Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition

IMECE2015
November 13-19, 2015, Houston, Texas

IMECE2015-51148

GRADUATION DESIGN PROJECT: DESIGNING AND BUILDING A PIN-ON-DISK

TRIBOMETER
Elspeth Ochs Patricia Iglesias Victoria
1

Mechanical Engineering Department Mechanical Engineering Department

Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester Institute of Technology,
Rochester, NY, USA Rochester, NY, USA
508-360-3699, elsmochs@gmail.com

ABSTRACT I second moment of inertia (arm) [m4]

J Polar moment of inertia [kg-cm2]
The purpose of this paper is to describe an independent
L length between supports (lead screw)[m]
study project required before graduation with a master of
L10 bearing life with 90% reliability (bearings) [cycles]
engineering degree in the department of mechanical
M moment around neutral axis [N-m]
engineering at Rochester Institute of Technology. The goal of
M‹x› third order singularity equation (arm) [N-m]
this graduation project was to design and build a Pin-on-Disk
N fixity (lead screw) [--]
Tribometer. The tribometer will be used by the department for
P applied load (arm) [N]
future student research projects. This paper includes the details
R rotating speed (motor) [RPM]
of the design process, such as adaptations from existing
Tfric torque due to friction (motor) [Nm]
tribometers, all required calculations, and descriptions of the
Trod torque due to rotation (motor) [Nm]
machining and assembly. New design concepts presented
V‹x› second order singularity equation (arm) [N]
demonstrate simplicity of construction and use. The required
Varm arm volume (arm) [m3]
calculations include shear and bending moments in the arm,
VCW counterweight volume (arm) [m3]
bearing calculations, lead screw load analysis, counterweight
Vpin pin volume (arm) [m3]
balancing, torque calculations for selecting the correct motor,
Vrod1,Vrod2 volume of threaded rods holding applied
and strain calculations for determining the correct strain gage
weight and counterweight (arm) [m3]
set-up. The paper details part selection, pricing, machining, and
W load [kg]
assembly. Mistakes and alternate design considerations are
b base width (arm)[m]
also discussed.1
c centroid (arm) [m]
NOMENCLATURE d root diameter (lead screw) [m]
e ball bearing constant (bearings)[--]
The nomenclature for this paper includes: g gravity [m/s2]
C dynamic load capacity (bearings) [N] h height (arm) [m]
Cl critical load (lead screw) [N] l1, l2 length of arm, length of threaded rod (arm) [m]
Cs critical speed (lead screw) [RPM] m1, m2 mass of arm, mass of threaded rod (arm) [m]
D diameter of scratch (pin) [m] q‹x› first order singularity equation (arm) [N/m]
E Young’s modulus [Pa] t time (motor) [s]
FA force at point A/pin (arm) [N] x distance from front end of arm (arm) [m]
FB force at point B/bearing pivot (arm) [N] xarm distance from arm pivot (arm) [m]
FC force at point C/counterweight (arm) [N] xCW distance from counterweight (arm) [m]
FN normal force (pin) [N] ε strain (strain gage) [--]
FR reacting force (pin) [N] μk coefficient of kinetic friction [--]
ρ density [kg/m3]
1
Elspeth now works full-time at UTC Aerospace Systems.

