium alloys a
Page 113 and 114: Zinc dialkyldithiophosphate (ZDDP)
Page 115 and 116: C- Lower deposits with NPNA on comb
Page 117 and 118: films. Carraro et al. [10] examined
Page 119 and 120: PlateCount No.Critical Load ( N)120
Page 121 and 122: solid melt of ZA27 alloy using mech
Page 123 and 124: SiC particles are uniformly distrib
Page 125 and 126: in number of micro-cracks and clust
Page 129 and 130: PBT has the average values of the f
Page 131 and 132: mechanical pressure and thermal loa
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
3. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTSTaking into
Page 137 and 138:
[12] L. Blunt De, X. Jiang: Advance
Page 139 and 140:
2. EXPERIMENTALTESTING2.1 MaterialT
Page 141 and 142:
figure 3a it could be seen that the
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
and lubrication is done so that the
Page 147 and 148:
5. CONCLUSIONFigure 11. The accumul
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
esistance was found for composite c
Page 153 and 154:
onze, which is embedded within the
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
The test contact pair meets the req
Page 159 and 160:
complete. The SEM analysis maycontr
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
tg( ) tg 100, [%] (2)tgwhere are:
Page 165 and 166:
corresponding to the maximum value
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
electrostatics [17]. Due to the fle
Page 171 and 172:
250nm size have been observed, acco
Page 173 and 174:
ETH Zurich, Switzerland, where all
Page 175 and 176:
comparison with the synthetic reinf
Page 177 and 178:
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION3.1 Micros
Page 179 and 180:
(a)(b)Figure 4. Showing (a) variati
Page 181 and 182:
composites. But the composite compo
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
coated and uncoated region after ad
Page 187 and 188:
has been measured between the top s
Page 189 and 190:
Fig. 9 shows the wear track obtaine
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Mica samples preparationFor the ads
Page 195 and 196:
According to the AFM results in fig
Page 197 and 198:
[21] B. G. Sharma et al.: Character
Page 199 and 200:
chemical vapor deposition method wi
Page 201 and 202:
analysis (a) and an approximate che
Page 203 and 204:
Table 3. Friction coefficients of s
Page 205:
A.K.Oleynik, V.M.Matsevity, ea.]. /
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Most of the friction units of produ
Page 213 and 214:
In order to provide both high parts
Page 215 and 216:
Fig. 3. The comparison the criterio
Page 217 and 218:
Table 3. Experimental and calculate
Page 219 and 220:
For developing the numerical model
Page 221 and 222:
,eccentricities and hydrodynamic pr
Page 223 and 224:
hydrodynamic regime. However, for b
Page 225 and 226:
to obtain the temperature distribut
Page 227 and 228:
force (pressure) between two contac
Page 229 and 230:
5E-06The total displacement [m]4.5E
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
[11]. Figure 5 shows s the influenc
Page 235 and 236:
efficiency of use, product quality,
Page 237 and 238:
38GSA. The chemical composition, de
Page 239 and 240:
niobium. It should be noted that fo
Page 241 and 242:
Figure 1. Friction force on side su
Page 243 and 244:
exploitation this changing is signi
Page 245 and 246:
2. EFFICIENCY OF CYCLO DRIVEEfficie
Page 247 and 248:
Figure 6. Dependence of cyclo drive
Page 249 and 250:
common for their ability to be inst
Page 251 and 252:
FNF (11)R sin cos11 21 22FNF
Page 253 and 254:
Normal force [N]4000350030002500200
Page 255 and 256:
analytical tests. The analytical te
Page 257 and 258:
Table 4. Results of zero samples of
Page 259 and 260:
noticeable, and by the end of explo
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
4. PLASTIC BEARING APPLICATIONSRega
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
For Elastohydrodynamic film thickne
Page 269 and 270:
The results concluded for different
Page 271 and 272:
For Thrust Force of 40KNKrytox 215
Page 273 and 274:
Krytox 215 (µ = 0.03204 Pa.s)Figur
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
- Reliable exploitation tools, prim
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
In addition, as a result of cyclic
Page 283 and 284:
AcknowledgementThe part of this res
Page 285 and 286:
Thepressure angle can be calculated
Page 287 and 288:
mechanism these parameters are fina
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
causes big changes of their propert
