Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
com
Abstract
Coating a surface with a thin layer changes the surface material properties and is an important tool for controlling friction and wear. The
tribological mechanisms, scale effects and parameters influencing the friction and wear of coated surfaces are discussed. The basic friction and
wear mechanisms can be reduced to: friction by adhesion, ploughing and hysteresis and wear by adhesion, abrasion and fatigue combined with
material fracture. The tribochemical and surface physical effects and surface fatigue taking place before material fracture are treated here as pure
surface material modification mechanisms. Scale effects in a tribological contact are illustrated by explaining typical surface roughness related
tribological mechanisms for diamond and DLC coated surfaces. For diamond coatings asperity interlocking effects are important for rough
surfaces, graphitisation is a dominating mechanism for smooth engineering surfaces and hydrogenising of dangling bonds may be crucial for
physically smooth surfaces. For DLC coated surfaces, surface graphitisation is important with rougher surfaces; building up transfer layers and
graphitisation is crucial for smooth engineering surfaces and hydrogenising of dangling bonds can explain superlubricity for physically smooth
surfaces. An analysis of dominating surface parameters such as elastic, plastic and fracture behaviour of the top surface, the coating, the coating/
substrate interface and the substrate in addition to the coating thickness forms the basis for surface modelling. A stress intensity factor analysis of
crack growth shows the importance of considering both modes I, II and III loading, crack spacing and location of crack, while crack orientation,
location in crack field as well as load biaxiality have minor influences. It is shown how surface 3D FEM modelling generates stress and strain
values at the nano level, within bond layers at coating/substrate interfaces and around cracks and forms the basis for better understanding the
origin of wear.
2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Tribology; Coatings; Modelling; Scale effects; Diamond; Diamond-like carbon (DLC)
1. Introduction
Energy saving, environmental, economic and safety aspects in
our society all emphasise the importance of controlling friction
and wear in machinery and devices. Lubrication with oil is the
most common way to control friction and wear. However, the use
of liquid lubricants is often not so desirable for environmental
reasons, problems with keeping it in the contact zone, ageing,
circulating, storing, contamination etc. Surface engineering,
where the surface properties of the moving contacts are changed
1035
Fig. 1. The advanced surface coating deposition techniques offer large possibilities to modify and tailor the top surface mechanical and chemical properties that govern
the friction and wear behaviour in industrial applications.
1036
Fig. 2. The basic friction and wear mechanisms are related to adhesion, ploughing and hysteresis. In the case of wear these contact mechanisms result in material
fracture, detachment and removal.
1037
Fig. 3. The tribological contact process is determined by a number of geometry, material and energy related parameters, including changes that can be described on e.g.
macro- micro- and nano-level and results in friction, wear and changed contact conditions.
Fig. 4. Main parameters influencing the friction in a macro-contact with thin coated surfaces are the hardness of the coating and the substrate, the coating thickness, the
surface roughness and debris in the contact zone. These parameters result in several different contact conditions, each of which can be modelled by a set of dominating
parameters and interaction mechanisms.
1038
Fig. 5. The tribological process has been studied on machinery level, component level, contact level, asperity level and molecular level.
Diamond
coatings
Modified/
doped DLC
Structure
CVD
diamond
a-C
ta-C
a-C:H
ta-C:H
Atomic
structure
Hydrogen
content
in vacuum
in dry N2
in dry air
515%
in humid air
1595% RH
in water
in oil
k in vacuum
k in dry N2
k in dry air
515%
k in humid air
1595%
k in water
k in oil
sp3
a-C:Me
a-C:H:Me
a-C:H:x
Me = W,Ti.
x = Si,O,N,F,
B
sp2 and sp3
N1%
1050%
0.021
0.03
0.080.1
0.30.8
0.60.7
0.6
0.0070.05
0.0010.15
0.0250.22
0.03
0.007
0.03
0.030.15
0.050.23
0.020.5
0.030.4
0.0020.08
0.070.1
0.03
60400
0.010.7
0.06
0.010.06
0.0001400
0.011
0.11
0.00011
0.0020.2
0.15
(0.1)
11000
0.10.2
15
0.0001
0.000010.1
0.010.4
1039
The contact mechanism is dominated by asperity interlocking, asperity breaking and asperity ploughing.