1 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 INTRODUCTION 1 Arm
assembly
Every year, much of the energy that the world consumes is 2 Counter
wasted through friction and wear in mechanical and weight
3 Applied
electromechanical systems. It has been estimated that weight
approximately 11% of the total energy annually consumed in 4 Pin
the U.S. in the four major areas of transportation, 5 Specimen
turbomachinery, power generation and industrial processes can 6 Disk
7 Plunger
be saved through new developments in lubrication and assembly
tribology [1]. Friction is responsible for a major loss of useful 8 Motor
mechanical energy and wear is a major reason for replacing (below
equipment. Thus, a better understanding and utilization of the table)
9 Lead
principles of tribology is particularly important for conservation screw
of energy and materials in engineering design [2]. assembly
The Pin-on-Disk tribometer [3] is the most common type 10 Mount
of friction and wear testing machine. Its basic design consists of 11 Swivel
12 Table
an arm with a pin (rolling ball) attached to the end of an arm
with the pin in direct contact with a test specimen secured on a
rotating disk. A normal load is applied at the end of the arm Figure 1. The pin-on-disk tribometer with labeled parts.
directly onto the pin, which causes the rolling ball inside the
pin to scratch the surface of the disk. The radius of scratch and Creo
the sliding speed can be adjusted. The friction force is The entire design was modeled with Creo as the first step
measured, in this case using a strain gage attached to the arm. in the design process. Once the three-dimensional model was
The amount of wear can be calculated by measuring the wear created, two-dimensional drawings were made for references
width of both specimens [3], from the change of cross- during the machining process. The Creo model is included in
sectional area measured with a profilometer [4] and weighting Fig. 2. All the designs discussed in the paper were first
both specimens before and after the test. developed in Creo. The three-dimensional model was the
The task at hand was to design and build a custom version primary tool developing the design process.
for Dr. Patricia Iglesias Victoria, a faculty of the mechanical
engineering department and tribologist. The rig will be used by
Dr. Iglesias and future graduate and other research students
working with her.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPARATUS

In this design, an arm holds a pin and, by means of a
counterweight, balances so the pin is just touching the surface
of the tested material. The pin holds a 1.5 mm diameter ball.
The specimen is clamped down onto a plate below the pin.
Before the test begins, a known weight (FN) is added to the top
of the arm directly above the pin, this is the normal force. As
the test begins, the specimen rotates at a constant predesignated
speed and the pin wears the specimen surface in a circle. The
friction coefficient between pin and specimen can be measured
from strain in the arm and converted to force (FR). Using these
two known forces, the coefficient of friction can be calculated
using Eq. (1).

(eq. 1)

The radius of the wear track can be adjusted with a lead

screw. A swivel allows the arm to rotate out, and can lock at set
positions to keep the arm stationary both for testing and
changing the pin. The motor and strain gage recordings are
controlled with LabVIEW software. The final assembly is
shown in Fig. 1.
Figure 2. The pin-on-disk tribometer modeled in Creo.
CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN
The requirements of the tribometer were to test the
coefficient of friction between a specimen and the pin. The rig

2 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 needed to test coefficients between .01 and .99 for both
lubricated and dry tests. The table holding the specimen
needed to spin at a constant speed up to 500 RPM. Test length
must range from a few minutes to 15 hours or possibly more.
Specimens and the pin must be replaceable, preferably easily,
and the pin height needed to be adjusted. The rig required a
way to adjust between the scratch radius. Components needed
to be strong enough to perform properly, with addition of the
strain gage arm designed to be weak enough to measure strain.
Finally, the rig must be safe to use with proper protection from
required, which could easily be assembled to one threaded rod
extended from the middle of the arm (alternate designs have
multiple counterweights [4]).
For the middle of the arm, a ductile material was
necessary to easily measure the strain. Additionally, aluminum
is much easier/faster to machine. The corresponding shear and
moment plots are shown in Fig. 4.
Shear Force for Aluminum
5
4

Shear Force (N)

possible harm and spray from lubricated tests. All of these 3
2
requirements are proven met within the calculations and design 1
section. 0
-1
-2
-3
Force and moment analysis in the arm -4
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
In order to decide which material would be best for the
Arm Length (m)
arm, a force and moment analysis was completed for both steel
and aluminum. For this calculation, the arm was assumed to be Bending Moment for Aluminum

Bending Moment (N-m)

one piece with the same cross section as the current arm front 0.00
and rear sections). The weight of the rod, threaded rod, counter
weight, and applied weight along with their displacements were -0.10
considered to find the bending and shear diagrams. The weight
was treated as an even load distribution along the arm. The free -0.20
body diagram is included in Fig. 3. The singularity equations
-0.30
are as follows in Eq. (2)-(4) below.
-0.40
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Arm Length (m)
Figure 4. Shear and moment plots for Aluminum.

