REVIEW PAPER 1

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating

seals: review of tribological studies and related
topics since the 1930s
G K Nikas
Mechanical Engineering Department, Tribology Group, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
email: g.nikas@imperial.ac.uk; gnikas@teemail.gr

The manuscript was received on 21 December 2008 and was accepted after revision for publication on 16 April 2009.
DOI: 10.1243/13506501JET607

Abstract: Hydraulic seals are complicated machine elements. The engineering research on
hydraulic reciprocating seals, which commenced roughly in the 1930s, has achieved a basic
understanding of performance issues. This article provides a review of the experimental and
theoretical research conducted over a period of eight decades, discussing more than 200 of the
most significant publications from the related literature. The topics discussed include recipro-
cating seal designs, materials, experimental methods, theoretical studies, elastohydrodynamic
lubrication, solid and contact mechanics, performance issues, and optimization.

Keywords: seal, reciprocating, elastomer, rubber, polymer, tribology, review

1 INTRODUCTION difficulty is attributed to seal flexibility, which pre-

Hydraulic reciprocating seals are critical machine
elements used in a variety of industrial, automo-
bile, aerospace, and medical applications that involve
linear and rotational motion such as in hydraulic
actuators [1]. They are usually made of polymeric
or thermoplastic materials, including elastomers and
rubber-like materials (rubber compounds with vul-
canized natural rubber as the prototype or synthetic
rubbers produced with sulphur or other additives),
plastics, polyurethanes, as well as composites. These
seals normally operate dynamically under broad oper-
ating conditions, with sealed pressures of up to 80
MPa, sliding speeds of up to 15 m/s, and temperatures
varying roughly between −70 and +250 ◦ C, depending
on application. Figure 1 shows typical hydraulic actu-
ators and some reciprocating seals of various shapes,
including rod, piston, and rotary-vane seals [1–4]. It is
characteristic that the depicted seal shapes are just a
few of many complex designs that have evolved over
decades of theoretical and applied research.
A hydraulic reciprocating seal is a rather neglected
machine element in the scientific literature, in spite
of its vital role in many applications. The neglect is
partly attributed to the complexity of seal behaviour,
which is owed to the large number of variables sig-
nificantly affecting sealing performance. The major
cludes obtaining analytical solutions and complicates
any numerical solution process, particularly in tran-
sient conditions. Moreover, typical seal materials such
as elastomers obey highly complex, non-linear stress–
strain laws of finite elasticity or thermoviscoelasticity,
which are strongly affected by temperature. In fact,
basic mechanical properties of hydraulic seals such
as the moduli of elasticity and rigidity, Poisson’s ratio,
hardness, and compressibility all depend strongly on
temperature. Additional influential factors such as
chemical interaction with hydraulic fluids, material
(e.g. elastomer or rubber) oxidation, and ageing play
major roles in sealing performance.
In spite of the difficulties in sealing performance
evaluation, hydraulic seals are met in many critical
applications with machinery costing hundreds to mil-
lions of times more than the seals. A characteristic
example was the dramatic destruction of the NASA
space shuttle Challenger in 1986, which was attributed
to the loss of sealing ability of a static elastomeric
O-ring because of low ambient temperature the night
before the shuttle’s launch [5], an engineering error
that cost several human lives. Therefore, the correct
engineering design and evaluation of hydraulic seals
is of paramount importance to avoid costly mistakes.
As far as the author is aware, the scientific research
on hydraulic reciprocating seals was initiated before

JET607 © IMechE 2010 Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
2 G K Nikas

Fig. 1 Hydraulic actuators for linear and rotary motion, and some examples of rod seals (on the
right), piston seals (on the left), and rotary-vane seals (top, right) (from references [1] to [4])

World War II; it then rapidly progressed in the 1960s
and 1970s. Following one of the early studies on the
network theory of rubber elasticity by Meyer et al. [6] in
1932, the doctoral thesis of Gronau [7] in 1935 was one
of the earliest known publications on hydraulic seals.
However, the first breakthrough probably was the pio-
neering work of White and Denny [8, 9] from 1944
to 1947, an exhaustive experimental and theoretical
work on reciprocating seals, which remains a source
of reference. Denny [10–16] continued his pioneering
work on reciprocating seals in the 1950s and 1960s,
dealing – mainly experimentally – with the issues of
lubrication, leakage, and friction. Some other note-
worthy, early experimental studies during the 1950s
were those of Cheyney et al. [17] and Morrison [18]
on static and dynamic O-rings, as well as the work

Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
of some researchers in Germany [19, 20]. By the late
1950s, the foundations of the elastohydrodynamic the-
ory of lubrication had been laid [21] and the theory was
swiftly applied to reciprocating seals with increasing
success since the 1960s.
The progress in sealing research was continuous
between 1960 and 2000 with a variety of valuable
experimental [22–29] and theoretical studies [30–46]
exploring fundamental issues of friction and leakage
performance on a variety of seal shapes, including
rectangular seals, toroidal seals (O-rings), U-cups,
step-seals, tandem seals, and a few others. These are
discussed in later sections of the article, together with
more recent studies in 2000–2008. Very few reviews on
reciprocating seals have been published over the past
80 years, most notably the general reviews of Nau [47,
48] covering some of the work done up to the 1990s, the
study of Field and Nau [49] on experimental research
up to the 1970s, the general discussions of Flitney
[50] in 1982, and Ramsdell [51] in 1986, the detailed
reviews of Kanters [52] and Visscher and Kanters [53]
in 1990 (mainly on experimental issues), the presen-
tations of reciprocating-seal tribology and designs of
Bisztray-Balku [54, 55], and, finally, the book chapter
in reference [1]. The present article is a review of the
majority of the significant theoretical and experimen-
tal studies on reciprocating seals and related topics,
discussing the major contributions in this field and
listing over 200 references for a complete bibliography
on the subject.
2 REVIEW OF EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON
RECIPROCATING SEALS AND RELATED TOPICS
Although the work of Gronau [7] in 1935 is one of
the earliest recorded studies on hydraulic seals, the
work of White and Denny [8, 9] between Septem-
ber 1944 and December 1946 is probably the first
major research contribution on seals. Their 130-page
final report [9], containing over 110 figures and draw-
ings, was based on an exhaustive experimental study
amidst World War II. In fact, the study was sup-
ported by the Ministry of Aircraft Production and the
Royal Aircraft Establishment in the UK in the inter-
ests of improving hydraulic system reliability. The work
of Deny under the direction of Professor White at
Imperial College in London dealt with the experimen-
tal study of flexible packings, including rectangular,
toroidal, and U-cup seals of various polymeric mate-
rials. Their measurements at various sealed pressures,
speeds, and temperatures involved the friction coeffi-
cient and force at the sealing contact, leakage rates,
seal wear, and failure mechanisms involving abra-
sion and extrusion. They studied the effects of seal
material hardness (which they showed to decrease
abrasion and extrusion) and sealed-fluid properties on
leakage and friction, and came up with seal housing
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
3
arrangements such as back-up rings to avoid extru-
sion. Their experiments on interfacial phenomena
involving surface roughness effects are of great impor-
tance because they demonstrated, perhaps for the
first time in hydraulic seals, the relation between stic-
tion, static and dynamic friction on the roughness
value and texture. Furthermore, by measuring the fric-
tion force in reciprocating motion at various stroking
velocities, they realized the connection with the film
thickness at the sealing contact and the transition
from boundary or partial lubrication with roughness–
asperity interactions at low speeds to elastohydrody-
namic lubrication at higher speeds. The latter was
much later explained by the Stribeck curve, although
some differences exist between the Stribeck curve of
hard-elastohydrodynamic contacts and that of flexi-
ble, reciprocating seals [56, 57]. White and Denny also
managed to measure the contact pressure at the seal-
ing interface and locate the zone of maximum seal
strain. This provided two important observations:
(a) elastomeric seals are nearly incompressible (the
Poisson’s ratio is very close to 0.5), which means
that the hydraulic pressure exerted on (preloaded
by radial interference) seals is readily transferred
to the sealing contact, allowing seals to achieve
automatic sealing (Fig. 2);
(b) the mechanism of sealing is hidden in the inlet
zone of the contact and related to the gradient of
the contact pressure distribution at the inflexion
point (more on that later).
Four experimental studies from the classic sealing
conferences organized by the British Hydromechanics
Research Association in the 1960s provided valuable
new information on seal lubrication and friction, using
a variety of measuring techniques. In 1964, Cnops [58]
Fig. 2 Rectangular elastomeric seal with an anti-extru-
sion ring in a linear hydraulic actuator (only
the upper half of the seal, ring and housing depic-
ted), demonstrating how the seal automatically
adjusts to sealed-pressure variations by transfer-
ring it to the sealing contact via its nearly incom-
pressible material (see arrows)
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
4 G K Nikas
devised a spring-loaded piston in a hydraulic cylinder
containing brake fluid of harmonically varying volume
to measure the friction of cup, piston, and elastomeric
seals. With that rig, Cnops observed the mechanism
of oil film formation at the sealing contact, the thick-
ness of which varied with the stroking speed from
partially collapsed at low speeds to relatively thick at
higher speeds. In terms of friction, Cnops observed the
effects of stiction and elastomer relaxation and creep,
which characterize the viscoelastic nature of rubber-
like materials, particularly after long periods in static
conditions. In fact, these effects had been discussed
years earlier by, for example, Denny [15] in 1959.
The friction and lubrication of natural-rubber, pis-
ton seals, were also studied by Lawrie and O’Donoghue
[23] in 1964, who utilized displacement transducers for
their friction and piston-velocity measurements. Their
sealing rig, which consisted of a pump-pressurized,
brake-fluid filled cylinder, allowed for simultaneous
measurement of contact pressure, friction force, and
stroking velocity for a complete operating cycle via
a multi-channel recorder. The seal rubber used was
conducting to allow for contact resistance measure-
ments and establishing whether the fluid film at the
sealing contact had collapsed (zero resistance) or was
full (infinite resistance). It was thus possible to mea-
sure the sealing performance in transient conditions
and identify potential problems with seal abrasive
wear for collapsed fluid film or, simply, observe film
development and variation during an operating cycle.
The development of a fluid film at a sealing contact
and the transition from boundary (partially collapsed
film) to hydrodynamic (full film) lubrication was also
the focus of Müller’s experimental work [22] in 1964.
His experiments with elastomeric toroidal seals and
quad (X) rings revealed the effects of the stroking
velocity, seal preloading, and fluid viscosity on seal-
ing performance in terms of leakage and friction. Of
particular importance was his discussion on the film-
thickness difference between instrokes and outstrokes
(see Fig. 2 for the direction clarification), as well as on
the elastohydrodynamic film thickness of elastomeric
reciprocating seals.
In 1969, Aston et al. [59] made a significant con-
tribution by presenting their experimental work on
rubber seal friction at temperatures of up to 200 ◦ C.
The importance of that work was on the demon-
strated relation between temperature and rubber-
specimen dimensions, which affected the frictional
force. Moreover, Aston et al. studied the relaxation
and subsequent recovery rate of rubber after peri-
ods of inactivity, which caused a reduction of the
frictional force in time. Such viscoelastic phenom-
ena are crucial in sealing performance and met in
many hydraulic-seal applications such as those in the
aerospace sector. They are also related to the natural
ageing of elastomeric materials and can be explained
via the network theory of rubber [60].
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
Another significant contribution from the 1960s is
the work of Dowson and Swales [25], who combined
experimental work with theoretical predictions via the
elastohydrodynamic lubrication theory. They devised
a rotating disc machine to test a cylindrical rubber
block, emulating reciprocating seals and very long
strokes. The sealing contact pressure was measured
by a piezo-electric transducer and the film thickness
was measured via capacitance techniques. The theory,
generally, supported the experimental findings show-
ing increase of film thickness with speed and decrease
with contact pressure. Moreover, the fundamental
sealing mechanism of reciprocating seals, i.e. the leak-
age difference between outstrokes and instrokes, was
revealed. The latter, obviously, resulted in concluding
that seal leakage-per-cycle (in reciprocating seals, an
operating cycle consists of one outstroke followed by
one instroke) is zero if the fluid that leaked during
the outstroke is fully returned to the sealed chamber
during the instroke.
Moving on to the 1970s, the experimental contribu-
tions of Field and Nau [24, 49], focusing on rectangular
rubber seals, improved the understanding of seal-
ing mechanisms and performance issues. By using
optical interferometry and electrical transducers to
measure the film thickness, they produced results
on leakage, friction, and contact pressure. However,
those results were characterized by some inconsisten-
cies. The reason for the latter, apart from a probable
lack of high-precision instrumentation at that time,
could be found in a study of Flitney and Nau [61]
in the late 1980s, which revealed a scatter in results
obtained from seven laboratories located in different
countries, yet based on experiments under controlled
conditions. A possible explanation postulated in refer-
ence [61] was that the adherence to test specifications
was hindered by the lack of standardized methods in
sealing technology.
Another significant contribution from the 1970s was
the experimental work of Hirano and Kaneta [27]
in 1971 who measured the friction force and leak-
age of nitrile-rubber D-rings in reciprocating motion.
They observed how the mixing of air bubbles with
hydraulic fluid in the sealing contact affected leakage
and friction. (Similar observations about air bubbles
indicating cavitation at the edges of the contact and
leading to film depletion because of the oil obstruc-
tion by the bubbles have been reported by Rana [62],
although that was happening in low-load contacts
after long periods of operation (more than 30 min)
and the phenomenon was weak when the contact load
was increased.) Hirano and Kaneta [27] also observed
the now well-known phenomena of rubber stiction
at the start-up and the reversal of motion, owing to
collapse of the fluid film at the sealing contact. They
also showed how friction and leakage were related
to the stroking length and how it became unsta-
ble in short stroking-length situations. In fact, they
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
discussed how the development of a stable hydro-
dynamic film in the sealing contact depends on the
ratio of the stroking length to the seal contact width.
If the said ratio is >2, sealed fluid, which is trans-
ported through the sealing contact at about half the
speed of the contact counterfaces, can reach the out-
let zone of the contact and, thus, leakage takes place.
This observation is, obviously, of paramount impor-
tance in reciprocating-seal leakage, friction, and wear.
The same conclusion was reached in an equally sig-
nificant study by Field and Nau [29] in 1975, who,
additionally, studied the effects of seal hardness and
preloading or initial interference, seal edge (or corner)
geometry, and back-up clearance. These parameters
were much later included in theoretical models by
other researchers and their effects quantified (more
on that later). What is perhaps most worthy of remem-
bering from Field and Nau [29] is their graphs on the
variation of the minimum film thickness and friction
force of a reciprocating rubber seal during a full cycle
(see Fig. 3). The differences between outstroke and
instroke dictate the leakage-per-cycle and explain the
seal behaviour during each stroke.
Fig. 3 The variation of the minimum film thickness of
a rectangular rubber seal during outstrokes and
instrokes (from Field and Nau [29])
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
5
In the first 40 or so years of sealing research (up
to and including the 1960s), the main parameters
affecting sealing performance had been identified and
experimentally studied. Naturally, the quality of the
experimental work was depending on the quality of the
laboratory equipment and the efficiency of the tech-
niques used. From the oil weighing for leakage mea-
surements in the 1940s to the video-camera recording
of the sealing contact in the late 1990s, there has been
a long way of custom-built apparatuses and measure-
ment techniques of variable success. Four variables
are of major importance in all of those studies, namely
the contact pressure distribution and width, the con-
tact film thickness, the seal frictional force, and the
leakage rate.
The measurement of static contact pressure distri-
butions [34, 63–70] has been performed by using strain
gauges, piezo-electric force transducers [24, 25, 71],
photoelastic methods [72], as well as inductive trans-
ducers for measuring displacements. The latter has
also been used in film-thickness measurements, in
addition to electrical capacitance [24, 25, 29, 49, 66,
71] and resistance methods [23, 67, 73], as well as opti-
cal interference and fluorescence techniques [74–76].
Recently developed methods on film-thickness mea-
surements such as ultrasonic techniques have also
been used, although the latter has been applied to
mechanical seals [77] and not to reciprocating seals
yet as far the author is aware.
The measurement of friction of rubber-like recipro-
cating seals has been the focus of most experimental
studies. Lack of standardized methods and commer-
cial apparatuses dictated the construction of various
rigs and devices to fit specific purposes. The com-
plexity and individuality of those approaches make a
detailed discussion very difficult but a lot of informa-
tion can be found in the doctoral theses and related
publication of Kanters and Visscher [52, 53, 78] for
studies conducted up to 1990.
The measurement of leakage of reciprocating seals is
usually done by weighing the leaked fluid after remov-
ing it from piston rods. This is most likely the oldest
method and has been used by most researchers [9, 22,
24, 27, 71, 79, 80]. A few other methods have also been
used such as measuring the electrical capacitance of
leaked oil layers with one or two electrodes [81] as well
as by measuring the oil flow necessary to maintain a
constant sealed pressure [24, 71, 82, 83].
Other important variables such as the static and
dynamic extrusion of elastomeric seals into large
clearances [84] have also been measured but the
main focus was on the phenomena taking place at
a sealing interface. The use of optical interferometry
since at least the 1960s gave new results to con-
sider in the study of hydrodynamic films, involving
the contacts between polymers (including rubber),
steel, and, especially, glass. In this respect, the work
of Blok and Koens [74] in 1965 was important because
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
6 G K Nikas
it addressed the problem of poor reflectivity of rub-
ber surfaces (owed to high surface roughness and
dark colour) by using an externally aluminized, thin,
plastic-sheet cover on the rubber. The method was
applied to rubber lubrication a few years later by
Roberts and Tabor [85], too. Optical interferometry in
the study of sealing contacts has more recently been
used by Kanzaki et al. [86, 87] as well as Kaneta et al.
[26]. In the latter study, a mono-chromatic technique
was used in D-rings and lip-shaped, nitrile-rubber,
stationary seals on sinusoidally reciprocating glass.
Unfortunately, in order to improve rubber reflectivity,
the specimens had to be specially moulded to improve
their smoothness, which destroyed their natural sur-
face roughness. A better solution to this problem (bet-
ter still than that in references [74] and [85] discussed
earlier) was used by Rana [62]: by applying a gold
sputtering method, seal specimens were coated with
four layers of gold, each being 50 nm thick. This gave
very high reflectivity without altering significantly the
Fig. 4 Test rigs for reciprocating seals developed by Rana [62]: (a) the original, simpler version [62,
90] and (b) the final, advanced version [62, 91]
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
original average roughness, which, in the case of elas-
tomeric seals, is quite high (typical values in the order
of 1.5 µm [1]).
Apart from optical interferometry, direct observa-
tion of lubricating films in sealing contacts was also
done by cameras and video recording. Schrader [88]
in the late 1970s and Kawahara et al. [67] at the begin-
ning of the 1980s used high-speed cameras to photo-
graph seals sliding on glass cylinders. More recently,
Rana [62], in collaboration with seal manufacturers
in England [89], developed a test rig for stationary
elastomeric seals on a reciprocating glass plate, which
was equipped with a microscope and computer data-
logging of video-recorded images (Fig. 4(a)). Several
tests of rectangular seals were performed with this rig
under static, dynamic, dry, and lubricated conditions,
varying the contact load on the seal, the reciprocating
frequency, and the stroking length [90]. Substitution
of different seals (of various dimensions and rough-
ness profiles) is straightforward. Apart from leakage
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
and friction results, this type of sealing-contact ana-
lysis offered real-time data on the dynamic varia-
tion of hydrodynamic films, including cavitation from
hydraulic-fluid starvation, air bubbles at the edges
of the sealing contact, as well as obstruction of fluid
replenishment by the accumulation of debris particles
(often fragments of seal material).
Rana’s rig [62, 90] was re-designed to allow for
greater flexibility and experimental precision. The
advanced rig [62, 91] (Fig. 4(b)) consisted of a hol-
low, transparent, and high-strength tube connected
to a motor, which transferred reciprocating motion
to the tube via a gear mechanism. Gland, elastomeric
seals were accommodated by a steel casing envelop-
ing and supporting the tube, whereas a hydraulic
circuit supplied red hydraulic fluid to the stationary
seals (refer to Fig. 4(b)) with pressures up to 7 MPa
(although the maximum sealed pressure in the tests
was kept below 1 MPa for safety reasons). A still, exter-
nally mounted boroscope with integral lighting was
focused on a seal and signalled clear images to a CCD
camera and attached computer for data logging and
subsequent processing. That rig provided an array
of results on seal leakage, friction, extrusion, cavita-
tion, and wear, as well as results on surface-roughness
deformation in dynamic conditions, fluid film devel-
opment and collapse, debris particle entrainment, and
so on.Visual observation of the sealing interface shows
that the entrainment of debris particles, including seal
fragments and foreign contaminants, increases leak-
age by distorting the seal surface. If the debris are
harder than the seal material, they stick to the seal
and may abrade the contact counterface (e.g. a piston
rod). The thus-created scoring grooves act like micro-
channels, allowing pressurized fluid to escape to the
low-pressure side of the seal (similar grooves were
artificially created by White and Denny [9] in their
experiments to test this hypothesis, which they ver-
ified). In the experiments of Tanoue et al. [92] with
used lubricating oils, it was found that shaft wear
was significantly affected by sub-micrometre particles
(<0.25 µm) and was proportional to the concentra-
tion of the particles. Remarkably, significant wear was
observed even for small particle concentrations, e.g.
0.2 per cent by weight.
Another important finding from the work of Rana
[62] was that, during the initial running-in period,
seals became smoother. Specifically, in Rana’s tests,
the average roughness was reduced from 1.8 to 1.1 µm
and skewness (a measure of the asymmetry of the
roughness profile about the mean line) reduced from
1.07 to 0.23 µm, even though the seal was sliding on
an (ultra smooth) glass surface. Wear was reduced
after the initial running-in period and was higher at
the end of the strokes because of a reduction of the
film thickness caused by the lower sliding speed (or
instantaneously zero speed during the reversal of the
entrainment velocity). Such results are of importance
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
7
in designing optimized seals and should complement
global optimization algorithms that normally take into
account only basic performance parameters [44, 93].
3 REVIEW OF THEORETICAL STUDIES ON
RECIPROCATING SEALS, MATERIALS, AND
RELATED TOPICS
The theoretical analysis of reciprocating seals began
with the pioneering studies of the 1930s and 1940s (for
example, see references [7] and [9]) but was hindered
and delayed by the challenging nature of the elasto-
hydrodynamics and contact mechanics problems of
flexible seals. The challenges, which are detailed in ref-
erence [1] and briefly in reference [94], are explained
next for the sake of completeness, and blended with
the discussion of progression in the theoretical mod-
elling of hydraulic reciprocating seals and their perfor-
mance evaluation. They concern both the mechanics
and the lubrication modelling of hydraulic seals.
The main problem is the flexible nature of recip-
rocating seals, which are made of either polymeric
materials (including elastomers and, generally, rub-
ber compounds), thermoplastics such as polytetra-
fluoroethylene (PTFE), ultra-high-molecular-weight-
polyethylene (UHMWPE), polyurethanes, and com-
posite materials such as bronze-filled PTFE in coaxial
seals [95], PTFE with glass fibres bonded with elas-
tomers as in rotary vane seals (Fig. 1) [4, 96, 97], or
PTFE filled with stainless steel or graphite. Even when
the main sealing element is not really flexible, the
supporting sealing element definitely is in order to
allow automatic adjustment of the contact pressure
to sealed pressure variations (e.g. observe the glyd-
ring rod seal at the bottom-right corner in Fig. 1).
Polymeric and composite materials have a non-linear
stress–strain behaviour, including viscoelasticity (as in
elastomers), viscoplasticity (as in PTFE), and, gener-
ally, finite elasticity, involving several experimentally
derived coefficients, which make their mechanics
modelling a complicated task.
3.1 Studies on hydraulic-seal materials and
constitutive laws
Elastomers suit hydraulic seal applications because of
their resilience. They accept large tensile, compres-
sive, and shear strains without permanent deforma-
tion, which is perfect for fitting in different housings
and adapting to pressure variations. This is owed
to their low elastic and shear moduli, as well as
incompressibility (Poisson’s ratio very close to 0.5,
normally >0.490). However, their mechanical prop-
erties strongly depend on temperature, the imposed
strain and strain rate, and change in time as they
age. Their Young’s modulus often exhibits up to two
orders of magnitude change when the temperature
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
8 G K Nikas
Fig. 5 Stress–strain curves of an elastomer used in
hydraulic reciprocating seals, with glass transi-
tion temperature of −47 ◦ C (see, for example,
references [1], [89], [94], [98], and [99])
is changed between positive and sub-zero values [98,
99], and is different in tension than in compression
(see Fig. 5). The stiffening of elastomers with dropping
temperature is maximized near the glass transition
temperature (usually between 0 and −70 ◦ C, depend-
ing on the particular material and signifying the tran-
sition from the rubbery to the glassy state), where
potentially irreversible structural changes ensue [100],
which are characteristic of the molecular structure of
elastomers. This fact, in combination with the typi-
cally high thermal expansion coefficient of elastomers
(10−4 − 3 × 10−4 K−1 [95]) implying large dimensional
changes with temperature, is critical in aerospace
applications and can cause sealing failure from loss
of contact pressure at low temperatures [1, 4, 94], the
most dramatic example of which was the destruction
of the NASA space shuttle Challenger in 1986 [1, 5, 94].
Dimensional changes of hydraulic seals in the form
of swelling are also met in cases where porous seals
absorb hydraulic fluid.
Further complications in the modelling of elastomer
mechanics arise by the elastomer not following the
same stress–strain path in loading/unloading (hys-
teresis) and by responding to load depending on the
magnitude of past acquired strain (memory). Such
non-linear effects are stronger at temperatures near
or lower than the glass transition temperature and
become apparent when seals remain stationary (set)
for long periods of time. The latter leads to seals adher-
ing to their metallic counterfaces and having high fric-
tion during the starting up of motion (see, for example,
the transient frictional behaviour of the rotary vane
seals in reference [4]; see also the study of Gibson
et al. [101]). It also causes stick-slip and vibration,
which is reduced by anti-extrusion rings (Fig. 2) or,
practically, avoided by using thermoplastics instead of
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
elastomers (e.g. the glyd rings in Fig. 1) or twin-lipped
seals (Fig. 1), naturally retaining lubricant between
their lips and avoiding adhesion. In addition, elas-
tomer ageing [102] from oxidation, which is, naturally,
faster at higher temperatures, and (sometimes) chem-
ical degradation from incompatible hydraulic fluids,
cause material hardening and, eventually, embrittle-
ment and fragmentation. In fact, rubber ageing has
been found to reduce friction and increase abrasive
wear in lubricated conditions [102].
A realistic description of the thermomechanics of
elastomeric materials [60] such as those used for recip-
rocating seals is based on the statistical–molecular
or network theory of rubber elasticity [6], which is
quite old but has passed the test of time. According to
the theory, elastomers are compounds of chemically
cross-linked macro-molecules (see section 1.5 in ref-
erence [100]), which create a three-dimensional net-
work. The macro-molecules (long molecular chains)
are folded, kinked, and of three types: linear, branched,
and cross-linked. The linear chains move easily recip-
rocally, giving elastomers the characteristic softening
when heated or stiffening when cooled. The cross-
linked chains however resist reciprocal motion, giving
elastomers resistance to flow when heated. Ther-
mally agitated atoms from said macro-molecules can
assume a variety of statistically determined confor-
mations [103] (hence the ‘statistical-molecular’ title
of the theory), allowing for continuous variation of
the free space between the molecular chains. This
neatly explains the extensibility of elastomers at tem-
peratures higher than the glass transition temperature
and their stiffening at temperatures close to or below
the glass transition temperature when the transient
chain motion is slowed down or almost ceases, making
elastomers behave like brittle solids.
Although in a few reciprocating-seal modelling
studies the elastomer mechanics have been mod-
elled in the frame of viscoelasticity (e.g. by using a
generalized Maxwell model), nearly all other pub-
lished studies have been based on the linear theory of
elasticity. However, according to the present author’s
work [89, 98, 99] on comparing the linear and the
most popular non-linear (Mooney–Rivlin) model in
reciprocating seals at temperatures between −54 and
+135 ◦ C, the linear theory of elasticity in reciprocat-
ing elastomeric seals is adequate for maximum seal
strains up to 10 per cent; above that limit, models of
finite elasticity should, ideally, be employed to give
more accurate leakage and friction results.
The most popular phenomenological models on
rubber hyperelasticity can be found in some books
dealing with finite elasticity such as Holzapfel’s book
[104]. A lot of related material can be found in reviews
[60, 103, 105–107], among which the papers of Treloar
[103] in 1976 and Ogden [107] in 1986 (both pioneers
in rubber thermoelasticity) are of lasting value. The
models usually deal with incompressible, hyperelastic
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
(rubber-like) materials and express the mechanical
properties in terms of the energy function. Specifi-
cally, the elastic strain energy per unit volume, W , is
expressed as a function of the three strain invariants,
that is W = W (I1 , I2 , I3 ), where
⎫ µ1
I1 = λ21 + λ22 + λ23
⎪
⎬ 2
I2 = (λ1 λ2 ) + (λ2 λ3 ) + (λ3 λ1 )
2 2 2
(1)
⎪
⎭ 2
I3 = (λ1 λ2 λ3 ) 2
where λi (i = 1, 2, 3) stands for principal stretch (ratio
of deformed to reference length). In the Ogden model
[108–110] in particular, the strain function is

