XML Template (2015) [10.3.

2015–1:05pm] [1–8]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d (PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]

Original Article

Proc IMechE Part J:

J Engineering Tribology
Frictional study of alumina, 316 stainless 0(0) 1–8
! IMechE 2015
steel, phosphor bronze versus carbon Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

as mechanical seals under dry DOI: 10.1177/1350650115577116

pij.sagepub.com

sliding conformal contact

S Shankar1, G Praveenkumar1 and P Krishna Kumar2

Abstract
This paper presents an investigative study on the frictional characteristics of alumina, 316 stainless steel, and phosphor
bronze materials against resin-impregnated carbon in the form of mechanical seals. An experimental setup was designed
and fabricated to study the frictional characteristics of the seal for varying normal load and speed. Pairing of stationary
seal and rotary seal was done among the three combinations among which alumina versus resin-impregnated carbon
exhibited the superior frictional characteristics. Whereas in comparison with 316 stainless steel versus resin-impreg-
nated carbon and phosphor bronze versus resin-impregnated carbon, the latter exhibited the better frictional charac-
teristics. Phosphor bronze pair and 316 stainless steel pair resulted in low and stable friction coefficient in the range of
0.07–0.08 and 0.12–0.13, respectively. This work highlights that the phosphor bronze might be an alternate substitute for
the applications involving 316 stainless steel as a seal face material, where the frictional characteristics was a major
concern.

Keywords
Mechanical seal, friction, 316 SS, alumina, phosphor bronze, carbon

Date received: 24 December 2014; accepted: 19 February 2015

Introduction techniques involving the deposition of nanocrystalline

Mechanical seals were the machine elements designed diamond films (NCD),5,12 ultra-nanocrystalline dia-
to form a running seal between a rotating and station- mond films (UNCD), and diamond-like carbon
ary part, especially designed to prevent leakages of (DLC) films on the mating seal face.13–15 This tech-
liquid or gases in centrifugal pumps, mixers, or nique had shown a significant improvement in the
other rotating equipments.1,2 The performance and characteristics of the mechanical seals.
reliability of the mechanicals seals mainly depends Many researches were devoted to explore the
upon the wide range of factors such as equipment mechanical and tribological properties of mechanical
design, operation conditions, pumped or sealed seals by altering the material properties of the seal
fluid, pressure and pump speed, support system, faces and altering the surface sensitive properties of
material characteristics, choice, and pairing of seal the seal faces by surface engineering techniques. To
faces.3,4 However, it was reasonable to conclude that ensure a long service life, high-quality materials must
the material properties limit the severity of the appli- be paired and they must be sufficiently hard to oppose
cation that mechanical seals can withstand.2,5 For the wear, resist corrosion, and be capable of producing a
past two decades, tremendous efforts were put in to very flat and smooth surface when lapped.3,16 Most
develop many newer exotic materials to meet the materials exhibit poor wear behavior when in sliding
increasing demand for higher performance of mech-
anical seals to meet harsher and tougher operating 1
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Kongu Engineering College,
conditions.6,7 In general, researchers had tried two Erode, Tamil Nadu, India
2
approaches to improve the frictional characteristics Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kongu Engineering College,
of the mechanical seals. First approach tried improve Erode, Tamil Nadu, India
the bulk properties of the seal face materials and
Corresponding author:
second approach focused on the surface engineering S Shankar, Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Kongu Engineering
techniques such as surface laser texturing,8–11 physical College, Erode 638052, Tamil Nadu, India.
vapor deposition, and chemical vapor deposition Email: shankariitm@gmail.com

Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016

XML Template (2015) [10.3.2015–1:05pm] [1–8]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d (PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]

