SES Presentation 2013

Macro-Scale Mixed Lubrication
Modeling Approach
Gagan Srivastava, C. Fred Higgs III
Carnegie Mellon University
Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory
SES 50th Annual Technical Meeting
July 29, 2013
Providence, RI
Overview
Introduction
Mixed lubrication (Applications)
Macro-scale modeling
Current modeling approach
PAML-lite: Simplified modeling approach
Results
Need for a better model
Conclusion

Core competencies
Our strength is that we develop:

Experiments
Simulations
Predictions
Granular flows
Powder lubrication
One of the most difficult areas of tribology relates to
the multi-physics behavior of particulate materials
large or small. They can wear and damage relatively
sliding materials, or they can be used to protect
materials.
Slurry
Introduction: Mixed Lubrication
newmachineparts.blogspot.com
Introduction: Mixed Lubrication

MIXED
HYDRODYNAMIC
Coefficient of Friction
BOUNDARY
Sommerfeld Number =
Introduction: Particles Augmented Mixed Lubrication (PAML)

Most industrial mixed lubrication systems have particle-fluid
suspensions as the lubricant
(b)
(a)
PAML Tribosystems
Bearing wear via
lubricant debris
Artificial hip wear
(c)
(d)
Chemical Mechanical Polishing

Disk drive contamination wear

6
Micro-scale vs Macro-scale Modeling

Tribosurfaces
Lubricant
Fluid Mechanics
Particle Dynamics
Contact Mechanics
Wear

Tribosurfaces
Lubricant
Fluid Mechanics
Micro-scale Modeling High fidelity 3D Navier-
Stokes solution
High computational cost

Small domain
No load carrying capacity
of the fluid
Particle Dynamics
Contact Mechanics
Wear
High fidelity EulerianLagrangian or EulerianEulerian treatment
High fidelity Boussinesq High fidelity individual

solution, or Winkler found- abrasive wear events
ation based analysis

Very small number of
particles monitored

Small analysis domain

Tribosurfaces
Lubricant
Fluid Mechanics
Micro-scale Modeling High fidelity 3D Navier-
Contact Mechanics
Wear
High fidelity EulerianLagrangian or EulerianEulerian treatment
High fidelity Boussinesq High fidelity individual

solution, or Winkler found- abrasive wear events
ation based analysis

Small domain
No load carrying capacity
of the fluid

Very small number of
particles monitored

Small analysis domain
Approximate, Reynolds
lubrication eq usable
Model load carrying
capacity of the fluid
Probabilistic treatment
possible
Large element
Average wear by a cluster
Boussinesq solution or
of active particles
elastic foundation model
High speed, lower

accuracy
High speed, much lower

accuracy
Lower accuracy
Speed / accuracy tradeoff
Stokes solution
Macro-scale Modeling
Particle Dynamics
High speed, relatively

lower accuracy
HIGH ACCURACY
HIGH COST, SMALL DOMAIN
LOW ACCURACY
HIGH SPEED, LARGE DOMAIN
10
A Typical Macro-Scale CMP Model

PAML lite
Fluid Mechanics
Contact Mechanics
Film thickness
Particle Dynamics
Uniform
Concentration
Size distribution
Separation
h = h(r,)
d = d(r,)
Hydrodynamic
Pressure
Elastic Contact
Material Removal
Rate
MRR = f(,w,,V)
Active Particles
= (z, F, E)
p = p[h, , ]
Wear
Nactive=f (G, , )
Equilibrium
Particle Indentation
= f (, Hw*, pd)
13
Fluid Mechanics
Contact Mechanics
Film thickness
Particle Dynamics
Uniform
Concentration
Size distribution
Separation
h = h(r,)
d = d(r,)
Hydrodynamic
Pressure
Elastic Contact
Material Removal
Rate
MRR = f(,w,,V)
Active Particles
= (z, F, E)
p = p[h, , ]
Wear
Nactive=f (G, , )
Equilibrium
= f (, Hw*, pd)
14
Fluid Mechanics
Contact Mechanics
Film thickness
Particle Dynamics
Uniform
Concentration
Size distribution
Separation
h = h(r,)
d = d(r,)
Hydrodynamic
Pressure
Elastic Contact
Material Removal
Rate
MRR = f(,w,,V)
Active Particles
= (z, F, E)
p = p[h, , ]
Wear
Nactive=f (G, , )
Equilibrium
= f (, Hw*, pd)
15
PAML - lite : Fluid Mechanics

