The Environmental and Economic Importance of Mixed and Boundary Lubrication

Abstract

One route to reducing CO2 emissions is to improve the energy efficiency of machines. For example, conventional combustion engines are being downsized (and down-speeded), are now running on lower viscosity engine lubricants (such as SAE 0W-20 or lower viscosity grades) and often also have stop-start systems fitted (to prevent engine idling when the vehicle is stopped). Some of these changes result in higher levels of mixed and boundary friction, and so accurate estimation of mixed/boundary friction losses is becoming of increased importance, both for estimating friction losses, and also for estimating wear volumes. Traditional approaches to estimating mixed/boundary friction, which employ real area of contact modelling such as the Greenwood-Tripp model [1] are widely used, but recent experimental data suggests that these approaches underestimate mixed/boundary friction losses [2-5]. A new model has been developed, based on experimental data, which estimates the proportion of mixed/boundary lubrication, X, as a function of the value (where is the ratio of the oil film thickness separating the surfaces to the combined root mean square surface roughness of the interface surfaces). The precise equation that describes the way in which X varies with takes the form of a “reverse S-curve”, which makes physical sense since S-curves arise naturally in growth processes, and in mixed/boundary lubrication, the real area of contact of rough surfaces grows as the load (and 1/) increases. Numerical estimates of mixed/boundary lubrication losses in internal combustion engines are presented here and compared with published data [2,6]. In addition, the improved method described here is used to estimate both the financial cost of mixed/boundary lubrication for today’s passenger car fleet, and the CO2 emissions associated with these friction losses.