N
µn   σi = λi
W = λα1n + λα2n + λα3n −3
n=1
αn
where µn and αn (n = 1, 2, . . ., N ) are constant shear
moduli and dimensionless constants, respectively,
which are experimentally derived (for typical values
of these constants, see p. 236 in reference [104]).
Additionally, for incompressible materials, λ1 λ2 λ3 = 1.
According to Holzapfel (p. 239 in reference [104]),
Ogden’s model for N = 3 (equation (2)) excellently
replicates the finite-strain behaviour of rubber-like
materials as proved in references [108] and [111] to
[114] among others. However, it should be empha-
sized that the difference between Ogden’s model and
other phenomenological models becomes apparent
only at high stretches. Based on the present author’s
research (for example, see references [89], [98]), and
[99]), typical polymeric reciprocating seals are usu-
ally not strained >15 per cent during operation.
This normally justifies the use of the classic linear
(Hookean) theory of elasticity [98], which, moreover,
is capable of directly accounting for thermal strains,
a feature absent from the popular non-linear models
unless approximately (not rigorously) introduced as
was done by the present author in references [89], [98],
[99], and [115] to [117] with a modified Mooney–Rivlin
model.
Despite the effectiveness of Ogden’s model, the
Mooney–Rivlin model based on the pioneering work
of Mooney [118] in 1940 and Rivlin [119] in 1948 on
finite isotropic elasticity is the most popular, followed
by the simpler Neo–Hookean model. In fact, the afore-
mentioned models can be derived from Ogden’s model
(equation (2)) by setting (N = 2, α1 = 2, α2 = −2) for
the Mooney–Rivlin model and (N = 1, α1 = 2) for
the Neo–Hookean model. Several other constitutive
approaches for incompressible, rubber-like materials
such as the Varga model [120] can be found in the lit-
erature and some are readily available to use in finite-
element commercial software but the Ogden model
with N = 3 in equation (1), the Mooney–Rivlin, and the
Neo–Hookean model, as summarized in equation (3),
are met most often and, in this author’s research expe-
rience, are deemed sufficient in reciprocating seals,
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
9
with preference to the first two
⎫

