Remarkably low wear rates were observed
in PTFE–PEEK and
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-alpha-alumina composites when evaluated
in a “self-mated” configuration, where a polymer pin
is slid against a polymer countersample of the same composition. Each
composite was tested in a controlled humidity environment on a linearly
reciprocating tribometer on two different countersamples: a polymer
countersample (self-mated) and a stainless steel countersample for
comparison. For all the self-mated PTFE–PEEK composites [polyether
ether ketone (PEEK) wt % 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50], the average friction
coefficient was reduced, and the steady-state and total specific wear
rates were improved when compared to testing against stainless steel.
Self-mated PTFE–PEEK (wt % 10–40) achieved ultralow
wear rates on the order of 10–9 mm3/Nm
and friction coefficients of 0.08–0.14. When compared with
samples slid against stainless steel, IR spectroscopy of the sliding
surface showed that the self-mated PTFE–PEEK composites accumulate
more PEEK at the sliding interface and more expression of a tribochemical
carboxylate species, which have been linked with ultralow wear PTFE
materials. The PTFE composites slid on steel rely on the formation
of transfer films for ultralow wear performance. This is achieved
by unidirectional increasing surface energy gradients from the polymer
pin to the steel substrate, which dominate the transport and wear
of PTFE composites slid on steel. However, the self-mated ultralow
wear PTFE-based composites rely only on the formation and stability
of tribofilms that consist of tribochemically altered PTFE with new
carboxylate end groups as well as accumulated filler (i.e., PEEK or
alumina). These films have self-regulating, minimal differences in
surface energy. The close match of these low-energy surfaces contributes
to low friction and ultralow wear. The self-mated PEEK-filled PTFE
outperforms the alumina-filled PTFE primarily because of the ease
at which PEEK accumulates at the surface. Additionally, the reinforcement
and anchoring of the surface is better for a polymer blend than a
particle-reinforced composite.