Counterweight
In order for the pin to sit on the surface of the specimen,
the arm needed a counterweight on the other side to balance it.
Figure 3. Free Body Diagram of force and moment analysis. Brass was chosen as the counterweight material because of its
large density. Because the volume of each part was known
(from Creo software) as well as the densities of the material,
the volume of the counterweight could be calculated using the
(eq. 2) following moment sum:

(eq. 3) (eq. 5)

Gravity can be canceled out from each term to simplify the

(eq. 4)
The pivot was located at 0.21m, the end of the arm and
beginning of the threaded rod at 0.25m, and the threaded rod
ended with the counter weight at 0.3m.
The factor of safety was also found for each case. Because
the factor of safety was so great (632 with aluminum),
aluminum was determined to be the appropriate arm material.
The exact weight of the counterweight was optimized, as well
as the size. The counterweight is made of brass, as its high
density minimizes the size needed. Only one weight was
above equation. The volume of the arm on the right of the
pivot was subtracted out with its same volume on the left side
of the pivot. Assuming a conservative distance for the
counterweight to be 9 cm from the pivot, the volume was
calculated as just below 50,000 mm3. A rod with an outer
diameter of 21 mm was available.A 6 mm diameter was
machined out of the counterweight for threading it onto the rod.
The length of the counterweight was machined to 38 mm, a
reasonable length. The corresponding mass of the
counterweight is .42kg.

3 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Lead screw
In order to allow multiple tests on the same sample, the
arm needed to be able to adjust linearly to change the diameter
of wear track. A simple solution for the linear movement was
to incorporate a lead screw assembly below the arm. An
example from the supplier is included in Fig. 5.
Figure 5. Lead screw assembly excluding shafts from
MiSUMi, the supplier [5].
The lead screw included two shafts to hold the weight of
the assembly, it is important that the screw did not take on any
extra weight. Each end of the screw has a pillow block bearing,
one fixed and one supported. The lead screw length needed to
include difference in radius of scratch, thickness of the mount,
and addition space on each side to keep the lead nut from
bottoming out.
The critical speed of the screw is determined in Eq. 6 to
decide whether it will meet the assembly needs:
(eq. 6)
N is 1.47 (one end fixed, one end supported) in this case, and d
is provided by the supplier.
Obviously the lead screw will not exceed its critical speed, it is
plenty thick and it is much too short for it to be unstable.
The critical load of the lead screw was calculated as such:
(eq. 7)
N is 2.00 for one end fixed, one end supported. Because N is
provided for English units and the supplier dimensions are
English, the load was first calculated in pounds and converted
back to metric.
Again, the critical scenario is not close to being reached, so this
lead screw more than satisfies the requirements.
At the end of the assembly is: a handle to rotate the screw,
a position indicator, which tells the location of the pin in
4 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
millimeters from the center of the specimen, and a lock to hold
the arm in place so it does not move during a test. The handle
hangs off the edge of the table to eliminate the possibility of
hand or arm interference. This is shown in the Fig. 6.
Figure 6. The lead screw assembly incorporated on the
tribometer.
Swivel design
A design requirement was to make the pin height
adjustable and completely removable in order to replace the
ball within. To do this, the arm would need to move enough
distance from the testing surface for easy accessibility. A
common approach with pin-on-disk tribometers is to allow the
arm to bend up at a very high angle, possibly up to 45º [4].
This method did not seem desirable for the sake of the
counterweight interfering with the lead screw assembly beneath
it. This could be avoided by raising the height of the arm above
the lead screw a considerable distance, installing two lead
screws instead of one and the weight would drop down between
them (a common solution), or resolving a way for the
counterweight to move entirely out of the way, such as to the
side or completely off. None of these results sounded desirable.
It was best if the arm didn’t tilt upwards to replace the pin, so
an alternate to this was to rotate the arm out to the side.
Originally, the idea was to rotate just the arm above the lead
screw, but a locking swivel that was the right size for that
application was not easy to find. Slightly larger locking
swivels, however, were available, but would not fit easily
between the lead screw and arm. The design of the swivel
location needed to be reevaluated. The idea came to put the
swivel below the entire lead screw assembly. Because the
tribometer is small in general, the locking swivels were large
enough in size to fit the lead screw assembly above it. The arm
did not need to swing up at a steep angle in order to replace the
 pin, which made for an easy replacement. The swivel and the (eq. 9)
subassembly it supported is pictured in Fig. 7.
The max condition values were used for calculating the
torque, so assuming the maximum size of the sample (causes
larger moment of inertia), largest wear track radius, largest
coefficient of friction, and maximum applied load. The
moments of inertia were calculated assuming circular sections
except for the plungers, which were point loads. It was
assumed the motor accelerated from naught to 500 RPM in one
second. The following torques were found:

(eq. 10)

The torque is then converted to English units for referrencing

the supplier given chart.