3
µn   ⎪
⎪
⎪
Ogden : W = λα1n + λα2n + λα3n −3 ⎪
⎪
αn ⎪
⎬
n=1
µ2
Mooney−Rivlin : W = (I1 − 3) − (I2 − 3) ⎪
⎪
2 ⎪
⎪
µ1 ⎪
⎪
Neo−Hookean : W = (I1 − 3) ⎭
(3)
Having decided which constitutive model to use, the
Cauchy (true) principal stresses are given by [104]
∂W
− pc (i = 1, 2, 3) (4)
(2) ∂λi
where pc is a hydrostatic pressure, calculated from
equilibrium equations and boundary conditions (for
details, see references [1] and [98]). For the Mooney–
Rivlin model, a standard engineering stress–strain
test of the material in question at the temperature
of interest suffices to derive the necessary constants
[98]. Nevertheless, in lack of such results, a reason-
able approximation to use is µ1 = −4µ2 (see pp. 7–33
in reference [121]). Combining the latter with the
condition of consistency between the Mooney–Rivlin
and the classic linear (Hookean) model, expressed by
G = µ1 − µ2 (see equation (6.120) in reference [104])
where G = E/(2 + 2ν) is the shear modulus with E
being the Young’s modulus and ν the Poisson’s ratio,
and taking ν = 0.5 for incompressible materials, the
following approximation is obtained: µ1 ∼ = 4E/15 and
µ2 ∼= −E/15.
The phenomenological models discussed thus far
refer to rubber-like materials and are suitable for
polymeric reciprocating seals. The basic mechanics
analysis of such seals, consisting of calculating the
three principal stresses for known strains by equation
(4), is sufficient when the seals are of simple shape
such as rectangular. As far as the author is aware (year:
2008), it is surprising that there are no publications
in the literature utilizing the non-linear models in
reciprocating seals and all rely on the linear model,
except those of the present author [98, 99, 115–117]. In
cases of seal shapes other than simple, e.g. step seals,
U-cups, and so on (Fig. 1), a simple mechanics analy-
sis is unfeasible. In the latter case, the finite-element
method has been utilized, which readily allows the
use of non-linear models, even those that incorporate
thermal and compressibility effects. Unfortunately,
there are several other properties of rubber-like mat-
erials, particularly those filler- or particle-reinforced
composites, which make their mechanical analysis
even with commercial finite-element software prob-
lematic. Those properties include stress softening
in cyclic loading (Mullins effect), strain stiffening
at large stretch, load-frequency-dependent response,
temporal softening at high temperature because of
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
10
scission of molecular cross-links that can even cause
permanent set of the material, and so on. Some con-
stitutive models have been developed to deal with
some of the said effects as in references [122] to [126].
However, their applicability may be limited to very
specific cases and they always require experimental
verification.
Even though the majority of published studies deal
with elastomeric seals, some studies have included
PTFE, UHMWPE, polyurethanes, and composite seals.
The main benefits of these materials over elastomers
are their increased wear resistance, avoidance of stick-
slip motion and extrusion, lower friction, and broader
operating-temperature range. Zhang’s review [127] on
polymer tribology and related book [100] (ch. 16)
comprise an excellent source of reference.
PTFE in particular has been used in hydraulic seal-
ing since the 1950s [128–132]. It is a thermoplastic
better known for its low-friction properties. It has a
very high resistance to ageing [129] and may be used
in various compounds for temperatures in excess of
250 ◦ C [133], i.e. temperatures much higher than those
allowed in elastomeric-seal applications. Its low fric-
tional resistance, apart from its low surface energy, is
also attributed to surface porosity, which results in
a small contact area. Moreover, in hydraulic recipro-
cating seals, surface pores of PTFE act as lubricant
pockets. This results in exceptionally low friction and
avoidance of stick-slip and vibration, even after long
periods of inactivity or low stroking velocities. How-
ever, the porosity may increase leakage. Moreover,
the low stiffness of PTFE leads to accelerated wear
because of delamination [134] when the material is
rubbed against metallic surfaces such as piston rods.
In fact, accelerated wear of the PTFE may occur even
when piston rods are made very smooth (e.g. super
finished), which results in polishing the PTFE dur-
ing extended periods of sliding and in a significant
increase of friction. For these reasons, PTFE is nor-
mally met in compounds and composites, e.g. filled
with bronze in coaxial seals [95], filled with stain-
less steel, graphite, or glass fibres and elastomeric
compounds as in rotary vane seals [4, 96, 135]. Unfor-
tunately, PTFE in its various compounds is, mechani-
cally, a very complex material, with different response
in tension and compression, whereas its Young’s mod-
ulus, yield point, and Poisson’s ratio all greatly depend
on its composition [136–138]. Li and Mays [135] have
effectively demonstrated this complexity in their spe-
cially adapted finite-element analysis of PTFE rotary
seals. Other materials used in hydraulic seals pose no
less complexity and may only suit particular applica-
tions. For example, UHMWPE cannot be used if the
operating temperature normally exceeds 80 ◦ C [133].
Thus, matching the seals to their intended use and
operating environment is the first priority in seal selec-
tion, as is realized by studying product catalogues of
seal manufactures [2, 3].
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
G K Nikas
3.2 Studies on hydraulic-seal mechanics and
elastohydrodynamics
As is realized from section 3.1, the mechanical analysis
of hydraulic seals is a complicated task. The com-
plexity of the available phenomenological models for
rubber-like materials precludes (even approximate)
analytical solutions in the solid mechanics of hydraulic
reciprocating seals in all but the simplest geome-
tries such as rectangular. This trend is clear in all
related literature studies. The older studies resorted to
either approximate analytical solutions for very sim-
ple geometries or numerical solutions for seal shapes
other than rectangular, yet still rather simple (e.g.
toroidal). Moreover, they all used the linear theory of
elasticity or elementary stress analysis to resolve seal
stresses and strains in the context of solid mechan-
ics. In most recent studies (after the year 2004 or so),
commercial finite-element software has been used to
deal with complex geometries such as for step and
U-cup seals.
The simple, approximate analytical solutions of
older studies remain valuable as they provide much
clearer understanding of the sealing mechanisms and
ways to optimize seals. In chronological order, most of
the significant contributions in this field can be found
in the publications of Hooke et al. [32, 43] (rubber
O-rings), Johannesson [34] (rubber O-rings), Drag-
oni and Strozzi [139] (rubber O-rings), Field and Nau
[31] (perfectly rectangular rubber seals), Strozzi [68]
(rectangular-rounded, elastomeric seals), Johannes-
son and Kassfeldt [140] (elastomeric seals of arbitrary
cross-section), Nikas [89, 98, 99, 115–117, 141–143]
(rectangular-rounded elastomeric seals), Nikas and
Sayles [97] (rectangular-rounded composite seals),
and Nikas [4, 96] (rectangular-rounded, composite,
and rotary vane seals in alternating rotation). In
the aforementioned studies, the contact pressure at
a sealing contact is calculated by either assuming
plane-strains conditions or via an elementary stress
analysis with strains calculated from the amount of
surface interference. Shear from contact friction is
usually neglected, although shear stresses inside a
seal’s body can be taken into account – see for exam-
ple Nikas [141]. Simple analytical studies have also
been conducted by Karaszkiewicz [144] on O-rings
and composite seals with O-ring and PTFE parts [145].
For seal shapes other than rectangular and/or when
numerical accuracy is of priority, the finite-element
method is used [46, 52, 68, 70, 82, 146–160]. A review
of this method for the period 1976–2003 on rubber-
like materials with an extensive bibliography can be
found in reference [161]. Various types of hydraulic
seals have been analysed with this method including
rectangular with rounded or chamfered ends [46, 52,
68, 147, 154, 156], O-rings [147, 149, 156, 158], X-rings
[148], U-cups [150, 151, 153, 155, 157, 159, 160], and
step seals [160].
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
Naturally, the main goal of theoretical models is
to evaluate sealing performance in terms of leakage
and friction. This requires accounting for the sealed-
fluid effect at a sealing contact, which the previously
mentioned computation of the pressure distribution
is only a part of. It is established experimentally and
theoretically [1] that a lubricating film of nanometre
to micrometre thickness is present at a sealing con-
tact under reciprocating conditions. The calculation
of that film thickness and its distribution in a contact
is based on the theory of elastohydrodynamic lubri-
cation [162], which is essentially represented by the
Reynolds equation in its various forms, depending on
application. Reciprocating seals are normally axisym-
metric, which means that leakage takes place along
the seal axis of symmetry. Thus, the one-dimensional
form of the Reynolds equation has been employed in
almost all studies [143]
 cubic polynomial, imaginary roots should be correctly
∂ ρh3 ∂p ∂(ρh) ∂(ρh)
= 6V + 12
∂x η ∂x ∂x ∂t
where p = p(x, t) and h = h(x, t) are the local pres-
sure and the local film thickness at the sealing contact,
respectively, V is the sum of the tangential velocities
of the contact counterfaces, ρ = ρ(p) and η = η(p) are
the local mass density and the local dynamic viscos-
ity of the sealed fluid at the sealing contact for a given
operating temperature, respectively, and t stands for
time. A more general, two-dimensional (2D) form of
the Reynolds equation was used by Nikas [89, 141]
and in subsequent publications [98, 99, 115–117] deal-
ing with various issues of reciprocating seals, because
the intention was to account for fluid transporta-
tion between roughness asperities transversely to the
direction of motion in an attempt to improve accuracy
in leakage calculations. However, this adds complex-
ity to the solution process and is, generally, not really
necessary.
The usual simplification of equation (5) is to ignore
the last term ∂(ρh)/∂t dealing with transient effects
and, thus, treat the lubrication problem for steady-
state conditions only. This is applicable only when
the stroking length is significantly greater than twice
the sealing-contact size and, additionally, both the
beginning and the ending of strokes are ignored. The
remaining Reynolds equation can be solved numer-
ically either for film-thickness or for the contact-
pressure distribution with appropriate kinematical
and boundary conditions, e.g. the no-slip and the
cavitation conditions [143].
The early solutions of the Reynolds equation for
reciprocating seals were based on assumed film thick-
ness and/or measured contact pressure distributions.
For example, White and Denny [9] calculated film
thickness by assuming a tapered film profile and a
parabolic pressure distribution. Müller [22] used mea-
sured contact pressure distributions and a tapered film
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
11
profile, which was different between outstrokes and
instrokes. In fact, the Reynolds equation is normally
solved for the film thickness h because the contact
pressure is calculated from a solid-mechanics analy-
sis as if the contact were dry. The latter is fully justified
[143] by the thinness of typical fluid films in recipro-
cating seals, which imposes a radial strain negligibly
small in comparison with the normal strains from seal
interferences and loading.
The fact that the contact pressure can be con-
sidered known has been taken advantage of in the
literature in the so-called inverse hydrodynamic (IH)
theory [163]. According to that theory, the Reynolds
equation (5) is developed to a cubic algebraic equation
for the film thickness [162]. However, the applica-
tion of this method to elastomeric reciprocating seals
met numerical obstacles caused by the flexibility of
the seals. Specifically, in calculating the roots of the
identified and resolved, otherwise numerical instabil-
(5)
ity will quickly destroy the convergence to the correct
solution [37, 40]. Nevertheless, the method has been
extensively applied [30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38–41, 43, 52,
71, 72, 164–166].
A modified version of the IH theory was developed
by Nikas [143] and applied in elastomeric and com-
posite rod and rotary-vane seals in references [4], [96],
[97], and [143] for reciprocating motion in curved
contact geometries, including transient effects [4, 96].
Instead of analytically solving the cubic polynomial of
the film thickness, the following first-order, ordinary
differential equation was derived [143]
dH H 3 d2 q/dx 2
= (6)
dx 6V − 3H 2 dq/dx
where H ≡ ρh and dq/dx ≡ (dp/dx)/(ηρ 2 ). An inlet
boundary condition was applied [143] (and an addi-
tional initial condition in the case of transient analysis
[4]). Equation (6) was then solved with a robust numer-
ical method, which allowed great numerical stability
and consistency with sub-nanometre precision in the
film thickness [96, 97, 143], as well as extremely fast
(practically instantaneous) computation.
Apart from the IH method, other numerical meth-
ods have also been applied, e.g. the Runge–Kutta
method [167] and the Petrov–Galerkin method [168].
These are iterative methods and vary in complexity.
The simplest or most direct ones are those that derive
the contact pressure from an elementary stress anal-
ysis of the seal and solve the Reynolds equation for
the film thickness iteratively, until the contact pres-
sure and film thickness are in agreement. The study of
Field and Nau [31] is representative of this methodol-
ogy. However, it is also characteristic of the numerical
instability of the method, which is reflected on the slow
numerical convergence rate, the wavy pressure and
film thickness results, and the inability to derive results
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
12
for instrokes [31]. The cause of instability is the sensi-
tivity of pressure to film thickness variations, which is
characteristic of the high non-linearity of the Reynolds
equation. Nevertheless, similar direct approaches can
be found in other studies [71, 141, 167].
In a series of papers [98, 99, 115–117, 141] that dealt
with the 2D form of the Reynolds equation for rod seals
that included surface roughness effects [141], Nikas
tackled the instability problem of the ‘direct approach’
by separating the effect of pressure ripples created by
the roughness asperities from the bulk contact pres-
sure. The bulk contact pressure was left out of the
convergence iterations and only the perturbations of
the roughness asperities were included.
Continuing with the simpler methodologies in solv-
ing the Reynolds equation for reciprocating seals,
the efficient techniques of Hooke on soft lubricated
contacts [169–171] that dealt with the elastohydrody-
namic inlet and exit zones provide a useful insight into
the lubrication problem. His work is particularly rel-
evant in reciprocating seals because the average film
thickness in the contact is almost completely governed
by the conditions at the inlet zone [143]. This is of
major importance in both leakage and friction, as well
as during the reversal of the entrainment velocity (end
of stroke and reversal of motion in reciprocating seals).
The latter causes film thinning [172] and increased seal
wear, as has been verified experimentally in several
studies (for example, see references [62] and [86]).
A method to avoid much of the numerical instability
from the inherent coupling between contact pres-
sure and film thickness in the Reynolds equation was
developed by Ruskell [46]. It was applied to rectangu-
lar rubber seals with chamfered ends under steady-
state conditions and for perfectly smooth contacts.
Ruskell adapted the numerical technique developed
by Rohde and Oh [173, 174] who used a Newton iter-
ation scheme. In Ruskell’s work [46], the elasticity
equation of the seal and the Reynolds equation were
combined into a single integrodifferential equation,
which was solved iteratively. Thus, convergence was
fast and consistent because the reciprocation between
the separate contact pressure and film thickness equa-
tions to correct one with the predictions of the other
was avoided. However, Ruskell’s method still lacked
outright computational speed because the contact
pressure had to be calculated separately (for a static,
frictionless contact) by a (naturally) time-consuming
finite-element analysis. Prati and Strozzi [72] used a
similar method.
In recent years (2006–2008), some more sophisti-
cated numerical methods were developed to tackle
the steady-state elastohydrodynamic problem of
hydraulic seals of various shapes. In the studies of
Salant, Maser, and Yang [153, 155, 157, 159, 160, 175],
which are essentially based on the thesis of Maser [153]
and built on past research experience of Salant and
co-workers on rotary seals, inter-asperity cavitation is
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
G K Nikas
incorporated into the Reynolds equation to deal with
rough contacts. So far, only the seal surface roughness
has been considered; the other contact counterface
has been assumed to be perfectly smooth. Surface
roughness is treated approximately in the context of
the Greenwood–Williamson model [176], i.e. it is sim-
ulated, idealized roughness. Finite-element analysis
has been used to compute the contact pressure of
the seals in dry, static contact, which gives freedom in
dealing with complex seal shapes and utilizing models
of finite elasticity.
The main deficiency of previous studies is that the
‘coupled’ elastohydrodynamic problem has not been
tackled, i.e. the deformation of the seals from friction
in the sealing contacts is unaccounted. This means
that the contact pressure is calculated for station-
ary contact counterfaces. However, in hydraulic seals,
normally, the motion of a counterface deflects the
seal because of contact friction and, thus, changes
the pressure distribution at the contact inlet. This, in
turn, affects the development of the hydrodynamic
film and, consequently, the average film thickness and
friction in the contact. The coupling between pres-
sure and film thickness or between stroking velocity
and contact friction needs to be resolved iteratively.
If this is not done, the sealing performance is essen-
tially evaluated only for unrealistic, idealized (static)
conditions. From a computational-fluid-dynamics or
finite-element point of view, the said coupling is
treated with the so-called fluid–structure interaction.
A couple of recent studies began to address this prob-
lem for simple seal geometries, namely the study of
Öngün et al. [158] on O-rings, and Stupkiewicz and
Marciniszyn [156] on rectangular seals and O-rings.
Needless to say that such studies are complicated and
still deal with steady-state conditions, i.e. they are
applicable only for very long strokes.
3.3 Transient lubrication effects
In reality, reciprocating seals exhibit clearly transient
behaviour, particularly at the ends of strokes and
during the reversal of the entrainment velocity. The
transient elastohydrodynamic problem in reciproca-
ting seals, as expressed by equation (5), has been
theoretically studied in around 1970 by Hirano and
Kaneta [36, 38] for idealized parabolic and Gaussian
contact-pressure distributions. Their work confirmed
numerous experimental observations (for example,
see reference [27]) regarding the importance of the
ratio of the stroking length to the contact width in
the development of a full elastohydrodynamic film. As
already explained, the said ratio must exceed two if it
is to allow sealed fluid, which is normally dragged at
half the sliding velocity of the contact, to travel from
the contact inlet to the outlet.
The value of a transient analysis is obvious when
dealing with seal friction, which is greatly affected by
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals 13

minute changes (in the order of nanometres) in the
average film thickness in the contact. Obviously, wear
is also significantly affected [62]. In fact, squeeze-film
collapse during long periods of inactivity or during
the reversal of entrainment motion can cause fric-
tion so high that seals may be rearranged in their
housings and subsequently fail. The experimental
study of Nwagboso [177] on elastomeric-seal rolling
is characteristic in this respect.
As far as the author is aware (year: 2008), very
few other studies have so far dealt with solving the
transient elastohydrodynamic lubrication problem in
reciprocating seals, namely his own [4, 89, 96, 117].
The problem belongs to the category of ‘soft elas-
tohydrodynamics’ in which there are several general
studies in the literature (for example, see references
[178] and [179]). A simple approach, dealing with
the transient elastohydrodynamics of compliant solids
(which could be applied to reciprocating seals), was
presented by Ikeuchi et al. [180]. In fact, the solu-
tion of the transient problem may be simplified by
ignoring the left-hand side of equation (5). The result-
ing reduced equation is merely a classic, first-order
differential equation of wave propagation. The latter
approach has been verified by Chang [181]. It has
also been applied by the present author in recipro-
cating, rotary vane seals [4, 96] as a means of fast
computations in parametric analyses.
3.4 Surface-roughness effects
Apart from transient effects, there are other aspects of
reciprocating seals that have not been given significant
emphasis in theoretical studies. Surface roughness is
one of those neglected aspects, except in the previ-
ously discussed studies of Salant, Maser, Yang, and
Nikas. It is worth mentioning that, according to the
work of Salant and his co-workers (for example, see

Fig. 6 Examples of film thickness maps at the sealing contacts of rectangular, elastomeric rod
seals. (a) Theoretical [141] and (b) experimental [62, 91]: (a) film thickness contour maps
of a rectangular, elastomeric rod seal, showing film collapse (left to right) as the sealed
pressure is reduced from 27.7 to 0.07 MPa. Patches of direct contact are seen to increase from
left to right (from the theoretical work of Nikas [141]), and (b) contact interface between
a rectangular, elastomeric rod seal and glass. High-pressure side is on the left side of both
images. Sealed pressure: 0.69 MPa on the left with moving rod and less than 0.34 MPa on the
right image with stationary rod (from the experimental work of Rana [62, 91])

