SAE TECHNICAL

PAPER SERIES

2002-01-0927

Analysis of Brake Caliper Seal-Groove Design

Okon D. Anwana, Hao Cai and H. T. Chang
Delphi Automotive Systems

SAE 2002 World Congress

Detroit, Michigan
March 4-7, 2002
400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A.

Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760

The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAEs consent that copies of the
paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the condition,
however, that the copier pay a per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. Operations
Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sections 107 or
108 of the U.S. Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as copying for
general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works, or for
resale.
Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.
To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in
other works, contact the SAE Publications Group.

All SAE papers, standards, and selected

books are abstracted and indexed in the
Global Mobility Database

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.
ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2002 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE Publications Group.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA

2002-01-0927

Analysis of Brake Caliper Seal-Groove Design

Okon D. Anwana, Hao Cai and H. T. Chang
Delphi Automotive Systems

Copyright 2002 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

ABSTRACT
It is well known that the design of the seal groove
assembly in the brake caliper greatly influences the
braking performance. The rubber seal performs the dual
function of sealing the piston bore and retracting the
caliper piston after a brake apply. However, the seal
function is affected by the configuration of the seal
groove, as well as the friction at the piston/seal and
groove/seal interfaces. The material properties of the
rubber seal are also important design parameters.
Issues such as fluid displacement, piston retraction,
piston sliding force, and brake drag are some of the
critical brake performance parameters that must be
considered in every caliper seal-groove design.
Presently, the brake caliper seal groove design is still
based on empirical rules established mainly from past
experience and its performance is achieved through
prototype testing. Indeed, an analytical model that offers
some predictive estimate of the seal groove
contributions to the braking performance is needed.
This will enhance the optimization of the seal groove
design, reduce the need for product prototyping and
minimize costs. In this paper, we attempt to identify the
critical design parameters in the seal/seal groove
assembly and quantify their impact on the brake
performance parameters.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
A typical disc brake system is comprised of a caliper
housing, piston, seal, and shoe with linings (Fig. 1).
During brake application, the apply system generates
fluid pressure that pushes the piston towards the shoe
with lining, forcing the shoe with lining to rub against the
rotor, and generating the braking torque to stop the
vehicle.
In addition to the braking output, disc brake engineers
face the challenge of meeting the strict performance
requirements established by the customer, such as fluid
displacement and drag torque. Displacement is the
additional volume of brake fluid needed for the caliper to

achieve a certain pressure during brake apply.

Higher displacement means longer piston travel and
consequently more brake pedal travel and slower
response of the caliper.
Groove Seal
Caliper housing
Brake Fluid
piston
Rotor
Shoe & Lining

Fig. 1 Schematic of the components of disc brake

system.
Drag is the residual torque on the rotor after brake has
been released. High drag not only affects lining life, it
also increases fuel consumption and causes energy
loss. Sometimes, design changes are needed late in the
caliper product development cycle to meet the desired
performance requirements (such as to achieve the
matching retraction characteristics for the seal with
system compliance). In such instance, the more timely
and cost effective design option is to modify the seal
groove design.
The rubber seal is designed to perform dual functions of
sealing the piston bore during brake apply and retracting
the caliper piston at brake release. The performance of
the seal is influenced by the configuration of the seal
groove, the seal material properties, as well as friction at
the piston/seal and groove/seal interfaces. Issues such
as fluid displacement, piston retraction, piston sliding
force, and brake drag are some of the critical brake
performance parameters that must be considered in
every caliper seal-groove design [1, 2]. The need to
increase piston retraction (thereby reducing drag) often
conflicts with the requirement to reduce piston travel (i.e.
reducing displacement) during brake application. This is
one of the major challenges in the seal-groove design.
Presently, brake engineers rely on prototype testing and

