Research Papers: Applications

Tribological Behavior of Wheel–Rail Contact Under Different Contaminants Using Pin-On-Disk Methodology

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Khalladi

Laboratory of Materials
Engineering and Environment,
National Engineering School of Sfax (ENIS),
University of Sfax,
Sfax 3038, Tunisia
e-mail: khalladiabdou@gmail.com

K. Elleuch

Laboratory of Materials
Engineering and Environment,
National Engineering School of Sfax (ENIS),
University of Sfax,
Sfax 3038, Tunisia
e-mail: khaled.elleuch@enis.rnu.tn

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received October 23, 2015; final manuscript received January 20, 2016; published online July 20, 2016. Assoc. Editor: George K. Nikas.

J. Tribol 139(1), 011102 (Jul 20, 2016) (9 pages) Paper No: TRIB-15-1381; doi: 10.1115/1.4033051 History: Received October 23, 2015; Revised January 20, 2016

The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of contaminants on the tribological behavior of wheel–rail contact. Sand, phosphate, sulfur, and cement were the studied contaminants identified after a Tunisian railway expertise. All friction tests under different contaminants were conducted using pin-on-disk machine, maintaining the same sliding velocity and Hertzian pressure, respectively, at 0.1 m/s and 1000 MPa. All results were compared with reference of two configuration contacts: wheel tread-rail head (clean dry condition) and wheel flange-rail gauge (clean lubricated condition). The main findings of this study could be listed as follows. First, with reference to clean and dry condition tests, sand and cement showed a higher adhesion than phosphate and sulfur. Second, all contaminants increased the adhesion coefficient with reference to clean and lubricated conditions. Third, sulfur generated the lowest energy-wear coefficient yielding a mild wear. Fourth, sand, cement, and phosphate generated a higher energy-wear coefficient yielding an abrasive wear. Finally, the highest energy-wear coefficient was obtained with sand.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Descartes, S. , Saulot, A. , Godeau, C. , Bondeux, S. , Dayot, C. , and Berthier, Y. , 2011, “ Wheel Flange/Rail Gauge Corner Contact Lubrication: Tribological Investigation,” Wear, 271(1–2), pp. 54–61. [CrossRef]
Wang, W. J. , Liu, T. F. , Wang, H. Y. , Liu, Q. Y. , Zhu, M. H. , and Jin, X. S. , 2014, “ Influence of Friction Modifiers on Improving Adhesion and Surface Damage of Wheel/Rail Under Low Adhesion Conditions,” Tribol. Int., 75,pp. 16–23. [CrossRef]
Tomeoka, M. , and Kabe, N. , 2002, “ Friction Control Between Wheel and Rail by Means of On-Board Lubrication,” Wear 253(1–2), pp. 124–129. [CrossRef]
Harrison, H. , McCanney, T. , and Cotter, J. , 2002, “ Recent Developments in Coefficient of Friction Measurement at the Rail/Wheel Interface,” Wear, 253(1–2), pp. 114–123. [CrossRef]
Arias-Cuevas, O. , Li, Z. , Lews, R. , and Gallardo-Hernandez, E. A. , 2010, “ Rolling-Sliding Laboratory Tests of Friction Modifiers in Dry and Wet Wheel-Rail Contacts,” Wear, 268(3–4), pp. 543–551. [CrossRef]
Gallardo-Hernandez, E. A. , and Lewis, R. , 2008, “ Twin Disc Assessment of Wheel/Rail Adhesion,” Wear, 265(9–10), pp. 1309–1316. [CrossRef]
Wang, W. J. , Shen, P. , Song, J. H. , Guo, J. , Liu, Q. Y. , and Jin, X. S. , 2001, “ Experimental Study on Adhesion Behavior of Wheel/Rail Under Dry and Water Conditions,” Wear, 271(9–10), pp. 2699–2705. [CrossRef]
Lewis, R. , and Dwyer-Joyce, R. S. , 2003, “ Wheel-Rail Wear and Surface Damage Caused by Adhesion Sanding,” Tribol. Ser., 43, pp.731–741.
Lyu, Y. , Zhu, Y. , and Olofsson, U. , 2015, “ Wear Between Wheel and Rail: A Pin-On-Disc Study of Environmental Conditions and Iron Oxides,” Wear, 328–329, pp. 277–285. [CrossRef]
Khalladi, A. , 2012, “ Contribution à la Résolution des Problèmes Tribologiques Associés au Contact Roue-rail dans une Locomotive,” Ph.D. thesis, National Engineering School of Sfax (ENIS), Sfax, Tunisia.
Hernandez, F. C. R. , Demas, N. G. , Gonzales, K. , and Polycarpou, A. A. , 2011, “ Correlation Between Laboratory Ball-on-Disk and Full-Scale Rail Performance Tests,” Wear, 270(7–8), pp. 479–491. [CrossRef]
Deters, L. , and Proksch, M. , 2005, “ Friction and Wear Testing of Rail and Wheel Material,” Wear, 258(7–8), pp. 981–991. [CrossRef]
Descartes, S. , Desrayaud, C. , Niccolini, E. , and Berthier, Y. , 2005, “ Presence and Role of the Third Body in a Wheel-Rail Contact,” Wear, 258(7–8), pp.1081–1090. [CrossRef]