JET607 © IMechE 2010 Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
14 G K Nikas

reference [155]), a critical value of average roughness of dynamic seals is rarely in the state originally con-
is predicted to be the limit between a leaking and ceived and simulated: polymeric films from worn or
non-leaking seal, which, naturally, depends on the run-in polymers may be deposited onto hard metallic
operating conditions and seal geometry. It is also note- surfaces, effectively creating a coating with roughness
worthy that, according to the modelling work of Nikas different from that of the hard substrate [198–200].
[89, 141], reciprocating seals normally operate in the
mixed lubrication regime but roughness mainly affects
the maximum and the minimum film thickness, not 3.5 Other topics (seal extrusion, back-up rings,
so much the average film thickness. Figure 6 shows tandem seals)
the theoretical predictions of Nikas [141] on the film There are extremely few studies in the literature that
thickness distribution of a rectangular, elastomeric rod deal with specialized topics such as anti-extrusion
seal, and some related experimental results of Rana rings and tandem seals. This is so because, until
[62, 91] in accordance with the trend of the theoreti- recently, the analysis and evaluation of reciprocating-
cal predictions. It is characteristic that the lubrication seal performance was more empirical than scientific.
of the seal is improved at higher sealed pressures as However, such issues are known for decades.
predicted in reference [141] and verified in references White and Denny [8, 9] in the 1940s discussed seal
[62] and [91]. A further discussion on the roughness extrusion as a factor causing seal damage and sealing
effects can be found in section 4 of reference [143]. failure in the long run. Seal extrusion (Fig. 7) is the
Useful findings have also been reported in the exper- squeezing of a part of a seal into a narrow clearance
imental and theoretical work on rough, rectangular, such as the clearance between a seal housing and the
elastomeric, and reciprocating seals by Kanters and piston rod in a linear hydraulic actuator. It is caused by
Visscher [182], and Kanters [183]. In the latter study,
Kanters used the average-flow model of Patir and
Cheng [184, 185] (as has been done by Salant and co-
workers more recently) to analyse the effects of seal
roughness on seal leakage and friction. He found that
when the ‘lambda ratio’ (defined as the central film
thickness for an ideally smooth contact divided by the
composite RMS roughness of the real contacting sur-
faces) is >4, a full hydrodynamic film is developed and
seal roughness appears unsuppressed. When the ratio
drops below about 2, the seal operates in the mixed
lubrication regime as roughness asperities are partially
but not completely compressed and engage with those
of the piston rod.
However, roughness modelling remains simplis-
tic because several influential factors have yet to
be accounted, such as the transient elastohydrody-
namic inter-asperity interactions, asperity viscoelas-
ticity [186], and inter-asperity adhesive forces (such
as van der Waals forces) in mixed lubricated condi-
tions [187, 188]. Such parameters should be addressed
in order to simulate experimentally observed elas-
tomeric seal behaviour including stick-slip phenom-
ena [189] and instabilities in the transition between
dry and wet regimes [190], Schallamach waves [191,
192], and abrasive wear [100, 127, 193, 194]. The work
of Jalisi [195] on the contact mechanics of rough elas-
tomeric contacts gives a good idea of a numerical
approach via finite-element analysis. Further insight
is gained by the general studies of Jin and Dowson
[196] and Kim et al. [197] on the modelling of soft and
rough elastohydrodynamic contacts. Fig. 7 Extrusion of a rectangular, elastomeric, rod seal
Nevertheless, the omission of surface roughness (top picture). Shape of the extruded part and
in theoretical models as a first approximation may its contact pressure with the piston rod for two
be justified. This is so because elastomeric seals are corner radii of the seal (r = 0 and 0.2 mm) (bot-
smoothened during running-in, even when rubbed tom graph). Based on the analytical study of
against glass [62, 91]. Moreover, the typical contact Nikas [142]

Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals 15

the sealed pressure (static extrusion) and the friction

of the seal on its counterface (e.g. a piston rod) during
outstrokes (dynamic extrusion). When the localized
strain at the extruded part is repeated hundreds or
thousands of times in normal reciprocating motion,
permanent deformation may occur, accompanied by
sealing failure. The static and dynamic extrusion of
elastomeric seals have been studied by Reddy and Nau
[84] in 1984.
Apart from experimental investigations on the
causes and effects of extrusion, an analytical solu-
tion to the problem was presented by Nikas [89,
142] for elastomeric, rectangular rounded or cham-
fered, and reciprocating rod seals. The solution was
also applied to rotary vane seals under alternating
rotation [4, 96]. In the aforementioned analytical
study [142], algebraic equations were derived pre-
dicting the shape of the extruded part of a seal and
the pressure on it at its contact with its counterface
(piston rod). Moreover, simple criteria in the form
of algebraic inequalities were mathematically devel-
oped, involving the parameters affecting extrusion and
establishing exactly when extrusion commences. The
conclusion was that the best way to avoid extrusion is
to use anti-extrusion or back-up rings. Another poten-
tial solution was later investigated by the author [97]
and found to be viable, namely the replacement of a
given elastomeric seal with a composite seal of the
same dimensions, comprising a central elastomeric Fig. 8 Tandem seal arrangement (top) and an example
part bonded with two outer PTFE parts along the of its theoretical analysis (bottom diagram) show-
direction of reciprocation. The elastomer-PTFE vol- ing the interseal-pressure abrupt rise after about
umetric proportion was parametrically optimized to 1600 strokes (Nikas and Sayles [115])
produce a composite seal outperforming the origi-
nal elastomeric seal in terms of leakage, friction, and
extrusion resistance. primary seal and, also, prevents dirt ingression into the
With regard to anti-extrusion rings (see for exam- system in the absence of a scraping element.
ple the Polypac PHD seal in Fig. 1), they are used to The performance of tandem seals has been exper-
prevent not only seal extrusion but also roll defor- imentally investigated in very few studies [80, 201–
mation [177]. However, they normally interfere with 203]. All concluded that sealing is mainly controlled
the sealing of the supported seal. The author is not by the primary seal but it is influenced by the interseal
aware of any studies in the literature on the modelling pressure (Fig. 8) and, naturally, by the edge geometry of
of back-up rings except for his own modelling work both seals at their low-pressure sides. Moreover, leak-
[89, 116]. In the latter studies, which are computation- age and friction are also influenced by any back-up
ally complicated, parametric analyses were conducted rings present in the system [202]. Field and Nau [201,
to quantify the effect of back-up rings of rectangular 202] in the early 1970s discovered that in some tandem
cross-section and relatively low stiffness on the sealing seal arrangements (mainly those of identical seals), an
performance of rectangular, elastomeric rod seals. The abrupt pressure rise in the interseal space takes place
operating temperature was varied from −54 to +135 ◦ C after a number of operating cycles. This is caused by
and the sealed pressure from 1 to 35 MPa. Among some leaked fluid flooding the interseal space. They found
interesting conclusions of the study was that the con- that this phenomenon can cause seal extrusion and
tact pressure and the average surface roughness of even complete failure of the system if the interseal
the back-up ring can be optimized to minimize the pressure is not vented before abruptly exceeding the
leakage-per-cycle of the seal–ring pair. sealed pressure (see Fig. 4 in Field and Nau [201]).
Another interesting topic in sealing research con- The phenomenon of interseal-pressure rise has
cerns the use of tandem (dual) seal arrangements been theoretically analysed by Nikas and Sayles [115]
(Fig. 8). Those consist of a primary seal, which does by accounting for a compressible mixture of air and
the major sealing job at the sealed-pressure side, and leaked fluid in the interseal space, and using the van
a secondary seal, which wipes off fluid leaking from the der Waals equation of state for air to simulate the