empirical rules for seal groove design [3, 7]. These

empirical rules are usually limited to a few design
parameters and cannot be reliably applied to predict the
seal behaviour in a quantitative sense. Indeed, a
quantitative measure that offers some predictive
estimate of the seal groove contributions to the braking
performance is needed.
There is very limited published information regarding the
use of math-based approaches for the seal groove
design. A number of studies on the rubber material
properties for seal applications have been reported [2, 5,
6], as well as experimental estimates of friction effects in
the caliper bore and piston [8]. Analysis of the boot seal
using the finite element method has been documented
[9]. One attempt at math-based design of the seal
groove used the Taguchi approach for statistical
evaluation of seal groove design parameters [11].
Additionally, the capabilities of commercial analysis
software codes for rubber analysis have been reviewed
that include estimates of the load-displacement
relationship for a given seal groove design [4]. However,
none of these studies went further to establish the
critical link between the response of the rubber seal
within the prescribed groove boundaries and the
expected performance of the seal groove design.
In this paper, we attempt to quantify the critical design
parameters in the seal/seal-groove assembly and
evaluate their impact on some of the brake performance
parameters. We note that the deformation of the seal in
the seal groove assembly during brake application is
governed by a set of design parameters that can be
broadly classified as follows:

Material parameters time-dependent, non-linear

material properties that govern the deformation of
the rubber seal material, and consequently the
braking performance.

Groove geometry geometric parameters that

prescribe the kinematic boundaries of the seal
deformation.

Friction parameters which defines the resistance

to seal sliding at its interfaces with the caliper piston
and seal groove.

brake application, it would be impossible to adequately

address all the design parameters within the limited
pages of this paper. Since the seal groove geometry is
most susceptible to design modification of all the design
parameters, we take the incremental step of limiting the
presentation in this paper to the design variations in the
seal groove geometry. Studies of design variations in
the seal material and friction will be presented in later
publications. The understanding gained from this effort
will not only enhance the seal-groove design
optimization, but will also reduce product prototype
testing and development lead-time. Note that product
prototyping requires weeks of laboratory and field tests.
The use analysis to examine and/or predict the effect of
the seal groove geometry on the brake performance
takes only a few hours. Thus the use of an analytical
approach to reduce product prototyping can save weeks
in product development cycle.
.

2.0 SEAL GROOVE ANALYSIS

2.1 SEAL GROOVE ASSEMBLY
A seal groove assembly has three main components rubber seal, piston and caliper groove. Fig. 2 shows the
cross-section of the seal groove assembly components
in the undeformed state, in which x denotes the radial
direction and y denotes the axial direction.

Piston

Brake
Apply
Direction
y

Surface contact parameters - describes the nonlinear contact behaviour of the seal at its interfaces
with the seal groove as well as with the piston.

Temperature and environmental parameters

time, temperature, and service conditions that affect
the seal rubber material behaviour, and
consequently the braking performance.

Given the complex interaction of these design

parameters in the seal/seal groove assembly during

Seal
Rubber

Seal Groove
Contour

Fig. 2 Seal groove components in the Undeformed

State.
Various configurations of the seal groove exist in the
industry, but the representative shape shown in Figure 2
captures the characteristic design features of a caliper
seal groove. The characteristic features of the groove
configuration include seal groove diameter, front angle,
bottom angle, corner break, and groove width (Fig. 3).
These features coupled with the piston diameter and
seal dimensions uniquely define the seal groove
assembly. By design, the seal outer diameter is larger
than the groove outer diameter. Hence the rubber seal
is squeezed between the groove and the caliper piston

when assembled. Rubber squeeze in the seal groove

assembly and its deformation during brake apply are
critical parameters for evaluating seal performance and
piston retraction. We now consider the analytical
approach to estimating these parameters.
Groove Inner
Diameter (Di)
Bottom
Angle

Groove
Width

Front
Angle
Corner
Break
Groove Outer
Diameter (Dg)

Fig. 3 Caliper seal-groove design features and

dimensions
2.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION -THE SEAL GROOVE
ANALYSIS
To study the effect of seal groove geometry on brake
performance, we selected a seal of known material and
configuration. A nomogram of the seal material
properties had been established for a range of
temperatures (-400F to 2300F), frequency and load rates
[2]. Additionally, appropriate material constitutive
relations were determined based on the results of the
material tests. From friction tests performed at the
rubber seal interface with the piston material surface,
Coulomb friction laws were developed both for the dry
and lubricated contact conditions. As expected, the
coefficient of friction was lower under lubricated
conditions than under dry contact conditions for the
same loading conditions. Hence lubricated conditions in
the seal groove assembly can be simulated analytically
by using lower friction coefficients as determined from
tests. Details on the friction study will be released in due
time. The temperature was set at room temperature
(under ambient conditions). By fixing the seal material,
seal geometry, the lubricant, piston material and
geometry, we implicitly standardize the material, friction,
contact and environmental design parameters. Under
such considerations, one can make judicious changes in
seal groove geometry (i.e. in the geometry parameters)
and monitor their effects on the braking performance
under room temperature conditions. The modeling
approach used for finite element analysis (FEA) of the
seal groove assembly is described in the next section.

