Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Very little attention has been directed toward the effect of the surface roughness of
the shoe soling, [10]. For example, measurement of the friction coefcient of soles is
usually undertaken on newly moulded or
only lightly abraded samples. It was mentioned that the microscopic roughness of
the soling surface is a major determinant of
slip-resistance on lubricated surfaces, [11].
Research revealed signicant correlations
between surface roughness of shoes and
friction coefcient for a given oor surface.
It was found that, [12, 13], abrasion of rubber soles in steps with increasingly coarse
grit gradually raised the roughness in parallel with a rise in the friction coefcient on
water wet surfaces and that both roughness and friction coefcient fell during subsequent polishing. Besides, a signicant
correlation between the rank order of friction coefcient of footwear on water-wet,
oily, and icy surfaces was shown.
Any specication of ooring by measuring
friction coefcient based on dry surfaces
could lead to an increase in the number of
injuries caused by slipping on the wet surfaces. An experiment in which ve pairs of
shoes were soled with the same rubber
compound was described, [14]. Four of the
pairs were abraded by different grades of
grit to produce a range of roughness values.
The friction coefcient of the ve soles was
then measured repeatedly by the walking
traction method on wet surfaces including
glazed wall tiles, vinyl asbestos coated with
the wax oor polish, and both sides of
Authors
A. M. Samy, M. M. Mahmoud,
M. I. Khashaba, W. Y. Ali,
El-Minia (Egypt)
Corresponding author:
Prof. Dr. Waheed Yosry Ali
El-Minia University
Faculty of Engineering
P.N. 61111, El-Minia, Egypt
E-mail: wahyos@hotmail.com
693
a sheet of oat glass. It was found that soling roughness is a major factor in determining the Friction coefcient of this rubber
soling material.
It was observed that, dry sliding of the rubber test specimens containing saw teeth
grooves displayed the highest value of friction coefcient (1.5) due to increased adhesion and deformation. As the height of the
V-grooves increased friction increased. For
water lubricated ceramics, the value of the
friction coefcient dropped to 0.65 due to
the easy leakage of the uid away from the
contact area to the grooves. Further decrease in friction coefcient was observed
when water was detergent by soap. For ceramic lubricated by water and soap and contaminated by sand, the friction coefcient
increased signicantly compared to the sliding conditions of water and soap only. This
behavior may be attributed to the increased
contact between ceramic surface and sand
particles. In the presence of oil and sand on
the sliding surface, the friction slightly increased. The friction coefcient reached to
0.35. This behavior may be caused by sand
embedment in rubber surface and consequently the contact became between ceramic and sand. At lubricated sliding surface
by oil and water contaminated by sand, the
friction presented higher value than that of
oil and sand sliding conditions.
In the present work, the effect of the height
of the vee grooves, introduced in the rubber
specimens, on the static friction coefcient
when sliding against ceramics lubricated by
oil and oil diluted by water is investigated.
Experimental
The test rig used in the present work was
designed and manufactured to measure
the friction coefcient between the rubber
specimens and the ceramics through measuring the friction force and applied normal
force.The ceramic surface is placed in a base
supported by two sets of thin spring steel
sheets, where strain gauges were adhered,
the rst can measure the horizontal force
(friction force) and the second can measure
the vertical force (applied load). Friction coefcient is determined through the measurement of the friction force by strain gauges. The load is applied on the specimens by
dead weights. The arrangement of test rig
used in friction force measurement is
shown in Figure 1.
Friction test were carried out at 50, 100 and
150 N normal load, at oil (Paraffin oil,
SAE 30) and oil diluted by water, (95 wt.
% H2O), lubricated sliding conditions. The
measurement of friction force was carried
694
10
11
12
13
experiments of rubber test specimens sliding against oil lubricated ceramics are
shown in Figures 4-8. Figure 4 shows the
friction coefcient for rubber specimen of
T = 3 mm. In the presence of oil as lubricant,
the smooth rubber specimens displayed the
lowest friction values which were ranging
from 0.12 and 0.18. Friction coefcient increased as the number of grooves increased.
At 50 N applied load the increase in friction
coefcient was more signicant. As the
load increased the friction coefcient decreased due to the relatively strong adhesion of oil in the rubber surface where the
removal of oil from surface was much difcult because the oil was trapped in the
contact area. The maximum value of friction coefcient (0.58) was observed at 50 N
normal load and number of grooves 8,
where the minimum value of friction coefcient (0.11) was observed at smooth rubber specimens and 150 N normal load.
For rubber specimen of T = 4 mm, Figure 5,
the increasing height of grooves showed
signicant reduction in friction coefcient.
The maximum value of friction coefcient
(0.48) was observed at 50 N normal load
and number of grooves of 8, while the minimum value of friction coefcient was ob-
695
696
number of grooves increased friction coefcient increased and the highest load displayed the highest friction value. The maximum value of friction coefcient (0.23) was
observed at 150 N normal load and number
of grooves 6.
Further friction decrease was observed as
the height of the grooves increased to
T = 7 mm, Figure 13, where the maximum
value of friction coefcient (0.21) was observed at 150 N normal load and number of
grooves 5. The minimum value of friction
coefcient was observed at smooth rubber
specimen and 100, 150 N normal load.
Conclusions
For oil lubricated ceramic, friction coefcient decreased with increasing height of
the grooves. It seems that height increase
enables the oil to be well distributed on the
contact surface and form a lm which is responsible for the friction decrease.
Friction coefcient decreased as the height
of the grooves increased and consequently
the capacity of the groove increased to restore lubricant uid and feed once again
into the contact area as load decreases.
Diluting oil by water displayed values of
friction much lower than that observed for
oil lubricated condition.
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]