0
Research Papers: Coatings and Solid Lubricants

General Procedure for Selecting and Testing Materials and Coatings in Response to a Tribological Problem

[+] Author and Article Information
Julie Pellier

Laboratoire Génie de Production (LGP),
Université de Toulouse,
INP-ENIT,
47, Avenue d'Azereix,
B.P. 1629,
Tarbes Cedex 65016, France

Jean-Yves Paris

Laboratoire Génie de Production (LGP),
Université de Toulouse,
INP-ENIT,
47, Avenue d'Azereix,
B.P. 1629,
Tarbes Cedex 65016, France
e-mail: jean-yves.paris@enit.fr

Jean Denape

Laboratoire Génie de Production (LGP),
Université de Toulouse,
INP-ENIT,
47, Avenue d'Azereix, B.P. 1629,
Tarbes Cedex 65016, France
e-mail: jean.denape@enit.fr

Joël Bry

AEREM,
18 Avenue du Louron,
Colomiers 31770, France
e-mail: joel.bry@aerem.fr

Vincent Genissieux

PULSWER S.A.,
8 Boulevard Roger Salengro,
Grenoble 38100, France
e-mail: vincent.genissieux@pulswer.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received October 2, 2015; final manuscript received July 21, 2016; published online November 22, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Sinan Muftu.

J. Tribol 139(3), 031302 (Nov 22, 2016) (12 pages) Paper No: TRIB-15-1359; doi: 10.1115/1.4034331 History: Received October 02, 2015; Revised July 21, 2016

In general, there is no available tool which can help engineers and researchers to choose optimal materials for friction pairs. This article proposes a dual approach for the choice of materials and coatings. First, in order to select the initial materials, a selection matrix helps to rank a reduced number of solutions to a tribological problem with the aim of building the most credible and viable experimental campaign. Then, this experimental phase is necessary for final selection taking into account tribological properties. The final step involves experimental validation on a prototype and on the real device. This methodology was applied on the complex geometry of an air compressor under severe friction conditions. Technical specifications are defined by a functional analysis of the tribological system. Then, the selection matrix is created on the basis of empirical rules and bibliographic data, including predetermined material/coating properties, process considerations, and tribological features, in accordance with the functional analysis. As an example, four potential solutions were tested: diamondlike carbon (DLC) and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) coatings on 15-5PH stainless steel and two composites, reinforced PTFE and polyetheretherketone (PEEK). Experimental results were then compared to expected values from the specifications. The performance of each solution was highlighted by a graphic radar representation. The selection matrix gave the DLC coatings as one of the best solutions, and experimental tests confirmed this choice while allowing to refine the preselected solutions. This result shows that the selection matrix gives a reliable choice of optimal solutions.

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

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Problem summary: How to find a reduced number of solutions in response to a tribological problem?

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) Air compressor where a deformable four-piston kinematic chain rotor rotates inside a fixed ovoid shape stator leading to the volume variation of compression/admission chambers and (b) modeling of the contact geometry which is a linear contact

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Graphic radar drawn from the scores according to the selection matrix: (a) for steel + DLC coating (homogeneous solution) and (b) for polymer (cylindrical bar) against steel (cylindrical-shaped). Dotted lines separate the three stages.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

General view of the specific tribometer specially designed for this study (plan-on-plan configuration on the left side and linear configuration of contact on the right part)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Contact temperature, T, as a function of time and for the four selected materials (sliding conditions: 150 °C, 8 m s−1, 6 MPa for PTFE + mica and reinforced PEEK, and 15 MPa for DLC and PTFE coatings)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Coefficient of friction, μ, as a function of time for the four selected materials. (a) DLC and PTFE coatings and (b) PTFE + mica and reinforced PEEK (sliding conditions: 150 °C, 8 m s−1, 6 MPa for PTFE + mica and reinforced PEEK, and 15 MPa for DLC and PTFE coatings).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Two-dimensional (2D) profile of the worn zone of the cylindrical-shaped sample

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) Three-dimensional view of a worn cylindrical bar and (b) method for calculation of total wear volume of the cylindrical bar

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Total wear (height and volume) for the four selected materials (sliding conditions: 150 °C, 8 m s−1, 6 MPa for PTFE + mica and reinforced PEEK, and 15 MPa for DLC and PTFE coatings)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Wear rate, k, as a function of coefficient of friction for tested solutions (sliding conditions: 150 °C and 8 m s−1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

SEM analysis of DLC coating on cylindrical bar: (a) image and (b) EDX spectrum of the surface before friction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

SEM analysis of DLC coating on cylindrical bar: (a) image and (b) EDX profile of the worn zone

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

SEM analysis of PTFE-based coating on cylindrical bar: (a) image and (b) EDX spectrum before friction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

SEM analysis of PTFE-based coating on cylindrical bar: (a) image and (b) EDX profile of the worn zone

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

SEM images of worn zone of cylindrical bar after 2 h of friction (sliding conditions: 150 °C, 8 m s−1, and 15 MPa) for (a) DLC coating against DLC coating and (b) PTFE-based coating against PTFE-based coating

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

SEM images after 2 h of friction of (a) cylindrical bar of reinforced PEEK (worn zone at the left of image) and (b) 15-5PH steel cylindrical-shaped sample (sliding conditions: 150 °C, 8 m s−1, and 6 MPa)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

SEM images after 2 h of friction of (a) cylindrical bar of PTFE + mica (worn zone at the left of image) and (b) 15-5PH steel cylindrical-shaped sample (sliding conditions: 150 °C, 8 m s−1, and 6 MPa)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Graphic radar representation of experimental results in comparison with expected values from specifications, applied to (a) bulk materials and (b) coatings (sliding conditions: 150 °C and 8 m s−1)

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