2.3

FEA MODEL

An axisymmetric FE model of the seal groove assembly

components was developed in which the seal groove
and piston were considered to be rigid. The rubber seal
material was modeled as hyperelastic and viscoelastic.
A hyperelastic material exhibits non-linear, large strain,
and elastic deformation when loaded. Viscoelasticity
describes the time-dependent as well as temperaturedependent changes in material properties under load.
These material descriptions are consistent with the
mechanical behavior of the seal rubber material
observed from tests [2]. In this analysis, the second
order Ogden hyperelastic model was used while the
material viscoelastic behavior was described using the
Prony series. Assuming Coulomb friction law, a static
friction coefficient of 1 was used to model the friction
contact between the rubber seal and the groove. A lower
static friction coefficient of 2 was assumed at the
piston/rubber interface to account for the effect of piston
lubrication. To capture the pressure loading during a
brake application, the fluid space in the caliper piston
was modeled as fluid cavity with the hydrostatic
pressure as the only degree of freedom. The braking
load was applied in the form of pressure. But where
analysis convergence was not feasible with pressure
loading, the brake apply was implemented as a
concentrated force on the piston. For simplicity, an
infinitely-rigid caliper housing was assumed, hence the
spring-back force from the caliper housing was not
considered. Analysis was performed using the Abaqus
Standard commercial finite element program i.e. the
implicit integration scheme was employed in the
analysis.
The analysis proceeded as follows. First, the seal
groove assembly process was analyzed. During this
process, the rubber seal was squeezed from its
undeformed configuration into the prescribed boundaries
of the groove and caliper piston (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 Seal rubber deformation at seal groove assembly

(Groove with 10deg front angle, 0.3mm corner break
and 59.53mm groove diameter).

In the assembled position, the seal rubber is subjected

to normal force Fn, a tangential force Ft, and moment.
The magnitude of the normal force (Fn) at the
piston/seal interface is a measure of rubber squeeze in
the seal assembly. Piston sliding occurs when the
tangential force (Ft) is exceeded during brake
application.
The second step in the analysis involved the relaxation
of the seal rubber in the assembled position assuming
linear viscoelasticity. Following this, the brake apply
sequence was simulated by applying the fluid pressure
at a specified flow rate. Predictions on piston travel as
well as rubber deformation during brake apply (Fig. 5)
were obtained. Note that the extent to which the rubber
seal extrudes into the corner break (at the front end)
during brake application depends on the friction between
the rubber seal and the piston as well as the front angle
and corner break geometry.

Contour plots of the displacement and strain energy

distribution in the seal groove assembly are shown in
Figs. 6 and 7.

Fig. 6: Displacement Distribution in the seal assembly

Fig. 7 Strain Energy Distribution in the seal assembly

Fn
Ft
Seal/Piston

Apply End

Fig. 5 Seal rubber deformation at brake apply (Groove

with 10deg front angle, 0.3mm corner break and
59.53mm groove diameter).

Similar results for rubber seal deformation at brake apply

are shown in Figs. 8 and 9.

Thirdly, the brake release was analyzed through

instantaneous release of applied pressure. Estimates of
the piston retraction, relative to the assembled position
were established. It is worth noting that, after brake
release, the rubber retracts but not necessarily to its
assembled position. Depending on the effects of friction
and groove configuration, slippage between rubber seal
and the piston can occur during the apply-and-release
processes. By comparing the piston and rubber seal
positions before, during, and after brake application, we
can estimate the piston travel (or displacement) and
retraction, which is a key contributor to brake drag.
Fig 8 Rubber seal displacement at brake apply

