Research Papers: Contact Mechanics

A Simplified Version of Persson's Multiscale Theory for Rubber Friction Due to Viscoelastic Losses

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Ciavarella

Center of Excellence in
Computational Mechanics,
Politecnico di BARI,
Viale Gentile 182,
Bari 70126, Italy
e-mail: Mciava@poliba.it

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received February 1, 2017; final manuscript received April 27, 2017; published online August 2, 2017. Assoc. Editor: James R. Barber.

J. Tribol 140(1), 011403 (Aug 02, 2017) (6 pages) Paper No: TRIB-17-1042; doi: 10.1115/1.4036917 History: Received February 01, 2017; Revised April 27, 2017

We show that the full multiscale Persson's theory for rubber friction due to viscoelastic losses can be approximated extremely closely to simpler models, like that suggested by Persson in 1998 and similarly by Popov in his 2010 book (but notice that we do not make any use of the so-called “Method of Dimensionality Reduction” (MDR)), so it is essentially a single scale model at the so-called large wavevector cutoff. The dependence on the entire spectrum of roughness is therefore only confusing, at least for range of fractal dimensions of interest D2.2, and we confirm this with actual exact calculations and reference to recent data of Lorenz et al. Moreover, we discuss the critical assumption of the choice of the “free parameter” best fit truncation cutoff.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Ciavarella, M. , Demelio, G. , Barber, J. R. , and Jang, Y. H. , 2000, “ Linear Elastic Contact of the Weierstrass Profile,” Proc. R. Soc. London A, 456(1994), pp. 387–405. [CrossRef]
Persson, B. N. , 2001, “ Theory of Rubber Friction and Contact Mechanics,” J. Chem. Phys., 115(8), pp. 3840–3861. [CrossRef]
Persson, B. N. J. , Albohr, O. , Tartaglino, U. , Volokitin, A. I. , and Tosatti, E. , 2005, “ On the Nature of Surface Roughness With Application to Contact Mechanics, Sealing, Rubber Friction and Adhesion,” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, 17(1), pp. R1–R62. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Greenwood, J. A. , and Williamson, J. B. P. , 1966, “ Contact of Nominally Flat Surfaces,” Proc. R. Soc. London A, 295(1442), pp. 300–319. [CrossRef]
Putignano, C. , Afferrante, L. , Carbone, G. , and Demelio, G. , 2012, “ A New Efficient Numerical Method for Contact Mechanics of Rough Surfaces,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 49(2), pp. 338–343. [CrossRef]
Lorenz, B. , Oh, Y. R. , Nam, S. K. , Jeon, S. H. , and Persson, B. N. J. , 2015, “ Rubber Friction on Road Surfaces: Experiment and Theory for Low Sliding Speeds,” J. Chem. Phys., 142(19), p. 194701. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Carbone, G. , and Putignano, C. , 2014, “ Rough Viscoelastic Sliding Contact: Theory and Experiments,” Phys. Rev. E, 89(3), p. 032408. [CrossRef]
Persson, B. N. , 1998, “ On the Theory of Rubber Friction,” Surf. Sci., 401(3), pp. 445–454. [CrossRef]
Williams, M. L. , Landel, R. F. , and Ferry, J. D. , 1955, “ The Temperature Dependence of Relaxation Mechanisms in Amorphous Polymers and Other Glass-Forming Liquids,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 77(14), pp. 3701–3707. [CrossRef]
Grosch, K. A. , 1963, “ The Relation Between the Friction and Visco-Elastic Properties of Rubber,” Proc. R. Soc. London A, 274(1356), pp. 21–39. [CrossRef]
Grosch, K. A. , 1996, “ The Rolling Resistance, Wear and Traction Properties of Tread Compounds,” Rubber Chem. Technol., 69(3), pp. 495–568. [CrossRef]
Heinrich, G. , 1997, “ Hysteresis Friction of Sliding Rubbers on Rough and Fractal Surfaces,” Rubber Chem. Technol., 70(1), pp. 1–14. [CrossRef]
Popov, V. , 2010, Contact Mechanics and Friction: Physical Principles and Applications, Springer Science & Business Media, New York. [CrossRef]
Popov, V. , and Hess, M. , 2015, Method of Dimensionality Reduction in Contact Mechanics and Friction, Springer, New York. [CrossRef]
Scaraggi, M. , and Persson, B. N. J. , 2015, “ Friction and Universal Contact Area Law for Randomly Rough Viscoelastic Contacts,” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, 27(10), p. 105102. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Popov, V. L. , Dimaki, A. , Psakhie, S. , and Popov, M. , 2015, “ On the Role of Scales in Contact Mechanics and Friction Between Elastomers and Randomly Rough Self-Affine Surfaces,” Sci. Rep., 5(1), p. 11139. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Popov, V. L. , and Heß, M. , 2015, Method of Dimensionality Reduction in Contact Mechanics and Friction, Springer, Berlin. [CrossRef]
Lyashenko, I. A. , Pastewka, L. , and Persson, B. N. J. , 2013, “ Comment on ‘Friction Between a Viscoelastic Body and a Rigid Surface With Random Self-Affine Roughness’,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 111(18), p. 189401. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Pastewka, L. , and Robbins, M. O. , 2014, “ Contact Between Rough Surfaces and a Criterion for Macroscopic Adhesion,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 111(9), pp. 3298–3303. [CrossRef]
Kluppel, M. , and Heinrich, G. , 2000, “ Rubber Friction on Self-Affine Road Tracks,” Rubber Chem. Technol., 73(4), pp. 578–606. [CrossRef]
Heinrich, G. , and Klüppel, M. , 2008, “ Rubber Friction, Tread Deformation and Tire Traction,” Wear, 265(7), pp. 1052–1060. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Adapted from Persson's [8] Fig. 3 in turn using Grosch [10] results on silicon carbide paper (solid curve) and a smooth glass surface (dashed curve)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Real (solid blue) and imaginary (solid black) parts of the viscoelastic modulus in Ref. [6] rubber compound C, together with power-law approximations (dashed lines) at low frequencies. ImE=100.075f0.07 and ReE=101.075f0.05.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

A comparison of our approximate solution (12)R1appr/π≃ (ImE(q1v))/|E(q1v)| (solid lines) for the viscoelastic moduli ratio (10)R1/π (dashed lines). The data are for decreasing velocities going from left to right (black, blue, and red line), v=1,0.1,0.01 m/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Increase of friction coefficient with cutoff wavevector q1 in Ref. [6] (red dots), against our approximation (blue solid line) (16)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Increase of friction coefficient with speed with different choices of wavevector q1. The black line is the “best fit” with pure hysteresis loss contribution, which corresponds to a cutoff of hrms′≃3.5, whereas the solid blue line is the “theoretical limit” at atomic scale suggested by Lorenz et al. [6].



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