Page 293 and 294:
Table 2. Impact toughness of some t
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Figure 1. Appearance of fractured f
Page 299 and 300:
implementation of these new manugac
Page 301 and 302:
additional energy is dissipated due
Page 303 and 304:
The adopted geometry parameters are
Page 305 and 306:
4. CONCLUSIONTools of virtual produ
Page 307 and 308:
Figure 2. Structure of the machinin
Page 309 and 310:
3. ANALYSIS OF RESULTSThe results o
Page 311 and 312:
Figure 15. Surface roughness regard
Page 313 and 314:
From the analysis of the diagram it
Page 315 and 316:
comparison from economic, energy co
Page 317 and 318:
Advantages and disadvantages of tra
Page 319 and 320:
The information provided by footwea
Page 321 and 322:
Force (N)5,554,543,532,521,510,50Ex
Page 323 and 324:
additives, that had been, until rec
Page 325 and 326:
Figure 1. Test results for samples
Page 327 and 328:
Table 7. Test results of oil sample
Page 329 and 330:
Input parameters- Current intensity
Page 331 and 332:
edge formed into a thin line. At th
Page 333 and 334:
Lower values of current are not res
Page 335 and 336:
Table 1. Chemical composition of si
Page 337 and 338:
flowable at high temperatures and v
Page 339 and 340:
holes (pits) emerge in the shape of
Page 341:
[4] W. Schatt, K-P. Wieters, Pulver
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
assumption allows us to use, instea
Page 349 and 350:
where P is the load, a - radius of
Page 351 and 352:
determination (total running in tim
Page 353 and 354:
μm, compared with Figure 17, wich
Page 355 and 356:
Serbian TribologySocietySERBIIATRIB
Page 357 and 358:
Especially when the chain transfer
Page 359 and 360:
is obvious that this isa so-calledw
Page 361 and 362:
winches. The authors are inclined t
Page 363 and 364:
find parameters of robot laser hard
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
each of which is measured by the le
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Fractal dimensions were determined
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Figure 3. Modified force acting sch
Page 377 and 378:
0.25Lubricant: L3DC 04Friction coef
Page 379 and 380:
nanocomposites. The influence of fi
Page 381 and 382:
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION4.1 Morpho
Page 383 and 384:
Figure 6. Loading and unloadin vers
Page 385 and 386:
3 8 12 1 4 2 4
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
The material after qualifying the r
Page 391 and 392:
It has already been mentioned that
Page 393 and 394:
Degradation & Stability, Vol. 69, N
Page 395 and 396:
conformance to researchers’ requi
Page 397 and 398:
This part is assembled of pneumatic
Page 399 and 400:
matrixes describe the state of the
Page 401 and 402:
values influence of themeasurement
Page 403 and 404:
Figure 1. Friction stir weldinga -
Page 405 and 406:
(t 2 t
Page 407 and 408:
M fr / T [-] [-]10.90.80.70.60.50.4
Page 409 and 410:
M fr / T [-]10.90.80.70.60.50.40.30
Page 411 and 412:
experimentally determined that for
Page 413 and 414:
4. DISCUSSIONAccording to the theor
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
2.1 The life cycle of the reportThe
Page 419:
Obviously the report is checked and
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425 and 426:
uticaja na osnovu kompozita, a time
Page 427 and 428:
5. ZAKLJUČCIStruktura tiksolivene
Page 429 and 430:
dobijene različite karakteristike
Page 431 and 432:
vizuelno, na dnevnoj svetlosti, pod
Page 433 and 434:
LITERATURA[1] Зинченко В.
Page 435 and 436:
Slika 1. Rotorni bager - glodar VII
Page 437 and 438:
stvaraju sliku stanja i svoja zapa
Page 439 and 440:
njihovih kotrljanih elemenata. Mere
Page 441 and 442:
postupka i uticaja parametara depoz
Page 443 and 444:
posledica različite raspodele mikr
Page 445 and 446:
ZrO 2 Y 2 O 3 je takođe zbog oksid
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
3.2 Pneumatska osetljivostOblast pr
Page 451 and 452:
p mg (δ), koji je zbog malih struj
Page 453 and 454:
PNEUMATIC PROBE HEAD SELECTION FOR
Page 455 and 456:
1. Podsistem kopanja2. Podsistem pr
Page 457 and 458:
Slika 3. Kriva habanjaNa tom dijagr
Page 459 and 460:
Mjereni su parametri habanja i pril
Page 461 and 462:
preše prevladavaju kombinirani uvj
Page 463 and 464:
a) b)Slika 5. Karakteristična mikr
Page 465:
varijantnih materijala u dostavnom
Page 468 and 469:
Jovanović D. 414, 446KKaleicheva J
Page 470 and 471:
CIP - Каталогизација
show all

Proceedings of SerbiaTrib '13

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?