3.1 SEAL SQUEEZE FORCE MAGNITUDE

Fig. 9 Strain Energy Distribution in the seal rubber at

brake apply

For comparative evaluation of the effect of seal groove

parameters on rubber squeeze, we use a seal groove
with 6.5 degrees front angle, 0.3mm corner break, and
59.53mm outer groove diameter as the base design. Let
the rubber squeeze force be Fn for the base groove
design. If a design change is made to the base groove
design (for example, if the front angle is increased from
6.5 degrees to 10 degrees), the rubber squeeze force
changes to a new value Fs. We can use the ratio of
these forces as a measure of the change in the squeeze
force associated with the design change.
Change in squeeze Force = Fs/Fn

3.0 EVALUATION OF SEAL GROOVE DESIGN

PARAMETERS
In evaluating the effect of changes in groove geometry
on caliper seal performance, we specifically
concentrated on the geometric features (such as groove
front angle, corner break size, groove outer diameter)
that most influence piston retraction using a fixed piston
diameter and seal dimensions. Incremental changes in
the groove configuration were made. Table 3.1
summarizes the range of design variables considered in
this study. (The reader is referred to Fig. 3 for
illustration of the seal-groove design variables).
Variations in seal groove width were also studied, but
the groove width parameter was found to be an
insignificant factor in piston retraction for the range of
groove designs considered in this study. Prototype
models were made and tested for each design
configuration analyzed. Some of the test results are
summarized in Section 4.0.

Table 3.1 Variations in Seal Groove Configuration

(Fixed Housing Caliper Groove Design)

Front Angle (degrees)

6.5

10.0

14.0

Corner
Break (mm)

Groove
Diameter
(mm)

0.3

59.53

0.7

59.53

0.3

59.69

0.7

59.69

Fig. 10 shows the variation in the seal squeeze with

changes in the groove front angle, corner break and
groove outer diameter as predicted by analysis.
Variations in Seal Squeeze Force with Changes in Groove
Geometry Using the 6.5deg-0.3-59.63od Groove as Reference
100

Change in Squeeze Force (%)

We now examine the effect of design parameters on

rubber squeeze, piston travel and retraction.

6.5deg-59.53od
10deg-59.53od
14deg-59.53od
6.5deg-59.69od
10deg-59.69od
14deg-59.69od

95

90

B
D
F
H
K
M

85

80

75

E
G
J

70

65

60
0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

0.65

0.7

Groove Corner Break Size (mm)

Fig. 10 Variation in seal rubber squeeze force with

changes in seal groove geometry.

In Fig. 10, the magnitude of the squeeze force in the

base groove is shown as 100% (point A). If the front
angle is changed from 6.5 degrees to 10 degrees (point
C), the squeeze force is reduced to 86% level of what it
was at the base design. If the front angle is increased to
14 degrees (point G), then seal squeeze force is
reduced to 76% level. If the seal groove diameter is
increased from 59.53mm to 59.69mm (point E), then the
squeeze force is reduced to 80%. Changing both the
groove diameter to 59.69mm and the front angle to 10
degrees (point J) reduce the rubber squeeze to 73%.
Point L represents a change in both the groove diameter
to 59.69mm and front angle to 14 degrees. Thus in
moving vertically down from point A, we obtain estimates
of the variations in the rubber squeeze force with
changes in the groove front angle and/or groove outer
diameter. When changes in the groove corner break
dimension are included, we see further reduction in the
rubber squeeze force as the points A, C, E, G, J, and L
move respectively to points B, D, F, H, K and M.

3. 2 SEAL SQUEEZE FORCE DISTRIBUTION AND

PISTON RETRACTION

travel and retraction are critical for estimating the seal

groove performance for a given seal groove design.

Both the magnitude and distribution of the seal squeeze

force vary with changes in the seal groove design. The
distribution of this force along the piston/seal interface
affects piston retraction. It was determined that as the
distribution of the normal force is skewed away from the
apply end of the seal groove i.e. away from the air end
to the fluid end of the seal, piston retraction is improved
(Fig. 11). This is attributable to the fact that the sliding
force (Ft) is minimized with skewed distribution of the
normal or squeeze force (Fn). Note that friction and
rubber seal adhesion to the piston surface contribute to
force Ft. As shown in Figure 11, the squeeze force in
the groove with 6.5 degrees front angle, 0.3mm corner
break size and 59.53mm groove diameter is fairly
distributed along the seal width. When the corner break
size was increased from 0.3mm to 0.7mm, a skewed
distribution of the seal squeeze force was obtained and
the piston retraction improved by 44% under the same
apply load conditions. The 44% improvement in piston
retraction was determined by prototype testing. Similar
distribution in seal squeeze force and improvement in
piston retraction were obtained when the front angle was
increased from 6.5 degrees to 14 degrees. With this
understanding, judicious changes to the seal groove
geometry can be employed to achieve desired levels of
piston retraction.

