2021.03.

09

Junction in Friction.
Junction Growth
Lecture 5

• Bowden and Tabor were motivated to think that contact area

(shown in Fig. bellow) might become much enlarged under the
additional shear force and they proposed junction growth
theory.
• They considered two rough surfaces subjected to normal load
W and friction force F at the interface.

1
 2021.03.09

• To explain their hypothesis they considered two dimensional

stress system Eq.(5.1):      
 1,2  X
  X
Y Y
   XY
2

2  2 
W F
 X  0; Y  ; 
 A XY  A

• To explain their hypothesis they considered two dimensional

stress system Eq.(5.1):      
 1,2  X
  X
Y Y
   XY
2

2  2 
(5.1)
W F
 X  0; Y  ; 
 A XY  A
• If W force is in y-direction and force in x-direction is zero, then
principle stresses can be expressed by Eq.(5.2) and Eq.(5.3).
W  W  W  W 
2 2

 A 1     F  (5.2)  A 2       F  (5.3)
2
 
2

2  2  2  2 

• σ1 - first principal stress, σ2 - second principal stress and

• δA - elemental area. 5

2
 2021.03.09

• Substracting Eq.(5.3) from Eq.(5.2):

 W 
2

 A  1   2   2     F 
2
(5.4)
 2 
• If the yield strength of material is σy = σ1 - σ2,
shear strength τy = 0.5σy and on substituting and rearranging:
 W 
2

 A y      F 
2
(5.5)
 2 
• In Eq.(5.5) τy and W remain constant and this indicates that area of
contact A will increase with increasing friction force, till force reaches
its limiting value.
• We can state that on application of additional incremental tangential
force, there will be further plastic flow at constant shear stress,
resulting in an incremental contact area of A. Bowden and Tabor
called this increase the junction growth (liet. susilietimo, kontakto
ploto augimas, didejimas).
6

• Assume τi is shear stress of fractured interface:

Flim iting   i Amax
• Eq. (5.5) can be rearranged:
 W 
2 2
W 
   F    Amax y       i Amax 
2
 A y  
2 2

 2   2
• Friction coefficient:
Flim iting  i Amax i 0.5
   
W 2 Amax   
2
y i
2
2  
2
y i
2
 y 
2
(5.6)
  1
• τy – shear strength, MPa  i 
• τi – interface shear strength, MPa
• Using Eq.(5.6) coefficient of friction can be calculated
from ratio τi / τy , as given in the Table.
• The above theory applies only to clean surfaces.
• In order to reduce maintenance cost and increase bearing life, interface
shear (τi) strength of contacting surfaces need to be as low as possible.
7

3
 2021.03.09

Reasons of Junction Growth

• Coefficient of friction varies with sliding time. Essentially, a dry contact
starts with a running in period (as shown by 'Line 1' in Fig. bellow).
• Initially, the friction force is largely a result of ploughing of the surface by asperities.
• Adhesion does not play much significant role due to surface contamination.
• Asperity deformation takes place and affects the static coefficient of friction and
surface is easily polished.
• This is the main reason of reduction in friction coefficient, as shown in Fig.
by 'Line 1'.

Reasons of Junction Growth

• Consequently the coefficient of friction in the initial stage is largely
independent of the materials pair combination. But if polishing wear
process is able to remove the contaminating layers, elements of bare (pure)
surface will appear, resulting in increase in the coefficient of friction due to
increased adhesion as shown by 'Line 2'.
• In addition the coefficient of friction increases due to rapid increase in the
number of wear particles entrapped between the sliding surfaces as a
consequence of higher wear rates as shown by 'Line 3', 'Line 4', 'Line 5' and
'Line 6' in Fig.

4
 2021.03.09

Reasons of Junction Growth

• The deformation of asperities continues and the adhesion effect
increases due to larger clean interfacial areas.
• Some of the wear particles are trapped between the surfaces, causes
ploughing. A steady state friction conditions arrives depending on the
worn out surfaces.

10

How to reduce Junction Growth ?

• Two methods to reduce junction growth are:
1) contaminations (reducing adhesion) and
2) lubrication.
• Contamination : A few molecules thick oxide layer (encountered with
metals in air) on the surface(as shown in Fig.) can reduce the friction
(i.e. μ = 0.1 to 0.3).

11

5
 2021.03.09

How to reduce Junction Growth ?

• Contamination: The surface film prevents the surfaces from sticking
together strongly and allows only a small amount of junction growth to
occur. The formation and breakage of contamination layer is a dynamic
process; therefore, there is possibilities of variation in μ.
• Weak (plastic, ductile) metal, weak oxide: Film easily broken, rapid junction
growth, and high μ. Examples: indium, gold.
• Weak metal, strong oxide : Transition from low
to high μ as load increases (as shown in Fig.)
e.g. Copper, Iron.
• Strong metal, strong oxide : Low μ at all loads.
Examples: steel, chromium.
• Note : Both junction growth and ploughing (two/three) effects play role,
and either of these may dominate friction behavior.
12

How to reduce Junction Growth ?

• Lubrication:
1. To reduce junction growth minimum value of ratio τi/τy (Eq. 5.1) must be
selected.

2. Lubricant: Presence of liquid lubricant reduces chances of junction

growth. One way is to choose liquid lubricant which has a low value of τ.

3. Use of suitable contacting materials: Using less reactive material (but high
hardness) materials, which result in low shear strength of interface.

4. Ductility: Use materials of limited ductility (elasticity). These materials

after a small amount of junction growth will fracture rather than flow
further. 13

6
 2021.03.09

How to reduce Junction Growth ?

• Sliding Dry Friction with Time :
• Sliding in dry contact starts with running-in period :
• High rate of ploughing of softer surface by asperities :
- Relatively low adhesion.
• Rupture/breakage of asperities polish surface :
- Reduce ploughing coefficient but increase coefficient of adhesion.
- On removal of contaminating layers, adhesion coefficient increases.

14