Reynolds Equation in Cylindrical and Spherical Polar Coordinates
17
PAML - lite : Contact Mechanics
Wafer: A flat rigid punch pressed against

the pad
Pad: Elastic Foundation (Johnson, 1983)

o
o
o
Asperities act as independent springs
LOAD
WAFE
R
PARALLEL SPRINGS
RIGID WALL
Deformation in the plane of the pad is neglected

Normal deformation due to tangential shear loading is neglected
All 15 Equations:
3 Equilibrium + 6 Strain Displacement + 6 Constitutive
Condensed to:
O (N) calculations
18

the pad

o
o
o
LOAD
WAFE
R
PARALLEL SPRINGS
RIGID WALL

All 15 Equations:
Condensed to:
O (N) calculations
19

the pad

o
o
o
LOAD
WAFE
R
PARALLEL SPRINGS
RIGID WALL

All 15 Equations:
Condensed to:
O (N) calculations
20
PAML - lite : Model Flowchart

START
Guess ,,0
Compute
new: ,,
Film thickness : h (,,0)

Reynold's
Reynold's
Equation
Equation
Elastic
Foundation
Find: fluid pressure

p(r,)
Find: contact stress

(r,)
Integrator
Fz,Mx,
My = 0
NO
Root Finder
YES
Equilibrium orientation
{,,}, p(r,), (r,)
Calculate Average
Wear
Calculate Active
Particles
Calculate Total Wear

23
PAML - lite : Model Flowchart

START
Guess ,,0
Compute
new: ,,
Film thickness : h (,,0)

Reynold's
Equation
Elastic
Foundation
Find: fluid pressure

p(r,)
Find: contact stress

(r,)
Integrator
Fz,Mx,
My = 0
NO
Root Finder
YES
Equilibrium orientation
{,,}, p(r,), (r,)
Calculate Average
Wear
Calculate Active
Particles
Calculate Total Wear

24
Complete Model: Wear Prediction During CMP

Application:
CMP
Evolution of wear on the
bottom face of the wafer
Wafer being polished
(changing orientation to
achieve equilibrium)
Section of the
pad interacting
with the wafer
Wafer-scale mixed
lubrication problem is
being computed in silico.
The evolution of wear,
fluid pressure and
contact stress is known.
25
Complete Model: Wear Prediction During CMP

Application:
CMP
Evolution of wear on the
bottom face of the wafer
Wafer being polished
(changing orientation to
achieve equilibrium)
Section of the
pad interacting
with the wafer
Wafer-scale mixed
lubrication problem is
being computed in silico.
The evolution of wear,
fluid pressure and
contact stress is known.
26
Results: Material Removal Rate

MRR vs Normal Load
Current model
The model has excellent predictions for lower loads ( < 15 PSI), but then requires
improved accuracy for higher loads.
28

MRR vs Normal Load
Inaccuracy at
higher loads
The model has excellent predictions for lower loads ( < 15 PSI), but then requires
improved accuracy for higher loads.
29

Inaccuracy at
higher loads
Independent springs
(deflect individually)
In the model
Fluid completely squeezed

out of the interface
In reality
30
Solution: Improving the

Solid-Solid Contact Model
31
Solution: Improved Contact Modeling
Independent springs No influence of asperities on each other

Apply Boussinesq solution of point load on an elastic half-space
Governing equations:
Allwood (2005)
p: Surface traction
u: Surface displacement
K: Influence coefficients
32
New Approach: MLMS + CG
Polonsky and Keer's Multi-level Multi-Summation (MLMS) algorithm, with

Conjugate Gradient (CG) solver is implemented
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Equation (1) solved by MLMS

Equations (2) and (4) solved by CGM
33
MLMS Routine
Three step process:
Interpolation from fine to coarse grid

Matrix-vector multiplication (Eq. 1)
Interpolation from coarse to fine grid
To retain accuracy, appropriate correction is applied after every interpolation

