0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Granular Lubrication: Toward an Understanding of the Transition Between Kinetic and Quasi-Fluid Regime

[+] Author and Article Information
I. Iordanoff

Laboratoire de Mécanique des Contacts UMR INSA-CNRS 5514, 20 Avenue Albert Einstein, 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex

M. M. Khonsari

Dow Chemical Endowed Chair in Rotating Machinery and Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 2508 CEBA, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803

J. Tribol 126(1), 137-145 (Jan 13, 2004) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1633575 History: Received October 08, 2002; Revised April 24, 2003; Online January 13, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Godet,  M., 1984, “The Third Body Approach: A Mechanical View of Wear,” Wear, 100, pp. 437–452.
Berthier, Y., 1995, “Maurice Godet’s Third Body,” 22nd Leeds Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier Tribology Series 31, pp. 21–30.
Ludema, K. C., 1995, “Third Body: Perspectives on Modeling in Lubricated Contacts etc: following on the concept of Dr. Maurice Godet,” 22nd Leeds Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier Tribology Series 31, pp. 3–19.
Berthier,  Y., Godet,  M., Brendle,  M., 1989, “Velocity Accommodation in Friction,” Tribol. Trans., 32, pp. 490–496.
Heshmat, H., 1993 “On the theory of Quasi-Hydrodynamic Lubrication with Dry Powder: Application to Development of High-Speed Journal Bearings for Hostile Environments,” 20th Leeds Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier, Tribology Series No. 27, pp. 45–61.
Heshmat,  H., 1995, “The Quasi-hydrodynamic Mechanism of Powder Lubrication. Part III: On Theory and Rheology of Triboparticulates,” Tribol. Trans., 38(2), pp. 269–276.
Dai,  F., Khonsari,  M. M., and Liu,  Z., 1994, “On the Lubrication Mechanism of Grain Flows,” STLE Tribol. Trans., 53, pp. 516–524.
Haff,  K. P., 1983, “Grain flow as a fluid-mechanical phenomenon,” J. Fluid Mech., 134, pp. 401–430.
McKeague,  K. T., and Khonsari,  M. M., 1996, “An Analysis of Powder Lubricated Slider Bearings,” ASME J. Tribol., 118, pp. 206–214.
McKeague,  K. T., and Khonsari,  M. M., 1996, “Generalized Boundary Interactions for Powder Lubricated Couette Flows,” ASME J. Tribol., 118, pp. 580–588.
Zhou,  L., and Khonsari,  M. M., 2000, “Flow Characteristics of a Powder Lubricant Sheared Between Parallel Plates,” ASME J. Tribol., 122, pp. 147–155.
Yu,  C. M., and Tichy,  J., 1996, “Granular Collisional Lubrication: Effect of Surface Roughness, Particle Size and Solids Fraction,” Tribol. Trans., 39, pp. 537–546.
Yu,  C. M., Craig,  K., and Tichy,  J., 1996, “Granular Collision Lubrication,” J. Rheol., 38(4), pp. 921–936.
Khonsari,  M. M., 1997, “On the Modeling of a Multi-Body Interaction Problems in Tribology,” Wear, 207, pp. 55–62.
Cundall,  P. A., and Strack,  A., 1979, “A Discrete Numerical Model for Granular Assemblies,” Geotechnique, 29(1), pp. 47–65.
Elrod, H. G., Brewe, D. E., 1991, “Numerical Experiments with Flows of Elongated Granules,” 18th Leeds Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier Tribology Series No. 21, pp. 219–226.
Elrod, H. G., 1995, “Numerical Experiments with Flows of Elongated Granules-Part II,” 22nd Leeds Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier Tribology Series 31, pp. 347–354.
Lubretch, A. A., Chan Tien, C., and Berthier, Y., 1995, “A Simple Model for Granular Lubrication, Influence of Boundaries,” 22nd Leeds Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier Tribology Series 31, pp. 377–385.
Seve, B., Iordanoff, I., and Berthier, Y., 2001, “Using Discrete Models to Simulate Solid Third Bodies: Influence of the Inter-Granule Forces on the Macroscopic Behavior,” 27th Leeds-Lyon Symposium on Tribology, Elsevier Tribology Series 39, pp. 361–368.
Iordanoff,  I., Seve,  B., and Berthier,  Y., 2002, “Solid Third Body Analysis Using a Discrete Approach: Influence of Adhesion and Particle Size on Macroscopic Properties,” ASME J. Tribol., 124, pp. 530–538.
Iordanoff,  I., Berthier,  Y., Descartes,  S., and Heshmat,  H., 2001, “A Review of Recent Approaches for Modeling Solid Third Bodies,” ASME J. Tribol., 124, pp. 725–735.
Campbell,  C., and Brennen,  C. S., 1985, “Computer Simulation of Granular Shear Flows,” J. Fluid Mech., 151, pp. 167–188.
Sawyer,  G. W., and Tichy,  J. A., 2001, “Lubrication With Granular Flow: Continuum Theory, Particle Simulation, Comparison with Experiment,” ASME J. Tribol., 123, pp. 777–784.
Campbell, C., and Zhang, Y., 1992, “The Interface Between Fluid-like and Solid-Like Behavior in Granular Flows,” Advances in Micromechanics of Granular Materials, Studies in Applied Mechanics, H. Sen et al., eds., 31 , Elsevier Science Publishers, pp. 261–270.
Lun,  C. K. K., Savage,  S. B., Jeffrey,  D. J., and Chepurniy,  N., 1984, “Kinetic Theories for Granular Flow: Inelastic Particles in Couette Flow and Slightly Inelastic Particles in a General Flowfield,” J. Fluid Mech., 140, p. 223.
Cheng,  Y. F., Guo,  S. J., and Lai,  H. Y., 2000, “Dynamic Simulation of Random Packing of Spherical Particles,” Powder Technol., 107, pp. 123–130.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Simulated domain for the particle dynamic model
Grahic Jump Location
Definition of velocities and contact duration Tc for a binary impact
Grahic Jump Location
Evolution of solid fraction, velocity and granular temperature through the thickness of the contact for two values of stiffness, with e=0.8,Ep=28,fg=0.7123,ΔRg=10 percent. The calculated pressure on the upper wall is 0.0202 for K=40,000 and 0.0205 for K=40,000,000.
Grahic Jump Location
Velocity accommodation for two types of granular material: (a) same size, ΔRg=0 percent, and (b) poly-disperse size, ΔRg=25 percent. At time 0 of the simulation, two columns of different colors are marked in order to visualize the way the particles accommodate the movement.
Grahic Jump Location
Test for the kinetic regime
Grahic Jump Location
Evolution of dimensionless pressure versus global solid fraction with e=0.8
Grahic Jump Location
Local data for different global solid fraction and for e=0.8
Grahic Jump Location
Normalized pressure versus coefficient of restitution
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between PDM model and kinetic model: velocity distribution (mass flow rate, Ms=0.174)
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between PDM model and kinetic model: Granular temperature distribution
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between PDM model and kinetic model: Area/Solid fraction distribution
Grahic Jump Location
Velocity profile when global solid fraction increases
Grahic Jump Location
Δfc versus dimensionless pressure
Grahic Jump Location
Δfc versus global solid fraction
Grahic Jump Location
Local solid fraction through the gap at transition
Grahic Jump Location
Δfc versus maximum local area fraction through the gap.

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