2 Proc IMechE Part J: J Engineering Tribology 0(0)

conformal contact with a surface fabricated from the bronze, and silicon bronze.21,22 Among which phos-
same material. Therefore, two dissimilar materials i.e. phor bronze was one of the important categories of
one softer than the other was usually chosen. Most these alloys, due to their high tensile strength, good
often, the rotating part of seal faces was chosen as the corrosion and resistance to wear, and excellent elastic
softer material.3,4 The choice of the stationary part properties. The presence of lead in the phosphor
determines the frictional characteristics and reliability bronze also provides the solid lubrication in sliding
of the mechanical seals. Generally, wide range of wear applications. Hence, it is suitable as softer
materials were chosen as an option for stationary material option for the application of mechanical
part of mechanical seal.16 The most commonly seals. On the other hand, steel alloys were also good
employed materials were ceramics such as silicon car- candidates for the application of mechanical seals.16,17
bide (SiC), silicon nitride (Si3N4), tungsten carbide Among which, 316 stainless steel were used as the seal
(WC), aluminum oxide (Al2O3), steel alloys, copper face materials for the applications such as sea water
alloys, and many more. desalination, power generation, agriculture irrigation,
Ceramics were good choice for stationary ring of and sewage pump, because of their good tribological
mechanical seals, not only due to their superior cor- properties such as high wear and corrosion resistance
rosion resistance17 but also due to their low density, and good sliding properties. However, to our know-
relatively high-fracture toughness, and high hardness. ledge, there were no works reporting results obtained
Wide ranges of ceramics were used for the application in a tribological test configuration that simulates the
of mechanical seals depending upon the high load and real functioning of mechanical seals by employing dif-
tougher operating conditions.16 Ceramic based on ferent seal face material, which had different hardness
alumina used for the application of mechanical seals level combinations. So, proper pairing of rotating and
for many years because of their availability and low stationary seal faces will exhibit efficient frictional
cost, also it was a sintered polycrystalline material characteristics.
ranging in purity between 95% and 99.5%. The The present study investigates the friction charac-
grains sizes were 1–5 mm, variably separated by teristics of different combinations of stationary seals
glassy phase. The properties were mostly dependent such as alumina, 316 stainless steel, and phosphor
on microstructure which varies with the powder bronze as shown in Figure 1, which comprises differ-
purity, firing temperature, and its duration. On the ent hardness levels against the rotating seals of resin-
one hand, copper alloys were metal alloys with the impregnated carbon. Most of the previous frictional
major constituent of copper used for many applica- characteristics study had been investigated using a
tions such as bearing, bush, spring, condenser tube, three ball-on-rod tester, pin-on-ring tester, roller
gears, marine fitting, diaphragms, bellows, lock- tester, four ball tester, ball-on-disc and dry ball-on-
washers, and cotter pins applications.18,19 As well, flat reciprocating tribometers, and so on. But in this
utilized as poorly lubricated bearings in corrosive work, a specially designed mechanical seal test rig had
environments19 because of their good corrosion resist- been utilized to study the frictional characteristics of
ance, wear resistance, and anti-friction properties.20 the mechanical seal. Also in specific seal applications
The most commonly used copper alloys were like agitators and boiler feed pumps, an abrupt
leaded-tin bronzes, phosphor bronzes, aluminum change in speed and load occurs23 resulting in

Figure 1. Photography of stationary seal: (a) phosphor bronze; (b) 316 stainless steel; (c) alumina.

Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016

XML Template (2015) [10.3.2015–1:05pm]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d
Shankar et al.
abnormal friction and unexpected wear. So, in this
work the seals were tested for various loads ranging
from 75 N to 325 N at a constant speed.
Experimental method
Material and specimen preparation
The ceramic rings were processed from alumina (99.4
to 99.6 wt%), magnesia (0.02 to 0.03 wt%), calcium
oxide (0.02 to 0.03 wt%), manganese oxide (0.03 to
0.05 wt%), with dispersing agent (0.3 to 0.5 wt%). It
was then pulverized and mixed uniformly with pure
water using the material: water volume ratio of 0.8
was diluted into stirred slurry, slurry to milling in a
ball mill at room temperature in sealed 2 to 4 h. The
slurry was placed in a ball mill at pump pressure of
1.5–3 MPa, inlet temperature of 320–360 C, and
outlet temperature of 110–140 C spray granulation.
The spray granulated powder on the steel mold was
subjected to 80–200 MPa / cm2 pressure molding
blank, which had been pressed and sintered in an
oxidizing atmosphere. The temperature was con-
trolled between 1650  C and 1750  C, and incubated
for 1 to 4 h. Finally, the alumina rings were ground to
obtain the final dimensions of Ø43Ø33 mm  8 mm
(OD  ID  Thickness). The sliding surfaces were
diamond polished and the surface roughness was mea-
sured using Mitutoyo SJ-410 roughness tester and was
found to have an initial roughness of 0.07–0.09 mm.
Phosphor bronze (ASTM B139) is an alloy of copper
whose chemical composition is shown in Table 1; the
round bar of diameter 52 mm was commercially
purchased. The chemical composition of 316 stainless
steel (ASTM A240) is shown in Table 2; the round bar
of diameter Ø50.8mm was commercially purchased.
Both the round bar of respective sizes was machined
using CNC turning center to a hollow ring of
Ø43Ø33 mm8 mm (OD  ID  Thickness). The
sliding surfaces of the seal ring were given a lapping
finish and the initial surface roughness was measured
using Mitutoyo SJ-410 roughness tester. The phos-
phor bronze and the 316 stainless steel seal ring
were found to have an initial surface roughness of
0.026–0.028 mm and 0.17–0.19 mm, respectively.
Table 1. Typical chemical composition of phosphor bronze.
Element Copper Lead Iron Tin
Weight (%) Rem 0.05 0.10 5.8
Table 2. Typical chemical composition of 316 stainless steel.
Element Carbon Manganese
Weight (%) 0.08 2.0
Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016
[1–8]
(PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]
3
In this study, resin-impregnated carbon—widely
used seal face material—was used as a rotating
ring16,24 because of its superior wear resistance and
anti-corrosion properties. The rotating ring was
purchased commercially with the dimensions of
Ø45  Ø38 mm9.52 mm (OD  ID  Thickness).
The compiled mechanical and physical properties of
the stationary and rotary seals are listed in Table 3.
Mechanical seal test rig
The mechanical seal test rig was designed in such a
manner so as to conduct test on various sizes of seals
and also of different kinds of seal materials, as shown
in Figure 2. The test rig was equipped with a top
holder fitted with the rotary seal, which was pressed
over the stationary seal. The lower chamber holds the
stationary seal, which was locked and made to press
against rotary seal rotated by spindle; proper spring
pressure between rings was maintained to ensure full
engagement. The spindle, which holds the rotary seal,
was rotated by a motor with belt drive, and the speed
of motor was controlled by a variable frequency drive
to provide uniform torque at all speeds. Load was
applied by placing dead weights on the pan at the
end of lever arrangement. The face temperature
raise of the stationary seal was measured by the
thermocouple, which was mounted on the side of
lower holder with the tip touching the outer diameter
of stationary seal. The speed of the spindle carrying
the rotating ring was measured by using the proximity
sensor. The mechanical seal test rig was incorporated
with the data acquisition card (I-DAS), which does
the sampling of signals obtained through the above
mentioned sensors, which can be recorded in the com-
puter by using the software program.
Testing procedure
All the tests were carried out on the designed mech-
anical seal test rig, as shown in Figure 2. The different
pairing of stationary seal and rotary seal was done
based on the hardness level, as shown in Table 4.
On the chosen pair 1, the stationary seal was mounted
on the lower chamber that allows the self-alignment of
the ring and also permits axial loading of the station-
ary seal against the upper rotating seal. Initial load of
75 N was applied at the end of the lever for the full
engagement of the stationary and rotary seal. Each
Zinc Phosphorus
test includes a 3600 s running-in period with a con-
0.30 0.35 stant speed of 1500 r/min for six loading conditions.23
After running-in, the load between the rings was
Silicone Chromium Nickel Molybdenum Phosphorus Sulphur
0.75 18.0 14.0 3.00 0.045 0.03
XML Template (2015) [10.3.2015–1:05pm] [1–8]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d (PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]

4 Proc IMechE Part J: J Engineering Tribology 0(0)

Table 3. Mechanical and physical properties of the seals.