Influence matrix 'K' is required for the finest gridsize of K = (Nx)4
Memory efficiency is achieved by using Ren and Lee's Moving Grid Method (Allwood)
pfpc
pfpc
U = Kpc
34
ucuf
ucuf
Conjugate Gradient Method
Solves the load balance equation (2) while imposing the

complimentary inequality conditions (4)
Minimizes the error in calculating 'separation' (g) at contact points
(minimize G = gij2 ), using p as the controlled variable
Rigid circular punch on a rough half-space
Evolution of contact zone (white: contact)
36
Validation Study: Rigid flat punch on a half space
Net Supported Load Error
Net Supported Load Error

(Area under the p-x curve)
(Grid Independence Study)

60
18
16
50
14
40
10
Error (%)
Error (%)
12
30
20
6
4
10
2
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
(Punch Width) / (Domain Width)
37
0.8
0.9
0
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000
Grid Points
Implementation for CMP
WAFER
PAD
ted
a
im
ox
r
p
Ap
w
p
WAFER
PAD
39
Improved Contact CMP Model: Preliminary Results

(m)
25
20
15
10
Contact
Zone
Pad
Deflection
(Pa)
5
0
(Pa)
1400
3000
1200
2000
1000
1000
800
0
600
-1000
400
-2000
Fluid
Pressure
-3000
Contact
Stress
40
200
Improved Contact CMP Model: Preliminary Results

100
F = Fcontact+ Ffluid
90
Waf
er
Deflection (micrometers)
80
Pad
Range of Fluid Pressure in the Interface
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
3000
1/60
Maximum Pressure
2000
Maximum Deflection
1/80
F/100
Fraction of Total Load
Minimum Pressure
Maximum Contact Stress

3000
2500
Contact Stress (Pa)
Pressure (Pa)
1000
0
1/60
1/80
F/100
-1000
2000
1500
1000
500
-2000
0
1/60
-3000
1/80
F/100

41
Conclusions
Different modes of modeling the mixed-lubrication regime are

discussed, addressing different scales
A macro-scale modeling framework PAML-lite is introduced

PAML-lite shows reasonable accuracy at lower loads, but exposes
the weakness of elastic foundation model at high loads
The Boussinesq solution based approach, which couples the

asperities together can provide better accuracy at higher loads
43
Acknowledgments
Philip and Marsha Dowd Fellowship
ASME Tribology Division
QUESTIONS
44
APPENDIX
45
45
Influence Coefficients
Integrated by Love (1927) for a constant rectangular load
46
pfpc
pfpc
U = Kpc
48
ucuf
ucuf

SES Presentation 2013

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

SES Presentation 2013

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Macro-Scale Mixed Lubrication

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Mixed lubrication (Applications)

Current modeling approach

PAML-lite: Simplified modeling approach

Need for a better model

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Our strength is that we develop:

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Introduction: Mixed Lubrication

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Introduction: Mixed Lubrication

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Introduction: Particles Augmented Mixed Lubrication (PAML)

Artificial hip wear

Chemical Mechanical Polishing

Disk drive contamination wear

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Micro-scale vs Macro-scale Modeling

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Micro-scale vs Macro-scale Modeling

Micro-scale Modeling High fidelity 3D Navier-

High computational cost

Carnegie Mellon University

High fidelity EulerianLagrangian or EulerianEulerian treatment

High fidelity Boussinesq High fidelity individual

High computational cost

High computational cost

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Micro-scale vs Macro-scale Modeling

Micro-scale Modeling High fidelity 3D Navier-

High fidelity EulerianLagrangian or EulerianEulerian treatment

High fidelity Boussinesq High fidelity individual

High computational cost

High computational cost

High computational cost

High speed, lower

High speed, much lower

Carnegie Mellon University

High speed, relatively

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Micro-scale vs Macro-scale Modeling

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

A Typical Macro-Scale CMP Model

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

A Typical Macro-Scale CMP Model

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

A Typical Macro-Scale CMP Model

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

PAML - lite : Fluid Mechanics

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

PAML - lite : Contact Mechanics

Wafer: A flat rigid punch pressed against

Pad: Elastic Foundation (Johnson, 1983)

Asperities act as independent springs