Sie sind auf Seite 1von 123
FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION METHODS FOR DRY SLIDING WEAR THESIS Aaron Chmiel, AFIT/GAE/ENY/08-M03 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR

FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION METHODS FOR DRY SLIDING WEAR

THESIS

Aaron Chmiel,

AFIT/GAE/ENY/08-M03

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR UNIVERSITY

AIR FORCE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION METHODS FOR DRY SLIDING WEAR THESIS Aaron Chmiel, AFIT/GAE/ENY/08-M03 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED.

The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.

AFIT/GAE/ENY/08-M03

FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION METHODS FOR DRY SLIDING WEAR

THESIS

Presented to the Faculty Department of Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering Graduate School of Engineering and Management Air Force Institute of Technology Air University Air Education and Training Command In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Aeronautical Engineering

Aaron Chmiel, BS

March 2008

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED.

AFIT/GAE/ENY/08-M03

FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION METHODS FOR DRY SLIDING WEAR

Approved:

Aaron Chmiel, BS

/signed/

14 March 2008

Dr. A.N. Palazotto (Chairman)

Date

/signed/

14 March 2008

Dr. W. Baker (Member)

Date

/signed/

14 March 2008

Dr. R. Brockman (Member)

Date

AFIT/GAE/ENY/08-M03

Abstract

The Holloman High Speed Test Track is a rocket sled track for testing at

hypersonic velocities. However, there are customers that desire to test at even greater

velocities. In order to achieve higher velocities there are several phenomena that must

be overcome. One important phenomenon is wear of the shoe that holds the sled on the

rail. This research is a look at the feasibility of using finite element analysis to predict

the wear of the shoe during a test run down the track. Two methods are investigated,

one is a macro-scale, incremental method utilizing traditional wear equations from

Archard, the other is a micro-scale, material property method that using a failure

criteria to determine the amount of wear. These methods are implemented at low

velocities to allow for comparison to results from the literature. While the incremental

method was found to provide accurate results, there are many numerical problems

associated with it. The material property method was found to be feasible, but more

research is needed to validate and calibrate the process.

iv

Acknowledgements

First and foremost, I owe thanks to God for all my abilities and talents.

It is

only because of his grace and blessings that I have gotten this far in life.

I would also like to thank my parents for their constant encouragement and

support; not only during my time at AFIT, but throughout my life. I am grateful for

the prayers of all my family and friends during the writing of this thesis.

I am greatly indebted to Dr. Palazotto for his ideas and unending belief it me.

I also owe thanks to my committee members: Dr. Baker and Dr. Brockman; without

their advice and intervention I would still be working on this project.

Finally, I would like to thank Dr. John Schmisseur at the Air Force Office of

Scientific Research for his sponsorship that has made this research possible.

Aaron Chmiel

v

Table of Contents

 

Page

Abstract .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

iv

Acknowledgements

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

v

Table of Contents .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

vi

List of Figures

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

viii

List of Tables

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

xi

List of Symbols

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

xii

List of Abbreviations .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

xiv

I.

Introduction

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1

1.1

Holloman High Speed Test Track

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1

1.2

Wear .

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

3

1.3

Problem Statement and Chapter Overview .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

8

II.

Theory and Tools Used

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

10

2.1

Abaqus

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

10

2.2

DADS

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

12

2.3

Pin-On-Disk

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

12

2.4

Wear Parameters

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

14

2.5

Damage Initiation Criteria (9; 12) .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

17

III. Incremental Method Development

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

20

 

3.1

Model

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

20

3.2

Mesh Validation

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

21

3.3

Analysis Type Determination

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

27

3.4

Friction

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

31

3.5

Corner Singularities

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

34

3.6

Wear Calculation

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

36

3.7

Pressure Distribution Sensitivity

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

36

3.8

Incremental Method Script

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

39

 
  • 3.8.1 Versions

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

40

  • 3.8.2 Script Version 2.1 Walkthrough

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

40

vi

 

Page

IV.

Incremental Method Results and Discussion .

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

45

  • 4.1 Results

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

45

  • 4.2 Discussion .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

47

  • 4.2.1 Need for Small Steps

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

47

  • 4.2.2 Pressure Averaging

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

48

  • 4.2.3 Material History Effects

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

48

  • 4.2.4 Mesh Modification

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

49

V.

Development of A Material Property Method for Calculating Wear

.

.

.

50

  • 5.1 Dynamic Analysis

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

51

  • 5.1.1 Scale

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

52

Submodeling

  • 5.1.2 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

54

  • 5.2 The Global Model

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

54

  • 5.3 The Local Model

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

56

Slipper .

  • 5.3.1 .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

56

  • 5.3.2 Rail

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

58

  • 5.3.3 Computing Cost Issues

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

60

  • 5.4 Material Properties .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

63

VI. Material Property Method Results and Discussion

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

65

 
  • 6.1 Proof of Concept Results

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

65

  • 6.2 Discussion .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

69

VII. Summary and Conclusions

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

73

 
  • 7.1 Incremental Method

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

73

  • 7.1.1 Conclusions

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

73

  • 7.1.2 Areas for Future Improvement

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

75

  • 7.2 Material Property Method .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

75

  • 7.2.1 Conclusions

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

75

  • 7.2.2 Areas for Future Study .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

76

Appendix A.

Python Script for Calculating Wear In Abaqus

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

78

Appendix B.

Wear Progression Images for the First Test of the Incremental Method

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

91

Appendix C.

Wear Progression Images for the Second Test of the Incremental

 

Method

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

101

Bibliography

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

107

vii

List of Figures

Figure

Page

  • 1.1 A test sled train on the HHSTT.

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

2

  • 1.2 A slipper on the rail at the HHSTT

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

2

  • 1.3 Lim and Ashby’s wear map for steels .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

6

  • 2.1 Cross-section of the rail showing the locations where DADS reports

 
 

forces on the slippers (2)

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

13

  • 2.2 A plot of the vertical force data predicted by DADS for one slipper

 
 

location through the entire run

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

13

  • 2.3 A typical pin-on-disk experimental set up

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

14

  • 3.1 The pin and associated model, showing the dimensions and the mesh

22

  • 3.2 The boundary conditions applied to the pin used for the incremental

 
 

method

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

23

  • 3.3 Boundary conditions for the mesh validation model

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

24

  • 3.4 Variation of contact pressure predicted by Prasad et al. (21:629).

 
 

The curves are for 3 different aspect ratio rectangles

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

25

  • 3.5 Normal stress along the bottom surface of the validation model for

 
 

different element types .

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

26

  • 3.6 Shear stress

along the trailing edge of the validation model for

 
 

various element types

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

28

  • 3.7 The refined mesh used for the mesh convergence study

 

.

.

.

.

.

29

  • 3.8 Normal stress along the bottom surface of the validation model for

 
 

two different element sizes .

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

30

  • 3.9 Comparison of contact pressure for dynamic and quasi-static analysis 31

    • 3.10 Pressure distribution along the bottom surface of the pin for different

velocities

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

32

  • 3.11 Coefficient of friction equation plotted against

Pv˜ ˜

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

34

  • 3.12 A close view of the rounded corner of the pin

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

35

  • 3.13 An example of an unrealistic wear profile that can cause an aborted

analysis .

.

.

.

.

.