Lewis, R. , and Olofsson, U. , 2004, “ Mapping Rail Wear Regimes and Transitions,” Wear, 257(7–8), pp. 721–729. [CrossRef]
Mech, B. , Attia, F. , Braham, M. , Ben Elhadj, S. , and Hammami, M. , 2007, “ Agronomic Application of Olive Mill Wastewaters With Phosphate Rock in a Semi-Arid Mediterranean Soil Modifies the Soil Properties and Decreases the Extractable Soil Phosphorus,” J. Environ. Manage., 85(4), pp. 1088–1093. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lilkov, V. , Petrov, O. , Tzvetanova, Y. , and Savov, P. , 2012, “ Mössbauer, DTA and XRD Study of Portland Cement Blended With Fly Ash and Silica Fume,” Constr. Build. Mater., 29, pp. 33–41. [CrossRef]
Ramalho, A. , and Miranda, J. C. , 2006, “ The Relationship Between Wear and Dissipated Energy in Sliding System,” Wear, 260(4–5), pp. 361–367. [CrossRef]
Rippeth, D. , Kalousek, J. , and Simmons, J. , 1996, “ A Case Study of the Effect of Lubrication and Profile Grinding on Low Rail Roll-Over Derailments at CSX Transportation,” Wear, 191(1–2), pp. 252–255. [CrossRef]
Sundh, J. , Olofsson, U. , and Sundvall, K. , 2008, “ Seizure and Wear Rate Testing of Wheel-Rail Contacts Under Lubricated Conditions Using Pin-on-Disc Methodology,” Wear, 265(9–10), pp.1425–1430. [CrossRef]
Clayton, P. , Danks, D. , and Steele, R. K. , 1989, “ Laboratory Assessment of Lubricants for Wheel/Rail,” Appl. Lubr. Eng., 45(8), pp. 501–506.
Zhao, X. Z. , Zhu, B. L. , and Wang, C. Y. , 1997, “ Laboratory Assessment of Lubricants for Wheel/Rail Lubrication,” J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 13(1), pp. 57–60.
Alp, A. , Erdemir, A. , and Kumar, S. , 1996, “ Energy and Wear Analysis in Lubricated Sliding Contact,” Wear, 191(1–2), pp. 261–264. [CrossRef]
Lim, S. C. , and Ashby, M. F. , 1987, “ Wear Mechanism Maps,” Acta Metall., 35(1), pp. 1–24. [CrossRef]
Gerald, K. , 2013, Sulfur History, Technology, Application and Industry, 2nd ed., ChemTec, Toronto, ON, Canada, pp. 79–144.
Lomboy, G. , Sundararajan, S. , and Wang, K. , 2013, “ Micro-and Macroscale Coefficient of Friction of Cementitious Materials,” Cem. Concr. Res., 54, pp. 21–28. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Illustrations of the contaminants: (a) sand invading the railway, (b) sulfur covering the railway crossing the factory of Tunisian Chemical Group (GCT), (c) agglomerations of mixtures of spilled oil and contaminants within the area of the Mechanical Maintenance Workshop of SNCFT, and (d) a thin layer of lubricant-contaminants mixture on the active surface of the wheels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Illustration of the damage brought to the interface surfaces: (a) wear of the wheel and (b) wear of the rail

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Sample characterization: (a) location of the sample on the rail and (b) dimensions of the sample in mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic diagram of pin-on-disk machine

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Test conditions: (a) test under clean and lubricated condition and (b) test under phosphate contaminant

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Friction curves under various test conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) analyses of the disks inside of the wear track: (a) under clean and dry condition, (b) under sand condition, (c) under phosphate condition, and (d) under cement condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Morphology of the third body of the top of the disks surfaces: (a) clean and dry condition, (b) sand condition, (c) sulfur condition, (d) phosphate condition, and (e) cement condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Typical wear scar for pin samples after tests under different conditions: (a) clean and dry condition, (b) clean and lubricated condition, (c) sand condition, (d) sulfur condition, (e) phosphate condition, and (f) cement condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Friction coefficient of wheel/rail contact under various conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Photos of pins and disks after tribological tests under different conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Wear volume against dissipated energy for wheel/rail contact under various tests

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Energy-wear coefficient α  of pins under various conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Map 1

Railway Network in the south of Tunisia



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