Mechanical and physical properties

Elastic Specific heat Thermal conductivity

Material description Density (kg/m3) Hardness modulus (GPa) (J/kg K) (W/m K)

Resin-impregnated carbon 1850 95 Shore A 22.76 856 10.37

Phosphor bronze 8.86  103 65 HRB 110 380 84
316 Stainless steel 8.07  103 185 HV 193 500 16.2
Alumina 3.89  103 1500 HV 300 880 18

Figure 2. Mechanical seal test rig: (a) placement of rotary and stationary seal.

Table 4. Pairing of stationary and rotary seal.

Hardness level
S. No. Stationary seal Rotary seal (Stationary vs. Rotary)

Pair 1 Alumina Resin-impregnated carbon High vs. Low

Pair 2 316 Stainless steel Resin-impregnated carbon Medium vs. Low
Pair 3 Phosphor bronze Resin-impregnated carbon Low vs. Low

varied from 75 N to 325 N (in a step of 75 N, 125 N, contact and it was an important consideration in the
175 N, 225 N, 275 N, 325 N). For each loading, the application of mechanical seals. All the tests were
running-in period was 600 s. After each loading con- repeated with three samples in each pair and their
dition, the test was halted for 5 min. The seal face average friction coefficient were computed. Figure 3
temperature, friction torque, and coefficient of friction shows the variation of friction coefficient with various
were recorded for every 1 s using data acquisition normal loads ranging from 75 N to 325 N at a con-
software program in the computer. The same proced- stant speed of 1500 r/min. In case of 316 stainless steel
ure was repeated for the pair 2 and pair 3. seal ring against resin-impregnated carbon (pair 2),
for the initial load of 75 N, the starting coefficient of
friction attains its stable value of m ¼ 0.016, approxi-
Result and discussion mately after 200 s, which was found to be in agree-
ment with the previous studies.25 The presence of
Friction coefficient foreign materials like moisture and oxides of metals
Friction was essentially a surface phenomenon and on 316 stainless steel seal layer was the reason for the
mostly depends on the properties of two materials in low friction value of m ¼ 0.016 at the start of the

Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016

XML Template (2015) [10.3.2015–1:05pm] [1–8]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d (PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]

Shankar et al. 5

Figure 3. Variation of frictional coefficient for different seals.

Table 5. Variation of surface roughness.

Phosphor bronze Alumina 316 Stainless steel

Before running-in test, surface roughness, Ra (mm) 0.026  0.011 0.082  0.012 0.170  0.011
After running-in test, surface roughness, Ra (mm) 0.153  0.012 0.095  0.015 0.185  0.014