Figure 8 shows that motor 23MD106 will be appropiate

considering the RPS of 8.3 s and max torque of 62.5 oz in. The
motor is connected to the data acquisition (DAQ) system,
Figure 7. Side view of the swivel. which acts as a counter for the motor, and the DAQ is
connected to a computer. A LabVIEW Virtual Instrument (VI)
Once the swivel was purchased, the lock and rotation code was written to control the motor. An external power
worked sufficiently for a commercial product, but there was supply was also required separately to power the motor, which
some considerable play in the locked position considering the had 24 V and 2.7 A voltage and amperage requirements,
design needed to minimize any possible source of vibration. In respectively.
order to tighten up the locking mechanism, the swivel was
partially disassembled, the locking pin hole was bored out
larger for a boss to be press fit in, and a new pin was made to
be long enough to hold in the new boss. A section of the swivel
plate was also machined out in order for the handle to rise up
higher for the longer locking pin.

Motor selection
A motor needed to be selected to meet the torque
requirements at the speed of 500 RPM (8.3 RPS). The motor
speed would kept at a constant throughout a test. A stepper
motor would easily fit the requirements, and Aneheim
Automation provides stepper motors. Stepper motors are less
expensive than servo, and the precision of a servo motor was
not necessary because only the speed being output needed to be
known. Figure 8. Torque curve for motor selections available.
In order to calculate which motor would satisfy the Taken from Anaheim Automation website [6].
conditions, the torque generated by the assembly upon start up
needed to be calculated. The torque caused by all the rotating Strain gage calculation
elements acts similarly to a flywheel and can be found using
During testing, the resulting friction force needed to be
Eq. (8)
measured, this is done by means of a strain gauge mounted on
the arm. Three kinds of strain could act on the arm: axial,
(eq. 8) torsional, and bending. As a frictional force is applied to the tip
of the pin, no axial strain acts on the arm, and both bending and
The torque caused by the friction from the pin is calculated as: torsion strain act on arm. Torsional forces cancel from the full
bridge setup of strain gage, this will be explained further on.

