0
Research Papers: Friction & Wear

Finite Element Modeling of Sliding Wear in a Composite Alloy Using a Free-Mesh

[+] Author and Article Information
M. A. Ashraf

College of Engineering,
Alfaisal University,
P.O. Box 50927,
Riyadh 11533, Saudi Arabia

R. Ahmed

College of Engineering,
Alfaisal University,
P.O. Box 50927,
Riyadh 11533, Saudi Arabia
School of Engineering and Physical Sciences,
Heriot-Watt University,
Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK
e-mail: R.Ahmed@hw.ac.uk

O. Ali

School of Engineering and Physical Sciences,
Heriot-Watt University,
Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK

N. H. Faisal

College of Engineering,
Alfaisal University,
P.O. Box 50927,
Riyadh 11533, Saudi Arabia
School of Engineering,
Robert Gordon University,
Garthdee Road,
Aberdeen AB10 7GJ, UK

A. M. El-Sherik

Research and Development Center,
Saudi Aramco,
Dhahran 31311, Saudi Arabia

M. F. A. Goosen

Office of Research & Graduate Studies,
Alfaisal University,
P.O. Box 50927,
Riyadh 11533, Saudi Arabia

Free-mesh is not the same as mesh-free methods of FEM.

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received July 22, 2014; final manuscript received February 18, 2015; published online April 15, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Mircea Teodorescu.

J. Tribol 137(3), 031605 (Jul 01, 2015) (15 pages) Paper No: TRIB-14-1184; doi: 10.1115/1.4029998 History: Received July 22, 2014; Revised February 18, 2015; Online April 15, 2015

A finite element analysis (FEA) based wear algorithm model is presented to predict sliding wear behavior of a composite cobalt-based (Stellite 6) alloy. This study aims to provide an understanding of FEA model behavior using: (a) free-mesh, (b) composite material microstructure, and (c) wear test conditions of loading and geometry which are consistent with ASTM G133-02. Results indicate that the wear model using free-mesh is able to predict wear in composite alloy within the limits of experimental deviation using a suitable kD (wear-rate) value. The rationale for the differences in the experimental setup and FEA model calculations is discussed in terms of the role of wear debris, wear mechanisms, and ball wear.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the (a) factors controlling sliding wear process, (b) evolution of the real contact area for disk wear [7,8], and (c) wear simulation process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) (i) Ball-on-flat wear test schematic, (ii) half symmetry two-dimensional (2D) model schematic, and (iii) the FEA mesh model with three-dimensional (3D) half symmetry; (b) half symmetry model of ball and track contact area showing refined contact mesh; and (c) contact area calculations at each sliding step [5]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) SEM observation of cast Stellite 6 microstructure and (b) XRD pattern of cast Stellite 6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

SEM observations (SEI and BEI) of the end of wear tracks at: (a) 10 m, (b) 30 m, (c) 50 m, (d) 75 m, and (e) 500 m sliding distances

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Higher magnification SEM observations (SEI and BEI) of the wear tracks at: (a) 10 m, (b) 30 m, (c) 75 m, and (d) 500 m sliding distances

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

SEM observation of the wear debris for the 75 m sliding test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

SEM of transfer film on WC–Co ball surface after the 75 m sliding test with oxygen EDX analysis inlayed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Friction coefficient plots for the 10–100 m sliding distance tests

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Ball-on-flat and FEA wear volume results for Stellite 6 for (a) a sliding distance of 10–500 m on the log scale. Values of the experimental standard deviation of the wear volume loss for the 500 m sliding wear tests are also indicated. The percentage of experimental error for the 500 m sliding distance was recorded as ±18.7% = ≈|37%|. (b) Ball-on-flat and FEA wear volume results for Stellite 6 for a 100 m sliding distance.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Contact pressure over the sliding distance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Wear regimes and wear-rate comparison for experimental data and FEA model for Stellite 6 for a sliding distance of 10–500 m on the log scale. Values of the experimental standard deviation of the wear-rate for the 500 m sliding wear tests are also indicated.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Wear track cross section profiles of wear scar, FEA model and ball geometry for: (a) 10 m, (b) 50 m, (c) 100 m sliding distances, and (d) 3D-map of wear track for 100 m sliding distance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Percentage error between experimental data and FEA results for the sliding distance of 10–500 m on the log scale. The percentage experimental error recorded for the 500 m sliding distance tests was ±18.7% = ≈|37%|as indicated in Fig. 9.

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