running-in test. The presence of these foreign mater- stainless steel seal ring was found to be Ra ¼ 0.171–
ials will make a little or minimum metallic contact at 0.199 mm (Table 5).
the junction and also the oxide film had lower shear In case of the phosphor bronze seal ring against
strength resulting in low coefficient of friction. After resin-impregnated carbon (pair 3), three specimens
initial running-in, approximately after 300 s, the sur- were tested for various normal loads at a constant
face layer got deteriorated and the clean surface came speed of 1500 r/min and their average friction coeffi-
in contact. At the same time, due to plowing action cient is shown in Figure 3. For the initial normal load
shown in Figure 6, there may be a chance of inclusion of 75 N, the starting friction coefficient value was
of wear trapped particles that resulted with the found to be m ¼ 0.041 and attains the stable value of
increase in roughness,25 face temperature, and friction m ¼ 0.053, approximately after 200 s.25 The reason for
force. These factors contribute with the increase in the low starting friction was the presence of foreign
frictional coefficient values. After certain duration of materials on the phosphor bronze seal ring and these
running-in, the increase in roughness and other par- foreign materials will make a little or minimum metal-
ameters reached the steady-state value resulting in lic contact at the junction as mentioned in above case.
constant friction coefficient for the rest of the run- Approximately after 300 s, there was an inclusion of
ning-in period. The average of those friction coeffi- wear particle from the resin-impregnated carbon due
cients (m ¼ 0.182) had been calculated and shown in to the mild plowing action as visible in Figure 6, thus
Figure 3. The same phenomenon was found in all the resulting in the increase of surface roughness of the
other loading conditions of 125 N, 175 N, 225 N, phosphor bronze seal ring, which in turn results in the
275 N, and 375 N. In some cases, the friction coeffi- increase of friction coefficient.25 The same phenom-
cient at specific load was less compared to the other enon was found at all loading conditions. At the
loads, due to the formation of tribofilm caused by normal loads of 125 N, 175 N, 225 N, 275 N, 325 N,
wear particles of resin-impregnated carbon on the the starting friction coefficient value at each of their
stationary seal. At the normal loads of 125 N, respective load was found to be m ¼ 0.111, 0.127,
175 N, 225 N, 275 N,325 N, the initial starting friction 0.103, 0.057, 0.065 and attains the stable friction coef-
coefficient at each of their respective load was ficient value of m ¼ 0.114, 0.110, 0.082, 0.081, 0.071.
found to be m ¼ 0.109, 0.127, 0.096, 0.094, 0.118 and All the above stable friction coefficient values at each
attains the stable friction coefficient value of specific loading conditions are plotted in Figure 3.
m ¼ 0.144, 0.129, 0.120, 0.107, and 0.103. All the Most of the friction coefficient values of phosphor
above stable friction coefficient values at each specific bronze were lower than the friction coefficient of
loading conditions are shown in Figure 3. After run- 316 stainless steel against resin-impregnated carbon
ning-in test for 1 h, the surface roughness of the 316 at the various loading conditions. This was due to

Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016

XML Template (2015) [10.3.2015–1:05pm] [1–8]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d (PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]

6 Proc IMechE Part J: J Engineering Tribology 0(0)

the presence of lead in the phosphor bronze,26,27 seal ring. Friction coefficient had the direct depend-
which acts as a solid lubricating agent, resulting in ence on friction torque.9 As the normal load
the improvement of antifriction properties under dry increases,25 the detachment of wear debris increases
sliding conditions. After running-in test for 1 h, the resulting in the increase in surface roughness, by
surface roughness of the 316 stainless steel seal ring which the sliding resistance of the mating surface
was found to be Ra ¼ 0.141–0.165 mm (Table 5). also increases. So the increase in normal load (N)
In case of alumina seal ring against resin-impreg- will increase the frictional torque, which is confirmed
nated carbon (pair 1), similar to the above testing from Figure 4. Among the three pairs, pair 1 (alumina
conditions, three specimens were tested and their seal ring against resin-impregnated carbon) exhibits
average friction coefficient is computed in the lowest friction torque. Alumina seal ring had
Figure 3.28 The high hardness, low density, and rela- high hardness, which eventually resulted in lowest
tively high fracture toughness of the alumina seal ring frictional torque. Whereas in case of 316 stainless
resulted in the higher wear resistance and low friction steel seal ring and phosphor bronze seal ring, the
coefficient compared to other two pairs (pair 2 and hardness of 316 stainless steel seal ring was greater
pair 3). The same phenomenon as stated for pair 2 than the phosphor bronze seal ring, but still the phos-
and pair 3 was also found to be true for pair 1.25 phor bronze seal ring exhibited lower frictional torque
There were no traces of plowing action in alumina than 316 stainless steel seal ring. This was due to the
seal ring as like in phosphor bronze and 316 stainless presence of lead (soft phase) in the phosphor bronze
steel seal ring as seen in Figure 6. For the initial seal ring,26,27 which acts as the solid lubricating agent,
normal load of 75 N, the starting friction coefficient resulting in improvement of the friction characteris-
value was found to be m ¼ 0.167 and attains the stable tics. Hence in the case of dry sliding conditions,
friction coefficient value of m ¼ 0.079, approximately phosphor bronze seal ring might be a better alterna-
after 300 s. Whereas at the normal loads of 125 N, tive for 316 stainless steel seal ring.
175 N, 225 N, 275 N 325 N, the starting friction coef-
ficient value at each of their respective load was found
to be m ¼ 0.096, 0.079, 0.075, 0.065, 0.057 and attains
Face temperature increase
the stable friction coefficient value of m ¼ 0.087, 0.069, The face temperature increase of the mechanical was
0.073, 0.069, 0.059. All the above stable friction coef- the important parameter to be examined to investigate
ficient values at each specific loading conditions is the frictional characteristics between the seals.9 In
plotted in Figure 3. After running-in test for 1 h, the general, the face temperature rise was commonly
surface roughness of the 316 stainless steel seal ring seen in all three pairs. Figure 5 shows the face tem-
was found to be Ra ¼ 0.080–0.110 mm. So in dry slid- perature increase for all three pairs, among which alu-
ing conditions, phosphor bronze might be a better mina seal ring exhibited the lowest face temperature
alternative for 316 stainless steel for enhanced fric- increase of 90.5  C. However, in comparison between
tional performance of the seal. 316 stainless steel and phosphor bronze seal ring (pair
2 and pair 3), phosphor bronze (pair 3) seal ring
exhibited the lower face temperature raise of
Friction torque
93.1  C, whereas 316 stainless steel exhibited the max-
Figure 4 shows a frictional torque comparison among imum face temperature increase of 110.1  C. So, hence
the 316 stainless steel, phosphor bronze, and alumina under dry sliding condition, phosphor bronze seal

