Research Papers

Numerical Investigation of Adhesive Wear and Static Friction Based on the Ductile Fracture of Junction

[+] Author and Article Information
Aizhong Wu

School of Mechanical Engineering,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, China

Xi Shi

School of Mechanical Engineering,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, China;
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical Systems and Vibration,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, China
e-mail: xishi@sjtu.edu.cn

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received August 21, 2012; final manuscript received November 21, 2012; accepted manuscript posted November 28, 2012; published online May 31, 2013. Editor: Yonggang Huang.

J. Appl. Mech 80(4), 041032 (May 31, 2013) (10 pages) Paper No: JAM-12-1407; doi: 10.1115/1.4023109 History: Received August 21, 2012; Revised November 21, 2012; Accepted November 28, 2012

Adhesion plays a significant role in the friction and wear in the case where the contact surfaces are continuous and smooth such that roughness-based factors are negligible. Therefore, imposing an external load to overcome the friction is, in essence, a failure process of adhesive junctions. In this work, a finite element model was developed in order to investigate the formation of adhesive wear particles and static friction based on the ductile fracture of junctions. Focusing on the cylindrical contact and the combined contact loading configuration, a modified element deletion method with three empiric fracture criteria was employed and the failed elements satisfying some fracture criterion were used to represent the cracks. Based on the different crack development stages, a qualitative adhesive wear mechanism was summarized. The simulation results indicate that the secondary crack initiated in the pile-up of material possibly accounts for the crack kinking, which is the origin of the flake-like wear particle. Friction behaviors under different loading configurations were investigated and a simple comparison for three different fracture models was presented. It was found that all three models show the same trend of friction decreasing with the increase of normal preload. Where the most conservative Bao–Wierzibicki (BW) fracture model predicts higher friction compared to two other fracture models, the Johnson–Cook (JC) model predicts a lower ductile fracture strain, thus the ductility of the material is relatively underestimated.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Bowden, F. P., and Tabor, D., 1939, “The Area of Contact Between Stationary and Between Moving Surfaces,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 169, pp. 391–413. [CrossRef]
Bowden, F. P., and Leben, L., 1939, “The Nature of Sliding and the Analysis of Friction,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 169, pp. 371–391. [CrossRef]
McFarlane, J. S., and Tabor, D., 1950, “Relation Between Friction and Adhesion,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 202, pp. 244–253. [CrossRef]
Bowden, F. P., and Tabor, D., 1954, Friction and Lubrication of Solids, Clarendon, Oxford, UK.
Bowden, F. P., and Rowe, G. W., 1956, “The Adhesion of Clean Metals,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 233, pp. 429–442. [CrossRef]
Tabor, D., 1959, “Junction Growth in Metallic Friction: The Role of Combined Stresses and Surface Contamination,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 251, pp. 378–393. [CrossRef]
Carpick, R. W., Agrait, N., Ogletree, D. F., and SalmeronM., 1996, “Measurement of Interfacial Shear (Friction) With an Ultrahigh Vacuum Atomic Force Microscope,” J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B, 14(2), pp. 1289–1295. [CrossRef]
Szlufarska, I., Chandross, M., and CarpickR. W., 2008, “Recent Advances in Single-Asperity Nanotribology,” J. Physics D: Appl. Phys., 41(12), pp. 1–39. [CrossRef]
Mindlin, R. D., 1949, “Compliance of Elastic Bodies in Contact,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 16, pp. 259–268.
Chang, W. R., Etsion, I., and Bogy, D. B., 1988, “Static Friction Coefficient Model for Metallic Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol., 110, pp. 57–63. [CrossRef]
Kogut, L., and Etsion, I., 2003, “A Semi-Analytical Solution for the Sliding Inception of a Spherical Contact,” ASME J. Tribol., 125, pp. 499–506. [CrossRef]
Johnson, K. L., 1955, “Surface Interaction Between Elastically Loaded Bodies Under Tangential Forces,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 230, pp. 531–548. [CrossRef]
Courtney-Pratt, J. S., and Eisner, E., 1957, “The Effect of a Tangential Force on the Contact of Metallic Bodies,” Proc. R. Soc. London, 238, pp. 529–550. [CrossRef]
Hills, D. A., and Ashelby, D. W., 1979, “On the Application of Fracture Mechanics to Wear,” Wear, 54, pp. 321–330. [CrossRef]
Suh, N. P., 1973, “The Delamination Theory of Wear,” Wear, 25, pp. 111–135. [CrossRef]
Suh, N. P., 1977, “An Overview of the Delamination Theory of Wear,” Wear, 44, pp. 1–16. [CrossRef]
Jahanmir, S., and Suh, N. P., 1977, “Mechanics of Subsurface Void Nucleation in Delamination Wear,” Wear, 44, pp. 17–38. [CrossRef]
Fleming, J. R., and Suh, N. P., 1977, “Mechanics of Crack Propagation in Delamination Wear,” Wear, 44, pp. 39–56. [CrossRef]
Fleming, J. R., and Suh, N. P., 1977, “The Relationship Between Crack Propagation Rates and Wear Rates,” Wear, 44, pp. 57–64. [CrossRef]
Ko, P. L., Lyer, S. S., Vaughan, H., and Gadala, M., 2001, “Finite Element Modeling of Crack Growth and Wear Particle Formation in Sliding Contact,” Wear, 251, pp. 1265–1278. [CrossRef]
Brizmer, V., Kligerman, Y., and Etsion, I., 2007, “Elastic-Plastic Spherical Contact Under Combined Normal and Tangential Loading in Full Stick,” Tribol. Lett., 25, pp. 61–70. [CrossRef]