- Diamond coatings sliding in air, water or oil (Fig. 6b) with
micro scale smooth topography, Ra =0.010.1 m, have a
friction coefficient of =0.0010.1 and a wear rate k =0.0001
0.1 10 6 mm3/N m with the lowest and k values measured in
water. A graphite film of the thickness h= 100200 nm is
formed on the contacting surfaces. The contact mechanism is
shear within sp2 hybridised graphitic basal planes, formed by
transformation from sp3 by sliding asperities at high local
temperature and pressure.
- Diamond coatings sliding in air at T b 600 C and nonvacuum (Fig. 6c) nano scale molecularly smooth topography, Ra = 130 nm, have a friction coefficient that is
= 0.030.15 and a wear rate of k = 0.015 10 6 mm3/N
m. The contact mechanism is shear between two flat layers
of single hydrogen atoms at dangling bonds. Only weak van
der Waals bonds between the atoms are present and no
strong chemical bonding is involved.
Corresponding contact conditions at the macro, micro and
nano scales are shown in Fig. 7 for diamond-like carbon coatings.
1040
la f s u
1041
Fig. 10. Abrasive wear is characterised by a hard asperity (a) or debris (b) that
deforms the countersurface in a ductile or brittle way resulting in fracture,
cracking and debris generation.
Fig. 9. Two surfaces attach to each other by adhesion (a) and the movement of
the top surface results in an adhesive force, Fa, that tries to detach material over
an area, A, from one of the surfaces. The detachment may take place (b) at the
top surface, (c) within the coating, (d) at the coating/substrate interface and (e) in
the substrate.
k Vabr =wd s f Kc ; Ki ; Ks ; Hc ; Hi ; Hs ; h
lp f Ec ; Hc ; Es ; Hs ; h
Fig. 11. Fatigue wear is characterised by repeated loading of the coated surface
resulting in cracking at the surface in the coating, at the interface or in the
substrate, followed by fracture, material detachment and debris generation.
1042
1043
Fig. 12. The stress field in a coated surface resulting from a sliding sphere is a result of four loading effects: friction force, geometrical deformations, bulk plasticity
concentration and residual stresses. Illustration (a) shows the loading effects with exaggerated dimensions and deformations and (b) with correct dimension
interrelationships.
Fig. 13. Schematic illustration of the three dimensional finite element mesh. The
mesh sizing is in the range of 0.025100 m and the number of mesh degrees of
freedom is about 500.000.
1044
1045
Fig. 14. Topographical stress-field maps showing first principal stresses on the coating and at the symmetry plane intersection of the steel sample coated with a 2 m
thick TiN coating (E = 300 GPa), a 500 nm hard interface layer (E = 500 GPa) and loaded by a sliding spherical diamond tip. Sliding direction is from left to right. The
values on the colour scale are given as MPa. The stress field at 15 N load and 2.1 mm of sliding is shown.
the loading tip shows large strain due to both elastic and plastic
deformation and it reaches about 40 m down under the surface.
The red tail behind the contact region shows the residual plastic
strain just under the groove and it reaches about 20 m down
under the groove surface.
Fig. 15. Close up of the region just behind the back of the contact zone at the interface plane in Fig. 14.
1046
Fig. 16. Topographical strain-field maps showing equivalent strain on the coating and at the symmetry plane intersection of the steel sample coated with a 2 m thick
TiN coating (E = 300 GPa), a 500 nm hard interface layer (E = 500 GPa) and loaded by a sliding spherical diamond tip. Sliding direction is from left to right. The values
on the colour scale represent the equivalent strain at 15 N load and 2.1 mm of sliding.
between the coating and the substrate are of special interest since
they indicate the break down of the coating/substrate adhesion.
The growth of these lateral cracks result in the formation of larger
Fig. 17. Topographical stress-field maps showing first principal stresses at the symmetry plane intersection of the steel sample coated with a 2 m thick TiN coating
(E = 300 GPa), having a 1 m long lateral crack at the coating/substrate interface and loaded by a sliding spherical diamond tip. Sliding direction is from left to right.
The values on the colour scale represent relative stress at 10 N load and 1.2 mm sliding.
1047
q
2
KE KI2 KII2 1 mKIII
1)
2)
3)
4)
Fig. 19. The effect of different crack growth parameters on normalized stress intensity factor (SIF).
1048
case is provided for reference. Two effects are noted, first how
crack density introduces a differing driving force to variable
density crack fields and second, how center and edge cracks
exhibit a somewhat different driving force dependant on crack
density. For crack fields with a lower density the crack driving
force is higher in comparison to dense crack cases and separate
cracks are relatively independent of each other, i.e. different
cracks have nearly identical crack driving forces. It was noted,
that the crack density is an extremely important parameter in
evaluating the SIF values, the effects being more than meaningful.