JET607 © IMechE 2010 Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
16
temporal change of pressure with the leaking fluid
and the number of strokes. A result of this simu-
lation is shown in the bottom diagram of Fig. 8,
which depicts the interseal pressure rise and inter-
seal gas-volume reduction with the number of strokes.
This way, the number of strokes before the pres-
sure starts to peak is predictable. The simulation also
included back-up rings on both elastomeric seals
in a complex, quasi-steady elastohydrodynamic and
non-linear mechanics analysis with surface rough-
ness effects on all elements, followed by performance
analysis in terms of leakage and friction for operating
temperatures between −54 and +135 ◦ C, and sealed
pressure between nearly 0 and 35 MPa. The tandem
seal arrangement showed clear benefits in terms of
leakage and friction and could be optimized for given
operating conditions.
The phenomenon of the interseal pressure rise is
also met in twin-lipped seals. Kanzaki et al. [204]
investigated this experimentally for sinusoidally recip-
rocating motion. They found that the interlip pressure
increases with the sealed pressure and the oil trapped
between the seal lips lubricated the seal, reducing fric-
tion. This is a well-known benefit of twin-lipped seals
[2] and the stored lubricant not only reduces friction
but also prevents the seal from running dry (even
after periods of inactivity), thus eliminating stick-slip
motion and vibrations [94]. The operation of scraping
elements [205] should also be seen under the same
light and as influential of the overall performance of a
sealing system.
4 EXPERIENCE GAINED FROM SEALING
RESEARCH AND THE FUTURE
The knowledge and experience gained from past
research on hydraulic reciprocating seals has ben-
efited the sealing industry immensely. The topics
discussed in the previous sections covered the fun-
damental aspects of sealing performance, i.e. leakage,
friction, and wear. It was shown that seals can be
optimized to offer better sealing performance with
increased reliability and longer service lives. This con-
cerns both existing seal designs and new, innovative
designs for future applications.
With regard to existing seal designs (shapes), past
research has proved the value of paying attention to
details. Some examples are listed next.
1. The values of surface-roughness parameters such
as the average and the RMS roughness are critical in
achieving zero leakage under given operating con-
ditions. An ‘optimal’ seal roughness value exists and
it should be targeted to produce non-leaking seals,
at least in the first half of a seal’s life.
2. The effect of temperature on sealing performance is
major. Seal preloading has to take this into account
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
G K Nikas
to avoid a sealing failure at low temperatures, e.g.
in aerospace applications.
3. Seal extrusion is a problem, which can and should
be avoided. Anti-extrusion rings (separate or inte-
gral to the seals), composite (e.g. elastomeric/
PTFE-glass-fibre), and multi-component seals (e.g.
the polypac PHD seal in Fig. 1) have been designed
to avoid this problem based on past experience and
research.
4. The corner geometry of reciprocating seals at seal-
ing contacts has the greatest influence on leak-
age, friction, and wear. Experimental research and
experience had already shown how this could
be improved before theoretical research showed
mathematically that the corner geometry can be
optimized. See for example the application of this
research in the design of the step seal and the
twin-lipped U-cup seal in Fig. 1.
5. Seal materials have improved as a result of exper-
imental research. Material properties such as stiff-
ness, hardness, and general stress–strain mechani-
cal behaviour have been under scrutiny in order to
produce seals that suit particular applications, i.e.
specific range of operating conditions.
6. As a final but probably most convincing example of
the gain from applied research is the evolution of
seal design based on tribological and mechanical
principles learned from research and experience.
The seals depicted in Fig. 1, particularly the left-
bottom two, utilize a number of innovations such as
anti-extrusion rings, energizing O-rings, compos-
ite materials for low-friction and high-wear rate,
and asymmetrical corner geometry optimizations
to minimize leakage. Such innovations are not
products of imagination but of applied research.
With regard to future seal design, it can be pre-
dicted that this will be a matter of optimizing existing
designs and selecting the best seal for a given appli-
cation based on end-user requirements. For example,
different or conflicting requirements would be min-
imum leakage, minimum friction, and/or minimum
wear. Unfortunately, scientific research has shown that
the aforementioned constraints cannot be simultane-
ously satisfied. There will always be a compromise
between leakage, friction, and wear. It is a matter of
end-user priorities which one performance variable
should be optimized. This is exactly where advanced
theoretical research comes hand-in-hand with past
industrial experience to solve a problem, which is by
all means, very complex. The days of empirical solu-
tions in sealing research are numbered because the
competition is stiff and customers are intolerable (and
rightly so) to sealing partial or total failures. There-
fore, sealing research will continue on a more scientific
basis, taking advantage of improved computing equip-
ment and numerical models capable of more realistic
predictions.
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
The fields where research is lagging and is more
urgently needed include those of surfacial (e.g.
abrasive) wear of reciprocating seals, and estimation
of life expectancy. Ideally, the latter should be in the
form of a performance-degradation curve depicting
the temporal reduction of sealing ability (e.g. increase
of leakage in time). Given the complexity of seal design
and countless performance issues, it would be opti-
mistic to expect a reliable lifetime prediction method
such as that adopted in, e.g. the rolling-bearings indus-
try. Nevertheless, some form of prediction method
may, eventually, be developed, even if it is restricted
to very specific operating conditions. In pursuit of this
target, engineers may have to rely, once again, on semi-
empirical methods. In this authors’ experience, sealing
research has still a long way to go.
5 CONCLUSIONS
After 80 years of scientific research and development
on reciprocating hydraulic seals, the main perfor-
mance issues have been identified and relatively well
understood. Nevertheless, flexible hydraulic seals are
elements of complex mechanical behaviour and pre-
dicting their performance in real (variable) operating
conditions with satisfactory precision is a very chal-
lenging task. A significant amount of work remains to
be done on the modelling front to produce realistic and
reliable computational models of the seal mechanics
and tribology, not suitable for the average user yet (this
is rather ambitious) but for the engineer who wants to
design or optimize such seals. Experiments performed
over a period of decades as well as practical experience
suggest that there are many parameters that have to be
accounted for in order to have a good understanding of
sealing performance. Engineering errors such as that
which led to the destruction of the NASA space shuttle
Challenger in 1986 should not be repeated.
REFERENCES
1 Nikas, G. K. Research on the tribology of hydraulic
reciprocating seals. In Tribology research trends (Ed.
T. Hasegawa), 2008, ch. 1, pp. 11–56 (Nova Science
Publishers, New York, USA).
2 Hydraulic Seals – Linear; Rod seals. Trelleborg seal-
ing solutions catalogue, edition April 2007; PDF file
available from www.tss.trelleborg.com.
3 Hydraulic Seals – Linear; Piston seals. Trelleborg seal-
ing solutions catalogue, edition April 2007; PDF file
available from www.tss.trelleborg.com.
4 Nikas, G. K., Burridge, G., and Sayles, R. S. Modelling
and optimization of rotary vane seals. Proc. IMechE,
Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2007, 221(J6), 699–715.
DOI: 10.1243/13506501JET290.
5 Flitney, R. K. (Ed.) Redesigning the space shuttle’s solid
rocket motor seals. Sealing Technol., 1996, 1996(26),
10–12.
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
17
6 Meyer, K. H., von Susich, G., and Valko, E. Die elastis-
chen Eigenschaften der organischen Hochpolymeren
und ihre kinetische Deutung. Kolloidzeitschrift, 1932,
59, 208–216.
7 Gronau, H. Investigations on gland packings and seal-
ing rings for high hydraulic pressures. Doctoral Thesis,
University of Berlin, Germany, 1935.
8 White, C. M. and Denny, D. F. The sealing mecha-
nism of flexible packings. MAP Scientific and Technical
Memorandum No. 4/45 (interim report), London, UK,
1945.
9 White, C. M. and Denny, D. F. The sealing mech-
anism of flexible packings. Scientific and Techni-
cal Memorandum No. 3/47, UK Ministry of Supply,
1947.
10 Denny, D. F. The friction of rubber sealing rings. British
Hydromechanics Research Association, Res. report No.
458, Harlow, UK, 1953.
11 Denny, D. F. The influence of load and surface rough-
ness on the friction of rubber-like materials. Proc. Phys.
Soc. B, 1954, 66, 721–727.
12 Denny, D. F. The lubrication of fluid seals. In Proceed-
ings of the IMechE Conference on Lubrication and
Wear, 1957.
13 Denny, D. F. Leakage and friction characteristics of
some single-lip U-seals fitted to reciprocating shafts.
British Hydromechanics Research Association, report
RR 595, August 1958.
14 Denny, D. F. Sealing characteristics of multiple-lip
seals fitted to reciprocating shafts. British Hydrome-
chanics Research Association, report RR 614, February
1959.
15 Denny, D. F. Time effects in the static friction of
lubricated rubber. Wear, 1959, 2(4), 264–272.
16 Denny, D. F. Leakage characteristics of rubber seals
fitted to reciprocating shafts. In Proceedings of the
IMechE Symposium on Oil Hydraulic Power Transmis-
sion and Control, London, UK, 1961, pp. 259–268.
17 Cheyney, L. E., Mueller,W. J., and Duval, R. E. Frictional
characteristics of O-rings with a typical hydraulic fluid.
Trans. ASME, 1950, 72(4), 291–297.
18 Morrison, J. B. O-rings and interference seals for static
applications. Mach. Des., 1957, 29(3), 91–94.
19 Hopp, H. Untersuchungen über den reibungswert von
dichtelementen für hubbewegungen. Hydraulik und
Pneumatik Technik, 1957, 1, Heft 2.
20 Lang, C. M. Untersuchungen an berührungsdichtungen
für hydraulishe arbeitszylinder. Dissertation, Technishe
Hochschule Stuttgart, Germany, 1960.
21 Dowson, D. and Higginson, G. R. A numerical solution
to the elastohydrodynamic problem. J. Mech. Engng
Sci., 1959, 1(1), 6–15.
22 Müller, H. K. Leakage and friction of flexible packings
at reciprocating motion with special consideration of
hydrodynamic film formation. In Proceedings of the
2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964,
pp. 13–28 (BHRA).
23 Lawrie, J. M. and O’Donoghue, J. P. The mechanism
of lubrication in a reciprocating seal. In Proceedings
of the 2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing,
1964, pp. 69–80 (BHRA).
24 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. An experimental study
of reciprocating rubber seals. In Proceedings of the
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
18
IMechE Symposium on Elastohydrodynamic Lubrica-
tion, Leeds, UK, 1972, pp. 29–36.
25 Dowson, D. and Swales, P. D. The development of elas-
tohydrodynamic conditions in a reciprocating seal. In
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 1969, pp. 2–10 (BHRA).
26 Kaneta, M., Todoroki, H., Nishikawa, H., Kanzaki,
Y., and Kawahara, Y. Tribology of flexible seals for
reciprocating motion. ASME J. Tribol., 2000, 122(4),
787–795.
27 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Experimental investigation of
friction and sealing characteristics of flexible seals for
reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 5th Inter-
national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 33–48
(BHRA).
28 Nau, B. S. Friction of oil-lubricated sliding rubber seals.
In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 81–96 (BHRA).
29 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. The effects of design param-
eters on the lubrication of reciprocating rubber seals.
In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 1975, pp. 1–13 (BHRA).
30 Dowson, D. and Swales, P. D. An elastohydrodynamic
approach to the problem of the reciprocating seal. In
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 1967, pp. 33–44 (BHRA).
31 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. A theoretical study of the elas-
tohydrodynamic lubrication of reciprocating rubber
seals. ASLE Trans., 1975, 18(1), 48–54.
32 Hooke, C. J., Lines, D. J., and O’Donoghue, J. P. A
theoretical study of the lubrication of reciprocating
O-ring seals. In Proceedings of the 3rd International
Conference on Fluid sealing, 1967, pp. 45–56 (BHRA).
33 Johannesson, H. L. Oil leakage and friction forces
of reciprocating O-ring seals considering cavitation.
ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1983, 105(2), 288–296.
34 Johannesson, H. Calculation of the pressure distribu-
tion in an O-ring seal contact. In Proceedings of the
5th Leeds–Lyon Symposium on Tribology, 1978, pp.
379–387.
35 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamics of rubber seals for
reciprocating motion, lubricating film thickness, and
out-leakage of O-seals. Ind. Eng. Che. Prod. Res. Dev.,
1987, 26(11), 2180–2185.
36 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Theoretical investigation of
friction and sealing characteristics of flexible seals for
reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 5th Inter-
national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 17–32
(BHRA).
37 Ruskell, L. E. C. Reynolds equation and elastohydrody-
namic lubrication in metal seals. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A,
1976, 349(1658), 383–396.
38 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Dynamic behaviour of flex-
ible seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of
the 4th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1969,
pp. 11–20 (BHRA).
39 Theyse, F. H. The inverse hydrodynamic theory and its
application in the design of controlled leakage seals
between moving parts. In Proceedings of the 3rd Inter-
national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1967, pp. 17–32
(BHRA).
40 Fazekas, G. A. On reciprocating toroidal seals. ASME J.
Eng. Ind., 1976, 98, 783–787.
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
G K Nikas
41 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamics of rubber seals for
reciprocating motion. Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev.,
1985, 24(2), 283–289.
42 Medri, G., Prati, E., and Strozzi, A. Elastohydrody-
namic lubrication in elastomeric reciprocating seals.