Figure 4. Variation of frictional torque for different seals.

Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016

XML Template (2015) [10.3.2015–1:05pm] [1–8]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d (PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]

Shankar et al. 7

Figure 5. Variation of face temperature increase for different seals.

Figure 6. Microstructure of the sliding path surface: (a) 316 stainless steel; (b) phosphor bronze; (c) alumina, after running-in test.

ring might be a better alternative for 316 stainless steel for the applications like sea water desalination pump
seal ring. Also, the weight loss in the material after the involving 316 stainless steel as a seal face material.
experimentations was measured. The loss seems to be
negligible while comparing with the combinations. Funding
Authors wish to thank University Grants Commission
Conclusions (UGC) INDIA, for their financial support to execute this
project work through Major Research Project Scheme.
In the present study, the frictional characteristics of
alumina, 316 stainless steel, and phosphor bronze seal Conflict of interest
ring against resin-impregnated carbon were evaluated None declared.
using the designed experimental seal test rig. Pairing
of stationary seal against rotary seal was done for all
References
the three combinations. Overall, pair 1 exhibited the
1. Kavinprasad S, Shankar S and Karthic M. Experimental
lowest frictional coefficient, friction torque, and face
and CFD investigations of mechanical seals under dry/
temperature rise than other cases. However, in com-
compressed air/liquid lubricating conditions. Proc Eng
parison with other pairs, the presence of lead (soft 2013; 64: 419–425.
phase) in phosphor bronze (pair 3) acted as a solid 2. Kavinprasad S, Shankar S and Karthic M. Experimental
lubricating agent and hence exhibited the better fric- and CFD investigations of carbon/SS316 mechanical
tional characteristics. Hence, phosphor bronze face seals under different lubricating conditions. Ind
became a dependable mechanical seal, which had effi- Lubric Tribol 2015; 67. DOI: 10.1108/ILT-03-2013-0037.
cient corrosion resistance (especially sea water) and 3. Nau B. Research in mechanical seals. Proc IMechE, Part
high wear resistance, and can be a substitute material C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 1990; 204: 349–376.

Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016

XML Template (2015) [10.3.2015–1:05pm] [1–8]
//blrnas3.glyph.com/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/PIJJ/Vol00000/150040/APPFile/SG-PIJJ150040.3d (PIJ) [PREPRINTER stage]

8 Proc IMechE Part J: J Engineering Tribology 0(0)

4. Ludema KC. Friction, wear, lubrication: A textbook in 17. Flitney RK. Seals and sealing handbook. Amsterdam,
tribology. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1996. Netherlands: Elsevier, 2011.
5. Mubarok F, Carrapichano J, Almeida F, et al. 18. Jackson R and Green I. An experimental investigation
Enhanced sealing performance with CVD nanocrystal- of various materials on thrust washer bearing oper-
line diamond films in self-mated mechanical seals. ation. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology
Diamond Relat Mater 2008; 17: 1132–1136. 2007; 221: 761–770.
6. Kong L, Bi Q, Zhu S, et al. Tribological properties of 19. Kimura T, Shimizu K and Terada K. Sliding wear char-
ZrO2 (Y2 O3)–Mo–BaF2/CaF2 composites at high tem- acteristic evaluation of copper alloy for bearing. Wear
peratures. Tribol Int 2012; 45: 43–49. 2007; 263: 586–591.
7. Sebastiani M, Mangione V, De Felicis D, et al. Wear 20. Prasad B. Sliding wear behaviour of bronzes under
mechanisms and in-service surface modifications of a varying material composition, microstructure and test
Stellite 6B Co–Cr alloy. Wear 2012; 290: 10–17. conditions. Wear 2004; 257: 110–123.
8. Etsion I. State of the art in laser surface texturing. 21. Xia Y, Wang L, Liu X, et al. Tribological properties of
J Tribol 2005; 127: 248–253. phosphor bronze and nanocrystalline nickel coatings
9. Yu X, He S and Cai R. Frictional characteristics of under PAOþ MoDTC and ionic liquid lubricated con-
mechanical seals with a laser-textured seal face. dition. Tribol Lett 2008; 31: 149–158.
J Mater Process Technol 2002; 129: 463–466. 22. Sharma S, Satish B, Girish B, et al. Wear characteristics
10. Coblas DG, Fatu A, Maoui A, et al. Manufacturing of phosphor–bronze/silicon carbide particulate compos-
textured surfaces: State of art and recent developments. ites. J Mater Process Technol 2001; 118: 65–68.
Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology 2015; 23. Engqvist H, Högberg H, Botton G, et al. Tribofilm for-
229: 3–29. mation on cemented carbides in dry sliding conformal
11. Xiao Y, Shi W, Luo J, et al. The tribological perform- contact. Wear 2000; 239: 219–228.
ance of TiN, WC/C and DLC coatings measured by the 24. Jones G. On the tribological behaviour of mechanical
four-ball test. Ceram Int 2014; 40: 6919–6925. seal face materials in dry line contact: Part I.
12. Kovalchenko A, Elam J, Erdemir A, et al. Development Mechanical carbon. Wear 2004; 256: 415–432.
of ultrananocrystalline diamond (UNCD) coatings for 25. Chowdhury M, Khalil M, Nuruzzaman D, et al. The
multipurpose mechanical pump seals. Wear 2011; 270: effect of sliding speed and normal load on friction and
325–331. wear property of aluminum. Int J Mech Mechatron Eng
13. Vila M, Carrapichano J, Gomes J, et al. Ultra-high per- 2011; 11: 53–57.
formance of DLC-coated Si3 N4 rings for mechanical 26. Cui G, Bi Q, Zhu S, et al. Tribological behavior of Cu–
seals. Wear 2008; 265: 940–944. 6Sn–6Zn–3Pb under sea water, distilled water and dry-
14. Mo J and Zhu M. Tribological investigation of WC/C sliding conditions. Tribol Int 2012; 55: 126–134.
coating under dry sliding conditions. Wear 2011; 271: 27. Ruusila V, Nyyssönen T, Kallio M, et al. The effect of
1998–2005. microstructure and lead content on the tribological
15. Erdemir A. Friction and wear of diamond and dia- properties of bearing alloys. Proc IMechE, Part J: J
mond-like carbon films. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology 2013; 227(8): 878–887.
Engineering Tribology 2002; 216: 387–400. 28. Morrell R. Handbook of properties of technical and
16. Nau B. Mechanical seal face materials. Proc IMechE, engineering ceramics. London: HMSO, 1987.
Part J: J Engineering Tribology 1997; 211: 165–183.

Downloaded from pij.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on September 12, 2016