Elsevier

Tribology International

Volume 38, Issue 10, October 2005, Pages 863-870
Tribology International

Wear and wear particles—some fundamentals

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2005.03.007Get rights and content

Abstract

Each of the various processes by which material can be lost from a surface in service leaves its fingerprint both in the topography of the worn surface and in the size, shape and number of the particles which make up the wear debris. To use debris examination as a diagnostic aid in assessing the health of operating plant, which may contain many tribological contacts, requires not only careful and standardised procedures for debris extraction and observation but also an appreciation of the mechanisms by which wear occurs and the regimes in which each of the contacts of interest operates when displayed on an appropriate operational map.

Introduction

The phenomenon of wear was given a formal definition in 1968 by the OECD as ‘the progressive loss of material from the operating surface of a body occurring as a result of relative motion at its surface’ [1]. This might today be thought a slightly curious definition as there is no mention of what it is that is moving relative to the surface in question, or indeed, of the need for the transmission of some contact force between the wearing surface and its counter-face—even if this transmission is through a low-strength, intermediate film such as that formed by a lubricant. Notwithstanding this difficulty, common usage of the term wear implies some mechanical action on the wearing surface—so that, for example, corrosion per se would not be classified as a wear mechanism whereas corrosive wear involving some form of mechanical interaction in a corrosive environment certainly would be.

Having divided wear mechanisms into two principal categories, the first adequately described as ‘mechanical wear’ and a second covering those situations where there is an additional element of active chemistry (typically oxidation and/or corrosion) it is temping to subdivide the former large category into some number of smaller classes—the extent of this sub-division being to some extent a function of the enthusiasm of the author. Fig. 1 illustrates a typical set of mechanical wear processes grouped under four general headings and arranged, within each of these, in increasing order of severity. All these mechanisms have the capability of removing material from the surface in question though the rates of degradation, measured as rates of loss of mass per unit time, can vary over many orders of magnitude. All can, and often do, operate in the presence of a lubricant, very often a mineral oil, whose function may be both to limit friction and to convect away heat so reducing the severity of thermal stresses or distortions in vital machine elements. Mechanisms of wear are not mutually exclusive and in some complex pieces of machinery several may be operating simultaneously at different sites and different internal contacts. Techniques of wear debris analysis are based on the hypothesis that the morphology of debris particles examined in a representative sample of the lubricant circulating through the machine can indicate which is the most active operating wear mechanism and, furthermore, that changes in the concentration of such particles within the circulating fluid will be indicative of changes in the state of surfaces of these potentially critical components [2], [3]. A reduction in the rate of particle production and detection in the early stages of device operation is associated with the running-in process as a benign and acceptable wear regime is established; whereas a later increase in the rate of particle concentration may herald a transition to a higher wear regime as the surfaces wear out—perhaps with catastrophic results.

Surveys of industrial wear problems often highlight abrasion as being of particular concern. Within the general area of abrasive wear a distinction is often made between so-called two-body abrasion when material is removed or displaced from the softer surface by the asperities or protuberances on the harder surface and three-body abrasion when the damage is done by some form of free, discrete abrasive particles rolling and sliding between the opposing surfaces of the contact: often such particles are contaminants form the outside environment. In practice, the distinction between the two sub-divisions may be somewhat blurred, as if the free particles become lodged in one of the bearing surfaces the situation either temporarily, or even permanently, becomes one of two-body abrasion. So-called open three body abrasion occurs when the two surfaces are sufficiently far apart to be effectively independent of one another; for example, this is the type of wear to which earth moving equipment is subject when soil particles abrade the shovel faces. If the particle velocities are large, say more than a few m/s, perhaps because they are carried in a gas stream or entrained in a flow of liquid, the wear process becomes one of erosion.

Section snippets

The modelling and the mapping of mechanical wear

No simple and universal model is applicable to all situations. In the dry, unlubricated or perhaps marginally lubricated sliding of a pair of, usually dissimilar, loaded surfaces, i.e. two-body conditions, the rate of surface degradation or damage of each depends (at least) on the factors of Table 1.

When a third body is present at the interface wear may be inhibited, though not entirely eliminated, for example if the third body is a lubricant or low shear strength film with a thickness

Mapping mechanical wear processes

The purposes of laboratory testing [8] can range from very specific ‘trouble-shooting’, i.e. the entirely empirical solution of operating problems with an existing machine, to much more general and fundamental studies of the micro-mechanics and materials science aspects of the physical processes operating during the phenomenon of wear itself.

Wear rates in successfully operating industrial equipment can vary enormously, from very high values under particularly aggressive conditions, to very low

Polymers and ceramics

The common glassy polymers, such as poly-methylmethacrylate, poly-carbonate and poly-styrene, are not often used as bearing materials but rather as optical windows and in this application their resistance to abrasive wear or scratch resistance is if obvious interest. Work, principally with PMMA, has demonstrated that damage evolves through a range of severity as the imposed strain is increased: visco-elastic smoothing or ironing is followed by plastic or visco-plastic grooving, then extensive

Corrosive wear and erosion–corrosion maps

Corrosive wear might be defined as covering those situations in which chemical or electro-chemical reaction with the environment predominate over mechanical interactions. However, this is not really a very satisfactory definition as the effects of mechanical wear and chemical wear may be synergistic and result in rates of material loss and surface degradation much greater than a simple sum of the two mechanisms observed independently. Any definition of corrosive wear will encompass the

Conclusions

When material is lost from a loaded surface either entirely or principally through some form of mechanical interaction the concentration, size and shape of the debris particles carry important information about the state of surfaces from which they were generated and thus, by implication, the potential life of the contact and of the equipment of which this forms a part. The full exploitation of this information and the ability to be able to predict quantitatively the future performance or life

References (19)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (195)

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text