Crack location, i.e. whether edge or center cracks are
concerned, has similar effects as with straight cracks under
unidirectional tension. Loading biaxiality had no remarkable
effect on straight scratch bottom cracks, but the differences
become noticeable when angular cracks are concerned. The
differences for the = 5 m crack field are at their maximum of
the order of 35%, the biaxiality effects affect edge and center
crack field cracks much in the same fashion and of the same order
of magnitude. Biaxial loading is seen to have a similar effect as
with the middle crack fields, the overall difference between the
single transversal middle crack being of the order of 4060%.
Different density crack fields are seen to produce relatively field
density insensitive results, whilst differing quite a bit from the
single crack solution, the difference being of the order of 80%.
8. Conclusions
The article discusses the basic friction and wear mechanisms,
scale effects and parameters influencing the friction and wear of
surfaces coated with thin films. This forms the basis for surface
optimisation by modelling, stress simulation and surface fracture
calculations.
It is shown that the basic friction and wear mechanisms can
be reduced to friction by adhesion, ploughing and hysteresis and
wear by adhesion, abrasion and fatigue combined with material
fracture. The tribochemical and surface physical effects and
surface fatigue taking place before material fracture are treated
as pure surface material modification mechanisms.
The scale effects in a tribological contact are illustrated by
explaining typical surface roughness related tribological
mechanisms for diamond and DLC coated surfaces. For
diamond coatings asperity interlocking effects are important
for rough surfaces, graphitisation dominates for smooth
engineering surfaces and hydrogenisation of dangling bonds
may be crucial for physically smooth surfaces. For DLC coated
surfaces surface graphitisation is important with rougher
surfaces, building up transfer layers and graphitisation is crucial
for smooth engineering surfaces and hydrogenising of dangling
bonds can explain superlubricity for physically smooth
surfaces.
An analysis of dominating surface parameters such as elastic,
plastic and fracture behaviour of the top surface, the coating, the
coating/substrate interface and the substrate in addition to the
coating thickness forms the basis for surface modelling. The
dominating parameters depending on the governing basic wear
mechanisms have been identified. Stress simulations locate high
tensile stresses on the top surface behind a sliding spherical tip
1049
[32] G.T. Gao, P.T. Mikulski, G.M. Chatneuf, J.A. Harrison, J. Phys. Chem., B
107 (2003) 11082.
[33] J. Gao, W.D. Luedtke, D. Gourdon, M. Ruths, J.N. Israelachvivli, U.
Landman, J. Phys. Chem., B 108 (2004) 3410.
[34] N. Jennet, R. Jacobs, J. Meneve, Proc. MST Conf.: Adhesion Aspects of
Thin Films, 1516.12, 2003, p. 20.
[35] European Standard, Advanced Technical Ceramics Methods of Tests
for Ceramic Coatings Part 3: Determination of Adhesion and other
Mechanical Failure Modes by Scratch Test, prEN1071-3, 1999, p. 42.
[36] K. Holmberg, Tribol. Finn. J. Tribol. 19 (2000) 24.
[37] S. Bull, Tribol. Int. 30 (1997) 491.
[38] E. Zoestbergen, J. De Hosson, Surf. Eng. 18 (2002) 283.
[39] S. Bull, Surf. Coat. Technol. 50 (1991) 25.
[40] J. von Stebut, R. Rezakhanlou, K. Anoun, H. Michel, G. Gantois, Thin
Solid Films 181 (1989) 555.
[41] P. Hedenquist, M. Olsson, S. Jacobson, S. Hogmark, Surf. Coat. Technol.
41 (1990) 31.
[42] M. Larsson, M. Olsson, P. Hedenquist, S. Hogmark, in: Uppsala
University, Sweden, Dr Thesis by M. Larsson, No. 191/1996.
[43] Y. Wang, S. Hsu, P. Jones, Wear 218 (1998) 96.
[44] S. Liu, Q.J. Wang, Surf. Coat. Technol. 201 (2007) 6470.
[45] S. Liu, Q. Wang, G. Liu, Wear 243 (2000) 101.
[46] F. Beremin, Metall. Trans. 14a (1983) 2277.
[47] K. Holmberg, H. Ronkainen, A. Laukkanen, K. Wallin, A. Erdemir, O.
Eryilmaz, Wear, in press.