5 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 The only remaining strain is caused by bending, the equation
for pure bending strain is noted below:
(eq. 11)
The Young’s Modulus will be the same with each experiment,
and the load will vary from 8.8N (1kg, μ=.9) to .05N (500g,
μ=.01) as extremes, depending on the mass applied to the top of
the arm and the range of estimated coefficient of friction. The
strain value calculated needs to fall in a measurable range of 10-
3
and 10-6 strain, so the length, width, and height of the section
are altered to maximize the strain values. The dimensions
selected were a length of 76mm, width of 10mm, and thickness
of 6mm.
Typically, a section of the arm is machined down to alter
the length, width, and thickness parameters to get the strain to a
measurable value. The same concept is applied here, but
instead of machining down the surface, a smaller section of the
arm is detachable. Making this section removable benefits the
design, for example if the smaller section is bent, it can be
replaced with a new piece, and the detailed machining work in
the rest of the arm would not need to be redone. On top of this,
the option to remove the arm is available for replacing the
strain gage. This section is pictured in Fig. 9.
Figure 9. Strain gage bonded to surface and lead wires
soldered.
The configuration of the purchased strain gage for the
tribometer is shown in Fig 10. Mounting a strain gage on both
sides of the arm will result in a full bridge set-up, which
maximizes accuracy of the strain measurement.
Figure 10. Strain gage purchased.
6 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
The strain gage acts as a resistor in a Wheatstone bridge
(Fig. 10), a circuit which can measure unknown resistance.
Figure 11. Wheatstone bridge circuitry.
In a full bridge, each resistor is replaced with a strain gage.
Gages experiencing positive strain are connected directly with
gages experiencing negative strain (Fig. 12).
Figure 12. Wheatstone bridge with respect to strain layout.
Because each resistor is being replaced with a strain gage in
a full bridge set-up, effects such as change in ambient
temperature and extraneous loads cancel out, as long as each
strain gage is centered and parallel to the beam as well as the
strain gages on opposite sides are symmetrically loaded.
Because both the strain gage and the arm are fastened in the
center of the arm, torsional effects are also canceled out.
Arm mid-section design
Because the middle section of the arm was designed to be
weaker to increase the axial bending (and strain), it was
important to check if it could hold the weight of the arm and
pin. One possible rudimentary calculation involves making
sure the stress in the arm did not exceed the yield stress, which
calculates stress as:
(eq. 12)
Each is calculated in Equations (13)-(15).
(eq. 13)
(eq. 14)
(eq. 15)
Stress is solved as:
The yield limit of aluminum is 200 MPa. The dimensions of
the arm are satisfactory.
 Because the mid-section of the arm was designed to be Shaft
weaker, it is also designed to be removable. This is because if
Simply put, the rotation of the motor transfers into the
it ever needed to be replaced, the detailed machining work at
mounting plate. In order for rotational output from the motor to
both ends would not need to be redone. If the mid-section ever
properly transfer into the plate, specific design considerations
needed to be replaced, the length of the exposed section should
needed to be accounted for in order to minimize slop and
be fastened to be exactly 76.2 mm so that the pin is centered
wobble within the subassembly. The motor shaft and hardened
properly on the disk. A rubber stop is included just below the
shaft are connected by means of a flexible coupling (Fig. 14).
arm towards the back so that the counterweight hanging off the
The shaft connects to the plate by a machined part, it was press
back would never smash into the position indicator directly
fit and secured with set screws to keep from slipping. The part
below it.
is flanged and bolted into the plate. A flanged ball bearing is
bolted to the table, which takes care of a great amount wobble
Plunger design in the shaft. In between this bearing and the machined part is a
Many current tribometer designs mount the test specimen flat bearing; this small piece is important because it allows the
by either bolting down the specimen at its center [X] or by weight of the plate to be held by the table through the bearing it
clamping down the specimen to a plate to a specific bolt pattern sits on. Without it, the motor would not be able to function
[X]. Both designs have advantages. The first allowing the with the weight of the plate assembly pressing down on it.
specimen to be any diameter (assuming it is big enough to fit a Lastly, spacers are surrounding the bolts holding the motor in
bolt and leave enough room to test), but takes time to machine order to further prevent wobble.
each test sample. The second does not need any adjustments
made to the sample, but takes time to unbolt and bolt the
clamps for each test that mounts a different size specimen.
Although this method allows the samples to be a range of
diameters, they still have to be specific.
The goal was to design something that was both quick to
set-up and allowed for any size diameter within a defined range
(.5 mm to 23.5 mm scratch radius was requested). Machining
into the part was not an option, as the specimen size is small coupling
and would leave little room for testing. The solution was
simply to clamp down the specimen with an adjustable threaded
fixture (Fig. 13). This fixture was a stationary piece with a
threaded hole. A long screw was added with a nut to hold it in
place, and a rubber tip to hold the specimen down. Because the
plate will never spin faster than 500 RPM and the pin does not
exert much lateral force on the specimen, tightening the
specimen down with hand tightness is enough to keep the
specimen from moving during tests, The nut can be tightened
with a wrench for a more comfortable clamp.
The specimen also has a range of heights (10 mm to 50
mm). This can be accounted for with the pin height.
Figure 14. Shaft assembly and counterparts.
The platform was machined with a ring pattern to allow the
specimen to be centered visibly. Bearing calculations
The bearing life of the flat bearing can be calculated as
such:

(eq. 16)

C is provided by the supplier. If the load capacity was the same

Figure 13. Specimen mounted and tightened with plungers.
as the load applied to the bearing, the bearing would last 106
revolutions. The value e is 3 for ball bearings, so is the same
value for each bearing in the tribometer. Assuming that the
bearing runs at 400 RPM (on average) and is used for 10 hours
a day, the flat bearing will fail in 362.5 days (according to that
calculation). In actuality, the tribometer will go without being
used for many days at a time throughout the year. This bearing