PISTON RETRACTION

Seal Squeeze Force (N)

6.5 deg Front Angle - 0.3mm Corner Break

The retraction of the piston after brake apply is quite vital

for estimating drag in the seal caliper design. The ability
to predict piston retraction analytically (and implicitly
estimate drag and other performance parameters)
provides several competitive advantages. Firstly, an
estimate of the performance of the caliper seal-groove
can be made early in the design when only the design
variables are known, i.e. before prototypes are made.
Secondly, in system-related performance issues such as
drag, optimization of the brake caliper design can be
implemented early and more efficiently. Furthermore, it
is possible to redesign other components of the brake
caliper that would otherwise be impossible to modify late
in the product design cycle.
To validate the analysis predictions of retraction, a
comparison was made between the piston retraction
predicted by analysis and from test results under the
same loading conditions. In this effort, we used the seal
groove design with 6.5 degrees front angle, 0.3mm
corner break, 4.17mm groove width and 59.53mm outer
groove diameter as baseline design. Let the piston
retraction for baseline groove design under specified
loading be Rb. Then, the piston retraction Rc predicted
for a given groove design under the same loading can
be normalized as

Piston Re traction Normalized =

14 deg Front Angle - 0.3mm Corner Break

Rc
Rb

6.5 deg Front Angle - 0.7mm CornerBreak

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Seal Width (Normalized)

1.2

Apply End

Fig.11 Squeeze force distribution along the seal/piston

interface at seal assembly. (Seal groove with 4.17mm
width and 59.53mm groove diameter).

4.0 EVALUATION OF SEAL GROOVE

PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS
The major performance issues in caliper seal groove
design include displacement and drag. Understanding
the impact of rubber deformation, friction effects, piston

It is worth noting that the piston retraction estimates

were made after a few applications of the pressure load
cycles. The analytical experience indicated that the
piston retraction stabilized after three loadapply cycles.
Fig. 12 summarizes the variations in piston retraction as
a function of corner break.
In the plot shown in Fig. 12, the solid lines depict the
analysis predictions of retraction for a groove with
59.69mm outer diameter, while the corresponding
prototype test results are shown in dashed lines. Points
A to D represent four configurations of the seal groove
as follows:
Point A Seal groove configuration with
59.69mm outer diameter,
0.3mm corner break dimension,
10 degrees front angle.

Piston Retraction Normalized

2.5

1.5

10 degrees to 14 degrees on the piston retraction. The

transition from point A to C or from point B to D shows
the effects of increasing the corner break dimension
from 0.3mm to 0.7mm on piston retraction. Overall, the
piston retraction improved with increase in corner break
dimension and/or groove front angle.
Figure 13 shows the effect of seal groove outer diameter
on piston retraction. In this comparison, the corner
break dimension is kept constant at 0.3 mm.

Analysis Result: Groove with 10deg Front Angle

Test Result: Groove with 10deg Front Angle

0.5

Variation in Piston Retraction with Seal Groove Diameter

Analysis Result: Groove with 14 deg Front angle

Ref: 6.5deg Front Angle, 0.3mm Corner Break, 59.53OD Diameter

Test Results: Groove with 14 deg Front Angle

0
0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

0.65

0.7

Groove Corner Break

Fig. 12: Variation in Piston Retraction with Seal Groove

Corner Break for Groove with 59.69mm outer diameter.
(Reference: Groove with 59.53 OD, 0.3mm Corner
Break, and 6.5 degrees Front Angle)

1.8

Piston Retraction Normalized

0.3

1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

Analysis Result - 0.3 Corner Brake, 6.5deg Front Angle

Test Result - 0.3 Corner Break, 6.5deg Front Angle
Analysis Results - 0.3 Corner Break, 14deg Front Angle
Test Result - 0.3 Corner Break, 14deg Front Angle
Analysis Result - 0.3 Corner Break and 10deg Front Angle
Test Result - 0.3 Corner Break and 10deg Front Angle

