0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Average Flow Model of Rough Surface Lubrication: Flow Factors for Sinusoidal Surfaces

[+] Author and Article Information
N. Letalleur, F. Plouraboué, M. Prat

Institut de Mécanique des Fluides de Toulouse, UMR CNRS/INPT/UPS no. 5502, Allée du Pr C. Soula 31400 Toulouse, France

J. Tribol 124(3), 539-546 (May 31, 2002) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1467084 History: Received February 26, 2001; Revised September 25, 2001; Online May 31, 2002
Copyright © 2002 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Patir,  N., and Cheng,  H., 1978, “An Average Flow Model for Determining Effects of Three-Dimensional Roughness on Partial Hydrodynamic Lubrication,” ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 100, p. 12.
Patir,  N., and Cheng,  H., 1979, “Application of Average Flow Model to Lubrication Between Rough Sliding Surfaces,” ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 101, p. 220.
Christensen,  H., 1970, “Stochastic Models for Hydrodynamics Lubrication of Rough Surfaces,” Int. J. of Mech. Eng., 104, p. 1022.
Chow,  L., and Cheng,  H., 1976, “The Effect of Surface Roughness on the Average Film Thickness Between Lubricated Rollers,” ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 98, p. 117.
Tripp,  J., 1983, “Surface Roughness Effects in Hydrodynamic Lubrication: The Flow Factor Method,” ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 105, p. 458.
Bayada,  G., and Chambat,  M., 1988, “New Models in the Theory of the Hydrodynamic Lubrication of Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol., 110, p. 402.
Bayada,  G., and Faure,  J., 1989, “A Double Scale Analysis Approach of the Reynolds Roughness. Comments and Application to the Journal Bearing,” ASME J. Tribol., 111, p. 323.
Whitaker, S., 1999, The Method of Volume Averaging, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Letalleur, N., Prat, M., and Plouraboué, F., 2002, “Averaged Reynolds Equation for Flow Between Rough Surfaces in Sliding Motion,” Trans. Por. Med., in press.
Plouraboué,  F., and Boehm,  M., 1999, “Multiscale Roughness Transfer in Cold Metal Rolling,” Tribol. Int., 32, p. 45.
Bhushan,  B., and Blackman,  G., 1991, “Atomic Force Microscopy of Magnetic Rigid Disks and Sliders and Its Applications to Tribology,” ASME J. Tribol., 113, p. 452.
Mahumdar,  A., and Tien,  C. L., 1990, “Fractal Characterization and Simulation of Rough Surfaces,” Wear, 160, p. 313.
Yang,  M., and Talke,  F., 1993, “Surface Roughness Investigation of Magnetic Recording Disk Using STM and Profilometry Measurements,” Wear, 170, p. 15.
Michell, A., 1950, Lubrication—Its Principle and Practice, Blakie and Son, London and Glasgow.
Burton,  R., 1963, “Effects of Two-Dimensional, Sinusoidal Roughness on the Load Support Characteristics of a Lubricant Film,” ASME J. Basic Eng., 84, p. 197.
Fantino, B., 1973, Influence des défauts de forme dans la lubrification hydrodynamique, Thèse de l’Université Claude Bernard de Lyon.
Hamrock, B., 1994, Fundamentals of Fluid Film Lubrication, McGraw-Hill.
Hemmat,  M., and Borhan,  A., 1995, “Creeping Flow Through Sinusoidally Constricted Capillaries,” Phys. Fluids, 7, pp. 2111—2121.
Plouraboué,  F., Prat,  M., and Letalleur,  N., 2001, “Sliding Lubricated Anisotropic Rough Surfaces,” Phys. Rev. E, 64(1), pp. 011202-1.
Peeken,  H., Knoll,  G., Rienacker,  A., Lang,  J., and Schonen,  R., 1997, “On the Numerical Determination of Flow Factors,” ASME J. Tribol., 119, p. 259.
Knoll,  G., Rienacker,  A., Lagemann,  V., and Lechtape-Gruter,  R., 1998, “Effect of Contact Deformation on Flow Factors,” ASME J. Tribol., 120, p. 140.
Elrod,  H., 1979, “A General Theory for Laminar Lubrication With Reynolds Roughness,” ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 101, p. 8.
Abramowitz, M., and Stegun, I., 1972, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, Dover, New York.
Press., W., Teukolsky, S., and Flannery, W. V. B., 1995, Numerical Recipes in Fortran, Cambridge University Press.
Hinch, E., 1991, Perturbation Methods, Cambridge University Press.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Sketch of the situation studied
Grahic Jump Location
Geometry in the plane y=0
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of pressure flow factors ϕx calculated for stationary case (smooth/rough, solid line) and unstationary one (rough/rough, dotted line). The dashed line corresponds to the saddle point estimate near contact for the smooth/rough case. The inset shows the log-log plot of ϕx near contact with same conventions.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of shear stress flow factors ϕfpx calculated for the stationary case (smooth/rough, solid line) and the unstationary one (rough/rough, dotted line). Same conventions as Fig. 3 have been used.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of shear stress flow factors ϕsx calculated for the stationary case (smooth/rough, solid line) and the unstationary one (rough/rough, dotted line). Same conventions as Fig. 3 have been used.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of shear stress flow factors ϕf calculated for the stationary case (smooth/rough, solid line) and the unstationary one (rough/rough, dotted line). Same conventions as Fig. 3 have been used.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of shear stress flow factors ϕfsx calculated for the stationary and the unstationary one. Same conventions as Fig. 3 have been used.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In