7 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 is easy to replace, only one screw on the coupling needs to be
loosened, and the entire plate assembly lifts out, and the
bearing simply sits in place.
The flanged linear ball bearing would see the same number
of rotations, but not a huge amount of force. There may be
some force from the motor jerking, but not enough to notice
visibly, as it runs smoothly. Very little force would be exerted
from the weight tilting because it is restrained from tilting
much, a fraction of the 23N. The dynamic load capacity of the
bearing is 320 N, so the bearing will easily last a long time.
The remaining bearings barely rotate or rotate slowly.
These bearings include the two ball bearings in the arm at the
pivot, the two linear ball bearings sliding on each shaft on
either side of the lead screw, and the two ball bearings in the
pillow blocks. Because they all do not move much, as long as
the load on the bearings does not exceed the load capacity, it is
safe to assume these bearings would last plenty of time to serve
the assembly. Table 1 shows the loads and load capacities for
each remaining bearing.
Table 1. Bearing load capacities and loads
BEARING LOAD LOAD
LOCATION CAPACITY [N] [N]
Arm pivot 3247 5.40
Linear shafts 262 30.3
Pillow blocks 1300 10.0
Normal force
Once the arm is balanced, a known weight is applied to the
top of the arm directly above the pin. The masses range from
100g to 1000g in 100g increments. The normal force is simply
the mass times gravity:
(eq. 17)
Although this may seem trivial, it is important to simplify the
design whenever possible.
Ground surfaces
Figure 15. Table during grounding process.
8 Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
All surfaces being built upon each other needed to be
precision ground. All the ground parts include the table, both
the plate and platform which mount the specimen, as well as
the arm mount and plate the arm assembles too. The ground
surfaces (Fig. 15) are flat within a tolerance of .13 mm.
Case
A case was also designed for both safety reasons and to
prevent splatter for lubricated tests. Because of the handle
hanging off the back of the assembly, it made more sense to
only enclose the rotating section instead of the entire assembly.
The case was designed to not interfere with the arm when
stationary or rotated out, and needed to be removed for easy
access to sample set-up. Instead of making one side removable,
all four sides were attached together for rigidity, and a
detachable piece allowed space for the arm to rotate out. The
piece is attached with hand screws and a bracket. The sides
were fixed together with an acrylic chemical that melts the
plastic together. The case overhangs the edges on three sides
and the forth side is supported by the table; on the opposite
edge, the case is held up/kept from sliding out with two
brackets. The case is made of plexiglas (Fig. 16).
Figure 16. Case assembled and mounted on tribometer.
Detachable piece removed for arm to rotate out.
Because acrylic cracks easily when drilled through, it was
risky to drill right into the sides, holes were drilled in a separate
piece and attached to the handles, then glued to the case. The
pieces with holes were taped during the drilling process to keep
them from cracking, and machined slowly with soapy water as
lubricant.
ASSEMBLY
The entire machining and assembly process was completed
over the final three months of the project. The first parts and
materials arrived right before this period, on schedule for
machining.
 Machined parts Arm subassembly to mount
Most components in the assembly were machined, either Threaded rods, counterweight, applied weight, and pin to arm
entirely or partially. Aluminum was used whenever something Motor and linear bearing to table
stronger was not necessary to simplify the machining. All of Disk subassembly, flat bearing unattached to motor/linear
the machined parts are included in Table 2. Figure 17 includes bearing, coupling fastened last
a picture of the fully machined front end of the arm, showing Case, sitting on table/brackets fastened to table
that individual parts have much machined detail.
The mounting block provides a good example of a part that
Table 2. Fully and partially machined parts needed precision machining and benefited from partial
FULLY MACHINED PARTICALLY MACHINED assembly. The bearing holes were bored out for a press fit
Arm front Threaded rods (2) installation. Their locations were determined from the shafts
Arm back Shaft already assembled to the plate. The press fit requirement
Arm mid section Swivel allowed almost no location and diametral tolerance. This
Arm mid section mounting Handle scenario is similar anywhere something was press fit, such shaft
brackets (2) and other bearing transitions.
Counterweight Lead screw The arm was able to unattach easily. It was helpful during
Mounting block Case the assembly process for machining updates and strain gage
Plate installment.
Disk Another feature that benefited from machining during the
Platform assembly process was the shaft hole in the table. This was
Plunger holders (4) machined after the arm was installed, marked by the location of
Shaft to disk connection the pin. The four motor mounting holes were machined with
Table respect to the shaft. This step is captured in Fig. 18.
Legs (4)

Figure 17. Front end of arm detached after completed

machining.