Point B Seal groove configuration with

59.69mm outer diameter,
0.3mm corner break dimension,
14 degrees front angle.
Point C Seal groove configuration with
59.69mm outer diameter,
0.7mm corner break dimension,
10 degrees front angle.
Point D Seal groove configuration with
59.69mm outer diameter,
0.7mm corner break dimension,
14 degrees front angle.
When the baseline groove design was changed to the
groove configuration at point A, analysis predicted a
20.5% improvement in piston retraction. This prediction
compares favourably with the 22.2% increase in
retraction obtained from laboratory tests of the prototype
model. If the corner break for this design change were
0.7mm instead of 0.3mm (Point C), analysis yielded a
62% improvement in piston retraction, versus 61.1%
obtained from prototype tests. If the baseline groove
design were changed to a groove configuration in
point B, a 66.3% improvement in piston retraction was
predicted by analysis. Test results showed a 72.2%
actual improvement for this case. Similarly, if this latest
design change included a corner break dimension of
0.7mm instead of 0.3mm (Point D), analysis predicted a
100% improvement in piston retraction, versus 94.4%
obtained from prototype tests. Essentially, in moving up
vertically from point A to B or from point C to D, we see
the effect of changing the groove front angle from

59.52

59.54

59.56

59.58

59.6

59.62

59.64

59.66

59.68

59.7

Groove Outside Diameter (mm)

Fig.13: Variation in Piston Retraction with Groove Outer

Diameter. (Reference: Groove with 59.53 OD, 0.3mm
Corner Break, and 6.5 degrees Front Angle)

The lower pair of curves shows the predicted

improvements in piston retraction for the 6.5 degrees
front angle from analysis (solid curve) and prototype
tests (dashed lines). The middle pair and upper pair of
curves depict similar results for the 10 degrees and 14
degrees front angles respectively. These plots show that
piston retraction is improved when the groove outer
diameter is increased from 59.53mm to 59.69mm.
In Fig. 14, we compare the improvements in piston
retraction predicted from analysis and laboratory
prototype tests as a function of the groove front angle.
To highlight and differentiate between these curves, the
piston retraction is normalized in the form

Re traction Normalized =

Rc
1
Rb

where Rb is the piston retraction in the baseline groove

design and Rc is the piston retraction for the current
groove design under the same loading conditions.
Again, these results show improvements in piston
retraction with increase in front angle. For grooves with
0.7mm corner break and front angles ranging from 10
degrees to 14 degrees, analysis predicted a higher rate

of increase in piston retractions compared to results for

similar grooves with front angles less than 10 degrees.
However, test data from prototype models of the said
groove configurations indicated a somewhat monotonic
increase in retraction as the front angle was increased
from 6.5 degrees to 14 degrees.

of friction appears to be dynamic during the brake

application process [2]. As noted earlier, details of the
friction study will be released in due time.
There is ongoing effort to refine and expand the
analytical model for improved estimate of the seal
groove contributions to the braking performance.

Retraction Normalized

5.0 CONCLUSIONS

Analysis Results - 0.3mm Corner Break

Test Results - 0.3mm Corner Break
Analysis Results - 0.7mm Corner Break
Test Results - 0.7mm Corner Break
6

10

11

12

13

14

Seal Groove Front Angle (deg)

Fig. 14 Effects of front angle on piston retraction.

groove with 59.69mm outer diameter).

(Seal

From the results summarized in figures 12 to 14, it is

evident that the basic trends in piston retraction for
various groove configurations have been reproduced
analytically. However, some discrepancies exist
between piston retraction values predicted by analysis
and comparable test results. We attribute the
discrepancies in analysis predictions to two main
sources. The first source of numerical error is from the
limitations in the material hyperelastic and viscoelastic
models. These material models were used to describe
the seal material mechanical behaviour during brake
application. Note that the coefficients for these material
models were derived from the standard process of curve
fitting the material test data. Clearly, approximations in
the curve fitting process will affect the accuracy of the
numerical predictions.
The other source of analysis error comes from the
Coulomb friction model used in the analysis. In this
friction model, assumptions were made regarding friction
contacts at the piston/seal and groove/seal interfaces.
For example, the values of friction coefficients were
assumed to be constant during the analysis of the
braking load sequence. Indeed, the nature of the
frictional forces at the seal interfaces with the piston and
the groove is presently not well understood. But
preliminary results of the laboratory study suggest that
the Coulomb friction model used in analysis may not be
fully adequate for the range of seal groove
configurations evaluated in this study. The actual state