In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 1981, pp. 55–71 (BHRA).
43 Hooke, C. J., Lines, D. J., and O’Donoghue, J. P. Elas-
tohydrodynamic lubrication of O-ring seals. Proc. Instn
Mech. Engrs, 1966–1967, 181(Part 1, No. 9), 205–210.
44 Johannesson, H. L. Optimum pressure distributions of
hydraulic cylinder seals. In Proceedings of the 9th Inter-
national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1981, pp. 87–102
(BHRA).
45 Chivers, T. C. and Hunt, R. P. The achievement of mini-
mum leakage from elastomeric seals. In Proceedings of
the 8th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1978,
pp. 31–40 (BHRA).
46 Ruskell, L. E. C. A rapidly converging theoretical solu-
tion of the elastohydrodynamic problem for rectangular
rubber seals. J. Mech. Engng Sci., 1980, 22(1), 9–16.
47 Nau, B. S. The state of the art of rubber-seal technology.
Rubber Chem. Technol., 1987, 60(3), 381–416.
48 Nau, B. S. An historical review of studies of polymeric
seals in reciprocating hydraulic systems. Proc. IMechE,
Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 1999, 213(J3), 215–226.
DOI: 10.1243/1350650991542956.
49 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. Film thickness and friction
measurements during reciprocation of a rectangular
section rubber seal ring. In Proceedings of the 6th Inter-
national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1973, pp. 45–56
(BHRA).
50 Flitney, R. K. Reciprocating seals. Tribol. Int., 1982,
15(4), 219–226.
51 Ramsdell, R. G. A primer on fluid power sealing. Funda-
mentals of reciprocating seals. Hydraul. Pneum., 1986,
39(11), 63–65.
52 Kanters, A. F. C. On the calculation of leakage and
friction of reciprocating elastomeric seals. PhD Thesis,
Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands,
1990.
53 Visscher, M. and Kanters, A. F. C. Literature review
and discussion on measurements of leakage, lubricant
film thickness and friction of reciprocating elastomeric
seals. STLE Lubr. Eng., 1990, 46(12), 785–791.
54 Bisztray-Balku, S. Tribology of elastomeric and com-
posite and reciprocating hydraulic seals. Period. Poly-
tech. Ser. Mech. Eng., 1999, 43(1), 63–80.
55 Bisztray-Balku, S. Design development and tribology
of reciprocating hydraulic seals. Period. Polytech. Ser.
Mech. Eng., 2004, 47(1), 163–178.
56 Kaneta, M., Yamagata, Y., Nishikawa, H., Kanzaki, Y.,
Ono, S., and Kawahara, Y. Stribeck curve of flexible
seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the
17th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 2003,
pp. 203–216 (BHRA).
57 Kaneta, M., Takeshima, T., Togami, S., Nishikawa, H.,
and Kanzaki, Y. Stribeck curve in reciprocating seals.
In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 2005, pp. 333–347 (BHRA).
58 Cnops, R. F. The friction of elastomer seals. In Pro-
ceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fluid
sealing, 1964, pp. 81–91 (BHRA).
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
59 Aston, M. W., Fletcher, W., and Morrell, S. H. Sealing
force of rubber seals and its measurement. In Pro-
ceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fluid
sealing, 1969, pp. 64–75 (BHRA).
60 Chadwick, P. Thermo-mechanics of rubberlike mat-
erials. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1974, 276(1260),
371–403.
61 Flitney, R. K. and Nau, B. S. Performance variation in
reciprocating rubber seals for fluid power applications.
STLE Lubr. Eng., 1988, 44(12), 993–1000.
62 Rana, A. S. A tribological study of elastomeric reciprocat-
ing seals for hydraulic actuators. PhD Thesis, Imperial
College London, Mechanical Engineering Department,
2005.
63 May, E. M. Pressure drop across a packing. Appl. Hyd.,
1957, 10(5), 110–114.
64 Olssen, E. Friction forces and oil leakage of O-rings on
axially moving shafts. PhD Thesis, Chalmers University
of Technology, Sweden, 1972.
65 Molari, P. G. Stresses in O-ring gaskets. In Proceedings
of the 6th International Conference on Fluid sealing,
1973, pp. 15–31 (BHRA).
66 Austin, R. M., Flitney, R. K., and Nau, B. S. Con-
tact stress, friction and the lubricant film of hydraulic
cylinder seals. In Proceedings of the 8th International
Conference on Fluid sealing, 1978, pp. 11–20 (BHRA).
67 Kawahara, Y., Ohtake, Y., and Hirabayashi, H. Oil film
formation of oil seals for reciprocating motion. In Pro-
ceedings of the 9th International Conference on Fluid
sealing, 1981, pp. 73–85 (BHRA).
68 Strozzi, A. Static stresses in an unpressurized, rounded,
rectangular, elastomeric seal. ASLE Trans., 1986, 29(4),
558–564.
69 Johannesson, H. L. and Kassfeldt, E. Computer aided
hydraulic cylinder seal design. In Proceedings of the
11th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987,
pp. 314–329 (BHRA).
70 Lindgren, H. Pressure distribution in scraper ring con-
tacts. Wear, 1987, 115(1–2), 31–40.
71 Field, G. J. The elastohydrodynamic lubrication of rect-
angular section rubber seals under conditions of recip-
rocating motion. PhD Thesis, City University London,
England, 1973.
72 Prati, E. and Strozzi, A. A study on the elastohydrody-
namic problem in rectangular, elastomeric seals. ASME
J. Tribol., 1984, 106(4), 505–512.
73 Wernecke, P. W. Analysis of the reciprocating seal-
ing process. In Proceedings of the 11th International
Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987, pp. 249–277 (BHRA).
74 Blok, H. and Koens, H. J. The breathing film between a
flexible seal and a reciprocating rod. Proc. Instn Mech.
Engrs, 1965/66, 180(part 3B), 221–223.
75 Krauter, A. I. Measurement of film thickness for appli-
cation to elastomeric Stirling engine rod seals. ASME J.
Lubr. Technol., 1982, 104(4), 455–459.
76 Kassfeldt, E. Analysis and design of hydraulic cylinder
seals. PhD Thesis, 1987 Luleå University of Technology,
Sweden, 1987.
77 Reddyhoff,T. and Dwyer-Joyce, R. Ultrasonic measure-
ment of film thickness in mechanical seals. Sealing
Technol., 2006, 2006(7), 7–11.
78 Visscher, M. The measurement of the film thickness
and roughness deformation of lubricated elastomers.
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
19
PhD Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The
Netherlands, 1992.
79 Iwanami, S. and Tikamori, N. Oil leakage from an
O-ring packing. In Proceedings of the 1st Interna-
tional Conference on Fluid sealing, 1961, paper B2
(BHRA).
80 Kaneta, M. Sealing characteristics of double reciprocat-
ing seals. J. Jpn. Soc. Lubr. Eng., 1985, 30(3), 194–200.
81 Kambayashi, H. and Ishiwata, H. A study of oil seals for
reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 2nd Inter-
national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964, pp. 29–40
(BHRA).
82 Lindgren, H. Scraper ring properties and behaviour in
hydraulic cylinders. MSc Thesis, Chalmers University of
Technology, Sweden, 1986.
83 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamic lubrication of rubber
seals for reciprocating motion; leakage of seals with an
O-ring. Tribol. Int., 1988, 21(6), 361–367.
84 Reddy, D. and Nau, B. S. The static and dynamic
extrusion of elastomer seals into large clearances. In
Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 1984, pp. 189–196 (BHRA).
85 Roberts, A. D. and Tabor, D. Fluid film lubrication of
rubber – an interferometric study. Wear, 1968, 11(2),
163–166.
86 Kanzaki, Y., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, M. Optical
interferometric observations of oil film behaviour in
reciprocating rubber seals. Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng.
C, 1996, 62(600), 3229–3236.
87 Kanzaki, Y., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, M. Oil film
behaviour and friction characteristics in reciprocating
rubber seals. Part 1: single contact. In Proceedings of the
15th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1997,
pp. 79–95 (BHRA).
88 Schrader, K. Beitrage zur klaerung des abdichtvor-
ganges gummielastischer abdichtungen axial verschieb-
barer hydrostatischer bauteile. PhD Thesis, Dresden
University of Technology, Germany, 1978.
89 Nikas, G. K. Determination of polymeric sealing prin-
ciples for end user high reliability. Technical Report
DOW-08/01, Department of Mechanical Engineer-
ing, Tribology Group, Imperial College London, UK,
2001.
90 Rana, A., Sayles, R. S., Nikas, G. K., and Jalisi, I. An
experimental technique for investigating the sealing
principles of reciprocating elastomeric seals for use in
linear hydraulic actuator assemblies. In Proceedings of
the 2nd World Tribology Congress, Vienna, Austria, 2001
(available on CD-ROM).
91 Rana, A. S. and Sayles, R. S. An experimental study
on the friction behaviour of aircraft hydraulic actuator
elastomeric reciprocating seals. In Proceedings of the
31st Leeds–Lyon Symposium on Tribology, 2004.
92 Tanoue, H., Ishiwata, H., and Tada, H. Effects of solid
particles in lubricating oil on the wear of oil seals
and shafts. In Proceedings of the 5th International
Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 37–48 (BHRA).
93 Shouten, M. J. W., Dollevoet, R. P. B., and de Laat, B.
M. Design of optimized seals for leak-free hydraulic
cylinders. In Proceedings of the 15th International
Conference on Fluid sealing, 1997, pp. 111–131 (BHRA).
94 Nikas, G. K. Fundamentals of sealing and tribology
of hydraulic reciprocating seals. In Proceedings of the
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
20
IMechE 1-Day Seminar ‘Focus on Reciprocating Seals’,
London, UK, 25 June 2008.
95 Müller, H. K. and Nau, B. S. Fluid sealing technol-
ogy (Mechanical Engineering Series 117), 1998 (Marcel
Dekker Inc., New York, USA).
96 Nikas, G. K. Research of fundamental sealing mech-
anisms needed for zero-leakage high-reliability rotary
vane actuators. Technical Report SMI-10/04, Depart-
ment of Mechanical Engineering, Tribology Group,
Imperial College London, England, 2004.
97 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Modelling and optimiza-
tion of composite rectangular reciprocating seals. Proc.
IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2006, 220(J4),
395–412.
98 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Nonlinear elasticity of
rectangular elastomeric seals and its effect on elastohy-
drodynamic numerical analysis. Tribol. Int., 2004, 37(8),
651–660.
99 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Nonlinear elasticity of
rectangular elastomeric seals and its effect on elastohy-
drodynamic numerical analysis. Sealing Technol., 2005,
2005(3), 6–11.
100 Zhang, S.-W. Tribology of elastomers (Tribology and
Interface Engineering Series 47), 2004 (Elsevier, Lon-
don, England).
101 Gibson, I. A., Hooke, C. J., and O’Donoghue, J. P. The
frictional behaviour of reciprocating O-ring seals under
starting conditions. In Proceedings of the IMechE Sym-
posium on Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication, Leeds,
UK, April 1972, paper C13/72.
102 Mofidi, M., Kassfeldt, E., and Prakash, B. Tribological
behaviour of elastomer aged in different oils. Tribol. Int.,
2008, 41(9–10), 860–866.
103 Treloar, L. R. G. The mechanics of rubber elasticity. Proc.
R. Soc. Lond. A., 1976, 351(1666), 301–330.
104 Holzapfel, G. A. Nonlinear solid mechanics, 2000 (Wiley,
New York, USA).
105 Price, C. Thermodynamics of rubber elasticity. Proc. R.
Soc. Lond. A., 1976, 351(1666), 331–350.
106 Chadwick, P. and Creasy, C. F. M. Modified entropic
elasticity of rubberlike materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids,
1984, 32(5), 337–357.
107 Ogden, R. W. Recent advances in the phenomenological
theory of rubber elasticity. Rubber Chem. Technol., 1986,
59(3), 361–383.
108 Ogden, R. W. Large deformation isotropic elasticity –
on the correlation of theory and experiment for incom-
pressible rubberlike solids. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A., 1972,
326(1567), 565–584.
109 Ogden, R. W. Elastic deformations of rubberlike solids.
In Mechanics of solids, the Rodney Hill 60th anniver-
sary volume (Eds H. G. Hopkins and M. J. Sewell), 1982,
pp. 499–537 (Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK).
110 Ogden, R. W. Non-linear elastic deformations, 1997
(Dover Publications, New York, USA).
111 Duffett, G. and Reddy, B. D. The analysis of incom-
pressible hyperelastic bodies by the finite element
method. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 1983,
41(1), 105–120.
112 Sussman, T. and Bathe, K.-J. A finite element formula-
tion for nonlinear incompressible elastic and inelastic
analysis. Comput. Struct., 1987, 26(1–2), 357–409.
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
G K Nikas
113 Simo, J. C. and Taylor, R. L. Quasi-incompressible finite
elasticity in principal stretches. Continuum basis and
numerical algorithms. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech.
Eng., 1991, 85(3), 273–310.
114 Miehe, C. Aspects of the formulation and finite element
implementation of large strain isotropic elasticity. Int.
J. Numer. Methods Eng., 1994, 37(12), 1981–2004.
115 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Computational model of
tandem rectangular elastomeric seals for reciprocating
motion. Tribol. Int., 2006, 39(7), 622–634.
116 Nikas, G. K. Theoretical study of solid back-up rings
for elastomeric seals in hydraulic actuators. Tribol. Int.,
2004, 37(9), 689–699.
117 Nikas, G. K. Transient elastohydrodynamic lubri-
cation of rectangular elastomeric seals for linear
hydraulic actuators. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineer-
ing Tribology, 2003, 217(J6), 461–473. DOI: 10.1243/
135065003322620282.
118 Mooney, M. A theory of large elastic deformation.
J. Appl. Phys., 1940, 11(9), 582–592.
119 Rivlin, R. S. Large elastic deformations of isotropic
materials. IV. Further developments of the general
theory. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A., 1948, 241(835),
379–397.
120 Varga, O. H. Stress-strain behaviour of elastic materials.
Selected problems of large deformations, 1966 (Wiley
InterScience, New York, USA).
121 Finite Element software MSc.Marc (version 2000) –
Volume A. MSC software Corp., Munich, Germany.
Available from http://www.mscsoftware.com.
122 Horgan, C. O., Ogden, R. W., and Saccomandi, G.
A theory of stress softening of elastomers based on
finite chain extensibility. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A., 2004,
460(2046), 1737–1754.
123 Wineman, A. and Shaw, J. A correspondence principle
for scission-induced stress relaxation in elastomeric
components. ASME J. Appl. Mech., 2004, 71(6), 769–
773.
124 Qi, H. J. and Boyce, M. C. Constitutive model of stretch-
induced softening of the stress-stretch behaviour of
elastomeric materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 2004,
52(10), 2187–2205.
125 Dorfmann, A. and Ogden, R. W. A constitutive model
for the Mullins effect with permanent set in particle-
reinforced rubber. Int. J. Solids Struct., 2004, 41(7),
1855–1878.
126 Horgan, C. O. and Schwartz, J. G. Constitutive mod-
eling and the trousers test for fracture of rubber-like
materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 2005, 53(3), 545–564.