Assembly order
The advantage of doing an independent project over an
industry product is the order of assembly does not have to be
entirely defined before the parts have arrived or even before the
machining process is complete. This advantage allowed many
parts to be marked with respect to a location of another part’s or
subassembly’s geometry. This lessened the tolerance on many
machined details, which is important for precision work.
The order of assembly is as follows in Table 3.
Table 3. Assembly order summarized
ASSEMBLY ORDER
Table including legs
Swivel to table
Plate with mounting block and lead screw subassembly to
swivel
Lock and handle to lead screw
Figure 18. Tribometer partially assembled during machining
process.
The final mechanical assembly was the case. As previously
mentioned, the case was assembled with an acrylic paste, and
the handles attached first by a separate piece then pasted onto
prevent cracking the main plexiglas.
The strain gage and motor were then wired to the DAQ,
which connected to the computer.
CONCLUSIONS
As expected, many issues arouse during the machining and
assembly process, due to either unforeseen circumstances or
inexperience. Many design improvements were made along the

9 Copyright © 2015 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 way. The design already is a streamlined version of existing
pin-on-disk tribometers, but it could be streamlined even
further, in terms of both function and physical appeal. For
example, making the plate, platform, and shaft transition pieces
lighter would have greatly reduced the power the motor needed.
In terms of overall aesthetics, it would have been more visually
pleasing if the bolts were threaded into the plate instead of
attached with nuts. The idea was to minimize tolerance, but
threading into material has a much nicer appearance. The final
difference would be to know many of the design change
descisions beforehand as to keep shipping costs down.
Overall, the tribometer was a success, both for providing
equipment to the department and as a learning experience.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial
support of the Mechanical Engineering Department at the
Rochester Institute of Technology. Special thanks to the RIT
machine shop for allowing use of their machines and answering
questions throughout the production process. Additional thanks
to professors, peers, and staff willing to provide feedback and
answer questions throughout the entire design, build, and
writing process.
About the author
The project was completed at the Rochester Institute of
Technology while Elspeth was working towards her Master of
10
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/86927/ on 05/26/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
Engineering Degree with a focus in Mechanics and Design.
Elspeth now works full-time at UTC Aerospace Systems in
Windsor Locks, CT as a Mechanical Design Engineer in the
Space Systems group. Her current work supports the design for
the Orion Spacecraft.
REFERENCES
[1] Bronshteyn, L. A., and Kreiner, J. A. H., 1999, "Energy
Efficiency of Industrial Oils," 42, pp. 771-776.
[2] Czichos, H., 1983, "Tribology: Scope and Future Directions
of Friction and Wear Research," Journal of Metals, 35(9), pp.
18-20.
[3] Standard test method for wear testing with a pin-on-disk
apparatus, ASTM G99-05.
[4] Iglesias, P., Bermudez, M. D., Moscoso, W., Rao, B. C.,
Shankar, M. R., and Chandrasekar, S., 2007, "Friction and Wear
of Nanostructured Metals Created by Large Strain Extrusion
Machining," Wear, 263(1-6 SPEC. ISS.), pp. 636-642.
[5] MiSUMi-Product Specifications. “Lead Screws –For
Support Units-” June 2014.
[6] Anaheim Automation. “23MD - Stepper Motors with
Integrated Drivers.” 2011. June 2014.
[7] CSM Instruments. “CSM TRIBOMETERS--Nano & Micro
range for Tribological studies.” pp. 2. June 2014
[8] Nanovea. “Tribometers.” pp. 1-4. June 2014.
Copyright © 2015 by ASME