In this paper, the authors have demonstrated the

application of analysis in the caliper seal groove design.
In this effort, the mechanics of rubber deformation within
the prescribed boundaries of the seal groove were
established. Predictions on the critical performance
parameters of the seal groove design were made in
terms of the geometric design parameters. The basic
trends in piston retraction for various fixed-housing
groove configurations have been reproduced
analytically. Issues such as seal geometry, seal material
creep, temperature, and time of exposure also affect
seal deformation, and consequently the braking
performance. These design parameters will be
considered in the next stage of the analytical
development.
Indeed, understanding the functional relationship
between design and performance parameters is crucial
for optimal seal groove design. Despite the assumptions
made regarding some critical parameters such as
friction, the results indicate the analytical approach
developed herein can reasonably predict the seal
retraction behavior for a given set or space of design
parameters. The ability to predict piston retraction
analytically (and implicitly estimate drag and other
performance parameters) provides several competitive
advantages, including the ability to optimize the
performance of the caliper groove seal early in the
design when only the design variables are known, i.e.
before prototypes are made. Furthermore, with the
understanding of retraction mechanism in the sealgroove, it is possible to modify other components of the
brake caliper system that would otherwise be impossible
to redesign late in the product design cycle. At this stage
of development, the authors feel confident that the
understanding gained from this effort will not only
enhance the seal-groove design optimization, but will
also reduce prototype testing and can shorten product
development lead time by several weeks.

6.0 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The support of Brent K. Dunlap, the Analysis Manager at
the Dayton Tech Center, Delphi Automotive Systems, is
gratefully acknowledged. Our Special thanks also to the
lab technicians in the wheel/brake caliper group at
Dayton Tech Center, Delphi Automotive Systems, for
providing the supporting test results.

7.0 REFERENCES

1.

2.

3.
4.

5.

6.

7.

Anwana, O. D. Analytical Design of the Seal Groove

Assembly Case Study in the Performance
Prediction, Delphi Automotive Internal Report
(2001).
Anwana, O. D., Characterization of Rubber Material
for Disk Brake Piston Seal, Delphi Automotive
Systems Internal Report EWR--584-022 (2000).
Baptists, T. Brake Drag Torque Measurements,
Delco Moraine - GM Report No. PG053026 (1988).
Chang, H., On a Numerical Study for Rubber Seals,
SAE Transactions v.97, Paper No. SAE-880255
(1988).
Dinzgurg, B., Measurement of Rubber Elasticity and
Correlation to Seal Life, SAE Congress, Detroit, MI,
Paper No. SAE-970547 (1997).
Dinzgurg, B., The Selection of Elastomer
Compounds through Correlation of Rubber
Properties to Seal Life, SAE Congress, Detroit, MI,
Paper No. SAE-2001-01-0686 (2001).
Hrbek, D., Piston Seal Characteristics on a Disc
Brake Caliper with a Self Adjusting Park Brake

8.
9.

10.
11.

Mechanism, CPC, GM Report No. PG057117

(1991).
Lim, J., Brake Caliper Analysis of Piston Friction,
CPE, GM Report No. PG051348 (1987).
Meada, N. and Matsuno, M., Analysis of Rubber
Boot Seal using Finite Element Method, SAE
Congress, Detroit, MI, Paper No. SAE-940289
(1994).
Moore, D., The Friction and Lubrication of
Elastomers, Pergamon Press, 1973.
Shnaider, A., Authentic Involvement Design, Dept. of
Mechanical Engineering, Monash University, MI,
Final Report to PBR Automotive Ltd. (1996).

8.0 CONTACT
For further information, please contact Okon D. Anwana,
Engineering Technical Center, M/C E-520, 1435
Cincinnati Street, Dayton, OH 45408.
Telephone: 937-455-5864, Fax: 937-455-6798