Wu, A., Shi, X., and Polycarpou, A. A., 2012, “An Elastic-Plastic Spherical Contact Model Under Combined Normal and Tangential Loading,” Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech., 79, p. 051001. [CrossRef]
Eriten, M., Polycarpou, A. A., and Bergman, L. A., 2010, “Physics-Based Modeling for Partial Slip Behavior of Spherical Contacts,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 47, pp. 2554–2567. [CrossRef]
Gurson, A. L., 1977, “Continuum Theory of Ductile Rupture by Void Nucleation and Growth—Part I: Yield Criteria and Flow Rules for Porous Ductile Media,” ASME J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 44, pp. 1–15. [CrossRef]
Tvergaard, V., 1981, “Influence of Voids on Shear Band Instabilities Under Plane Strain Conditions,” Int. J. Fract., 17, pp. 389–407. [CrossRef]
Tvergaard, V., and Needleman, A., 1984, “Analysis of Cup-Cone Fracture in a Round Tensile Bar,” Acta Metall., 32, pp. 157–169. [CrossRef]
Besson, J., Steglich, D., and Brocks, W., 2001, “Modeling of Crack Growth in Round Bars and Plane Strain Specimens,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 38, pp. 8259–8284. [CrossRef]
Bao, Y., and Wierzbicki, T., 2004, “On Fracture Locus in the Equivalent Strain and Stress Triaxiality Space,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., 46(81), pp. 81–98. [CrossRef]
Bao, Y., and Wierzbicki, T., 2004, “A Comparative Study on Various Ductile Crack Formation Criteria,” ASME J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 126, pp. 314–324. [CrossRef]
Eringen, A. C., 1978, “Line Crack Subjected to Shear,” Int. J. Fract., 14, pp. 367–379. [CrossRef]
Bardet, J. P., 1990, “Lode Dependences for Isotropic Pressure-Sensitive Elastoplastic Materials,” Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech., 57, pp. 498–506. [CrossRef]
Wierzbicki, T., Bao, Y., Lee, Y. W., and Bai, Y., 2005, “Calibration and Evaluation of Seven Fracture Models,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., 47, pp. 719–743. [CrossRef]
Borvik, T., Langseth, M., Hopperstad, O. S., and Malo, K. A., 1999, “Ballistic Penetration of Steel Plates,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 22, pp. 855–886. [CrossRef]
Nahshon, K., Pontin, M. G., Evans, A. G., Hutchinson, J. W., and Zok, F. W., 2007, “Dynamic Shear Rupture of Steel Plates,” J. Mech. Mater. Struct., 2(10), pp. 2049–2066. [CrossRef]
ABAQUS, 2010, “User's Manual and Theory Manual,” Hibbit, Karlsson & Sorenson, Providence, RI, V6.10.
Johnson, K. L., 1985, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Archard, J. F., 1953, “Contact and Rubbing of Flat Surfaces,” J. Appl. Phys., 24, pp. 981–988. [CrossRef]
Archard, J. F., and Hirst, W., 1958, “The Wear of Materials Under Unlubricated Conditions,” Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. A, 236, pp. 397–410. [CrossRef]
Erdogen, F., and Sih, G. C., 1963, “On the Crack Extension in Plates Under Plane Loading and Transverse Shear,” ASME J. Basic Eng., 85, pp. 519–527. [CrossRef]
McClintock, F. A., 1968, “A Criterion of Ductile Fracture by the Growth of Holes,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 35, pp. 363–371. [CrossRef]
Rice, J. R., and Tracey, D. M., 1969, “On the Ductile Enlargement of Voids in Triaxial Stress Fields,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 17, pp. 201–217. [CrossRef]
Johnson, G. R., and Cook, W. H., 1985, “Fracture Characteristics of Three Metals Subjected to Various Strains, Strain Rates, Temperatures and Pressures,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 21(1), pp. 31–48. [CrossRef]
Johnson, G. R., and Holmquist, T. J., 1989, “Test Data and Computational Strength and Fracture Model Constants for 23 Materials Subjected to Large Strain, High Strain Rates, and High Temperature,” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Technical Report No. LA-11463-MS.
Hooputra, H., Gese, H., Dell, H., and Werner, H., 2004, “A Comprehensive Failure Model for Crashworthiness Simulation of Aluminum Extrusions,” Int. J. Crashworthiness, 9(5), pp. 449–464. [CrossRef]
Xue, L., 2007, “Damage Accumulation and Fracture Initiation in Uncracked Ductile Solids Subject to Triaxial Loading,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 44, pp. 5163–5181. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) Spherical contact under normal loading, and (b) combined normal and tangential loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Finite element model for 2D cylindrical contact

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Loading rate dependent normal contact parameter: (a) dimensionless reaction force, and (b) dimensionless contact pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

(a) Dimensionless tangential force versus dimensionless tangential displacement under different tangential loading rates, and (b) the ratio between the kinetic energy (ALLKE) and the strain energy (ALLSE) during tangential loading with a loading rate of 0.1 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Development of the fracture initiation criterion (the SBL model) during tangential loading (ω = 3.5ωc)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Simulated wear particle, kinked crack with the (a) SBL model, (b) JC model, and (c) BW model (ω = 3.5ωc)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Formation of a flake-like wear particle under combined normal and tangential loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Fracture initiation criterion for a low normal preload of 1ωc: (a) the BW model, (b) the SBL model, and (c) the JC model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Sliding inception characterized by the damage energy dissipation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Dimensionless tangential force versus dimensionless tangential displacement: (a) ω = 3.5ωc, and (b) ω = 1ωc

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Predicted static friction coefficient with different fracture criteria




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