127 Zhang, S. W. State-of-the-art of polymer tribology.
Tribol. Int., 1998, 31(1–3), 49–60.
128 Bertolet, E. C. Teflon – use of Teflon packings and seals
in hydraulic operations. In Proceedings of the 12th
National Conference on Industrial Hydraulics, USA,
1956, vol. 10, pp. 56–68.
129 Atkins, L. E. The design of seals in PTFE. In Proceedings
of the 7th International Conference on Fluid sealing,
1975, pp. 11–24 (BHRA).
130 Flitney, R. K. and Nau, B. S. Performance of PTFE
reciprocating seals. Lubr. Eng., 1983, 39(5), 285–291.
131 Lewis, M. W. J. Friction and wear of PTFE-based
reciprocating seals. Lubr. Eng., 1986, 42(3), 152–158.
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals
132 Prokop, J. and Müller, H. K. Friction behaviour and
friction coefficients of PTFE hydraulic rod seals.
Konstruktion, 1987, 39(4), 131–137.
133 Duhring, B. and Iversen, G. The application of plastics
in dynamic seals. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering
Tribology, 1999, 213(J3), 227–237.
134 Stachowiak, G. W. and Batchelor, A. W. Engineering
tribology, 3rd edition, 2005 (Elsevier Butterworth-
Heinemann, London, UK).
135 Li, W. and Mays, S. Analysis of PTFE material in
rotary seals. In Proceedings of the 17th International
Conference on Fluid sealing, 2003, pp. 157–165 (BHRA).
136 Lee, N.-J. and Jang, J. The effect of fibre-content
gradient on the mechanical properties of glass-fibre-
mat/polypropylene composites. Compos. Sci. Technol.,
2000, 60(2), 209–217.
137 Ganghoffer, J.-F., Brillard, A., and De-Borst, R.
Description of the mechanical behaviour of micropolar
adhesives. Math. Comput. Model., 1998, 27(7), 23–49.
138 Caddock, B. D. and Evans, K. E. Negative Poisson ratios
and strain-dependent mechanical properties in arterial
prostheses. Biomaterials, 1995, 16(14), 1109–1115.
139 Dragoni, E. and Strozzi, A. Analysis of an unpressur-
ized, laterally restrained, elastomeric O-ring seal. ASME
J. Tribol., 1988, 110(2), 193–200.
140 Johannesson, H. L. and Kassfeldt, E. Calculation of the
pressure distribution of an arbitrary elastomeric seal
contact. Wear, 1989, 130(1), 3–15.
141 Nikas, G. K. Elastohydrodynamics and mechanics of
rectangular elastomeric seals for reciprocating piston
rods. ASME J. Tribol., 2003, 125(1), 60–69.
142 Nikas, G. K. Analytical study of the extrusion of rectan-
gular elastomeric seals for linear hydraulic actuators.
Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2003,
217(J5), 365–373. DOI: 10.1243/135065003322445287.
143 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Study of leakage and
friction of flexible seals for steady motion via a numer-
ical approximation method. Tribol. Int., 2006, 39(9),
921–936.
144 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamic lubrication of rubber
seals for reciprocating motion; leakage of seals with an
O-ring. Tribol. Int., 1988, 21(6), 361–367.
145 Karaszkiewicz, A. Leakage and friction comparisons in
modern seal designs. Power Int., 1986, 32(383), 299–301.
146 Medri, G., Molari, P. G., and Strozzi, A. Numerical and
experimental stress-strain analysis on rubberlike seals
in large elastic deformations under unilateral contact.
In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on
Fluid sealing, 1978, pp. 19–30 (BHRA).
147 Medri, G. and Strozzi, A. Mechanical analysis of elas-
tomeric seals by numerical methods. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Prod. Res. Dev., 1984, 23(4), 596–600.
148 Dragoni, E., Medri, G., and Strozzi, A. Analysis of
an elastomeric X-ring seal. In Proceedings of the
11th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987,
pp. 160–174 (BHRA).
149 George, A. F., Strozzi, A., and Rich, J. F. Stress fields in
a compressed, unconstrained, elastomeric O-ring seal
and a comparison of computer predictions with experi-
mental results. In Proceedings of the 11th International
Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987, pp. 117–137 (BHRA).
150 Naderi, A., Albertson, K., and Peng, S. Finite element
analysis of a hydraulic seal: BS U -cup. In Proceedings
JET607 © IMechE 2010
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
21
of the 46th National Conference on Fluid Power, NFPA,
Chicago, Texas, USA, 1994, pp. 99–105.
151 Peng, S., Sun, S., and Albertson, K. FEA-Assisted
design of low-friction U -cup as spool valve seals. In
Proceedings of the 47th National Conference on Fluid
Power, NFPA, Chicago, Texas, USA, 1996, pp. 175–182.
152 Claus, R. G. Development of a high performance, heavy
duty piston seal. In Proceedings of the 49th National
Conference on Fluid Power, NFPA, Las Vegas, Nevada,
USA, 2002, pp. 383–389.
153 Maser, N. B. Numerical model of a reciprocating rod seal,
including surface roughness and mixed lubrication.
MSc Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, School of
Mechanical Engineering, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 2006.
154 Tang, J., Yang, W., Ding, Y.-M., Li, J., Zhang, Y., and Lu,
B.-T. Finite element analysis of rectangular rubber seals
(Chinese). Lubr. Eng., Lubr. Seal, 2007, 32(2), 36–39.
155 Salant, R. F., Maser, N., and Yang, B. Numerical model
of a reciprocating hydraulic rod seal. ASME J. Tribol.,
2007, 129(1), 91–97.
156 Stupkiewicz, S. and Marciniszyn, A. Elastohydrody-
namic lubrication and finite configuration changes in
reciprocating seals. Tribol. Int., 2009, 42(5), 615–627.
157 Yang, B. and Salant, R. F. A numerical model of a
reciprocating rod seal with a secondary lip. Tribol.
Trans., 2008, 51(2), 119–127.
158 Öngün, Y., André, M., Bartel, D., and Deters, L. An
axisymmetric hydrodynamic interface element for
finite-element computations of mixed lubrication in
rubber seals. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tri-
bology, 2008, 222(J3), 471–481. DOI: 10.1243/13506501
JET393.
159 Yang, B. and Salant, R. F. Numerical model of a tandem
reciprocating hydraulic rod seal. ASME J. Tribol., 2008,
130(3), 032202.
160 Yang, B. and Salant, R. F. Soft EHL simulations of
U-cup and step hydraulic rod seals. ASME J. Tribol.,
2009, 131(2), 021501.
161 Mackerle, J. Rubber and rubber-like materials, finite-
element analyses and simulations, an addendum: a
bibliography (1976–2003). Model. Simul. Mater. Sci.
Eng., 2004, 12(5), 1031–1053.
162 Gohar, R. Elastohydrodynamics, 2nd edition, 2001
(Imperial College Press, London, UK).
163 Blok, H. Inverse problems in hydrodynamic lubrication
and design directives for lubricated flexible surfaces. In
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Lubri-
cation and Wear, Houston, Texas, USA, 1963, pp. 7–79.
164 Strozzi, A. An assessment of the inverse hydrodynamic
theory. Zag. Eksp. Masz., 1986, 21(1), 123–134.
165 Johannesson, H. L. Piston rod seal and scraper ring
interaction in hydraulic cylinders. Wear, 1989, 130(1),
17–27.
166 Kanters, A. F. C., Verest, J. F. M., and Visscher, M. On
reciprocating elastomeric seals: calculation of film
thicknesses using the inverse hydrodynamic lubrica-
tion theory. STLE Tribol. Trans., 1990, 33(3), 301–306.
167 Yang, Y. and Hughes, F. Elastohydrodynamic analysis
of preloaded sliding seals. ASLE Trans., 1984, 27(3),
197–202.
168 Strozzi, A. Numerical solution of the elastohydro-
dynamic problem in soft reciprocating seals. Eng.
Comput., 1987, 4(3), 199–206.
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
22
169 Hooke, C. J. and O’Donoghue, J. P. Elastohydrody-
namic lubrication of soft, highly deformed contacts. J.
Mech. Engng Sci., 1972, 14(1), 34–48.
170 Hooke, C. J. The elasto-hydrodynamic lubrication of
soft, highly deformed contacts under conditions of
nonuniform motion. ASME J. Tribol., 1986, 108(4),
545–550.
171 Hooke, C. J. The lubrication of soft contacts. In Proceed-
ings of the 13th Leeds–Lyon Symposium on Tribology
(1986) (Tribology Series), 1987, vol. 11, pp. 299–305
(Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
172 Hooke, C. J. The minimum film thickness in lubricated
line contacts during a reversal of entrainment – general
solution and the development of a design chart. Proc.
IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 1994, 208(J1),
53–64. DOI: 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1994_208_349_02.
173 Rohde, S. M. and Oh, K. P. A unified treatment of thick
and thin film elastohydrodynamic problems by using
higher order element methods. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A,
1975, 343(1634), 315–331.
174 Oh, K. P. and Rohde, S. M. Numerical solution of the
point contact problem using the finite element method.
Int. J. Numeri. Methods Eng., 1977, 11(10), 1507–1518.
175 Salant, R. F. Progress towards a realistic numerical
model for elastomer reciprocating seals. Sealing
Technol., 2007, 2007(1), 7–11.
176 Greenwood, J. A. and Williamson, J. B. P. Contact of
nominally flat rough surfaces. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A,
1966, 295(1442), 300–319.
177 Nwagboso, C. O. Evaluation of surface contact forces
on a roll deformed elastomeric seal using the imaging
method. STLE Lubr. Eng., 1994, 50(1), 66–72.
178 Swales, P. D., Dowson, D., and Latham, J. L. Theoretical
and experimental observations of the behaviour of
soft elastic materials under elastohydrodynamic con-
ditions. In Proceedings of the IMechE, Symposium on
Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication, 1972, pp. 22–28.
179 Elsharkawy, A. A. Visco-elastohydrodynamic lubrica-
tion of line contacts. Wear, 1996, 199(1), 45–53.
180 Ikeuchi, K., Fujita, S., and Ohashi, M. Analysis of fluid
film formation between contacting compliant solids.
Tribol. Int., 1998, 31(10), 613–618.
181 Chang, L. A simple and accurate method to calculate
transient EHL film thickness in machine components
undergoing operation cycles. STLE Tribol. Trans., 2000,
43(1), 116–122.
182 Kanters, A. F. C. and Visscher, M. Lubrication of recip-
rocating seals: experiments on the influence of surface
roughness on friction and leakage. In Proceedings of
the 15th Leeds–Lyon Symposium on Tribology, 1989,
pp. 69–77.
183 Kanters, A. F. C. On the elastohydrodynamic lubrica-
tion of reciprocating elastomeric seals: the influence
of the surface roughness. In Proceedings of the 17th
Leeds–Lyon Symposium on Tribology, 1991, pp. 357–
364 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands).
184 Patir, N. and Cheng, H. S. An average flow model for
determining effects of three-dimensional roughness
on partial hydrodynamic lubrication. ASME J. Lubr.
Technol., 1978, 100(1), 12–17.
185 Patir, N. and Cheng, H. S. Application of average flow
model to lubrication between rough sliding surfaces.
ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1979, 101(2), 220–230.
Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015
G K Nikas
186 Grosch, K. A. The relation between the friction and
visco-elastic properties of rubber. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A,
1963, 274(1356), 21–39.
187 Drutowski, R. C. Hertzian contact and adhesion
of elastomers. In Proceedings of the 4th Interna-
tional Conference on Fluid sealing, 1969, pp. 52–57
(BHRA).
188 Wassink, D. B., Lenss, V. G., Levitt, J. A., and Ludema,
K. C. Physically based modelling of reciprocating lip
seal friction. ASME J. Tribol., 2001, 123(2), 404–412.
189 Koenen, A. and Sanon, A. Tribological and vibroa-
coustic behaviour of a contact between rubber and
glass (application to wiper blade). Tribol. Int., 2007,
40(10–12), 1484–1491.
190 Deleau, F., Mazuyer, D., and Koenen, A. Sliding friction
at elastomer/glass contact: influence of the wetting
conditions and instability analysis. Tribol. Int., 2009,
42(1), 149–159.
191 Schallamach, A. How does rubber slide? Wear, 1971,
17(4), 301–312.
192 Cunningham, A., Andrew, K. R., and Roberts, A. D.
Short duration sliding contacts between elastomers
and smooth rigid substrates: exploratory studies with
an instrumented pendulum skid tester. Wear, 1999,
232(1), 122–130.
193 Fukahori, Y. and Yamazaki, H. Mechanism of rubber
abrasion. Part 3: how is friction linked to fracture in
rubber abrasion? Wear, 1995, 188(1–2), 19–26.
194 Zhang, S. W. and Zhaochun, Y. Energy theory of rubber
abrasion by a line contact. Tribol. Int., 1997, 30(12),
839–843.
195 Jalisi, I. S. Z. A numerical method for the simulation
of rough elastomeric contact. PhD Thesis, Imperial
College London, Mechanical Engineering Department,
2002.
196 Jin, Z. M. and Dowson, D. A general analytical solu-
tion to the problem of microelastohydrodynamic
lubrication of low elastic modulus compliant bearing
surfaces under line contact conditions. Proc. IMechE,
Part C: J. Mechanical Engineering Science, 1997, 211(4),
265–272. DOI: 10.1243/0954406971522033.
197 Kim, A. T., Seok, J., Tichy, J. A., and Cale, T. S. Soft
elastohydrodynamic lubrication with roughness. ASME
J. Tribol., 2003, 125(2), 448–451.
198 Eiss Jr, N. S., Wood, K. C., Herold, J. A., and Smyth,
K. A. Model for the transfer of polymer to rough,
hard surfaces. ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1979, 101(2),
212–219.
199 Eiss Jr, N. S. and Smyth, K. A. The wear of polymers
sliding on polymeric films deposited on rough surfaces.
ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1981, 103, 266–273.
200 Myshkin, N. K., Petrokovets, M. I., and Kovalev, A. V.
Tribology of polymers: adhesion, friction, wear, and
mass transfer. Tribol. Int., 2005, 38(11–12), 910–921.
201 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. Interseal pressure between
reciprocating rectangular rubber seals. In Proceedings
of the 5th International Conference on Fluid sealing,
1971, pp. 21–35 (BHRA).
202 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. Interseal pressure between
tandem reciprocating rubber seals with back-up rings.
ASLE Trans., 1973, 16(1), 10–15.
203 Kaneta, M. Sealing characteristics of double recipro-
cating seals. J. JSLE Int. Ed., 1986, 7, 141–146.
JET607 © IMechE 2010
 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals 23

204 Kanzaki, Y., Nakayama, J., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, p local pressure
M. Effects of interlip pressure of reciprocating seals pc hydrostatic pressure
with two lips on sealing and frictional characteristics. q auxiliary variable defined implicitly by
Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng. C, 1996, 62(596), 1533–1539. dq/dx ≡ (dp/dx)/(ηρ 2 )
205 Peppiatt, N. The influence of the rod wiper on the leak-
t time
age from a hydraulic cylinder gland. Sealing Technol.,
V sum of the tangential velocities of the
2003, 2003(12), 5–8.
contact counterfaces
W elastic strain energy per unit volume
x axial coordinate
APPENDIX
α1 , α2 , α3 dimensionless constants
Notation
η local dynamic viscosity
E modulus of elasticity λ1 , λ2 , λ3 principal stretches
G shear modulus µ1 , µ2 , µ3 shear moduli
h local film thickness ρ local mass-density
H auxiliary variable, H ≡ ρh σ1 , σ2 , σ3 Cauchy principal stresses
I1 , I2 , I3 strain invariants (equation (1)) (equation (4))

JET607 © IMechE 2010 Proc. IMechE Vol. 224 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at RICE UNIV on May 18, 2015