REVIEW

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals: review of tribological studies and related topics since the 1930s
G K Nikas Mechanical Engineering Department, Tribology Group, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, London SW7 2AZ, UK. email: g.nikas@imperial.ac.uk; gnikas@teemail.gr

Keywords: seal, reciprocating, elastomer, rubber, polymer, tribology, review

INTRODUCTION

Hydraulic reciprocating seals are critical machine elements used in a variety of industrial, automobile, aerospace, and medical applications that involve linear and rotational motion such as in hydraulic actuators [1]. They are usually made of polymeric or thermoplastic materials, including elastomers and rubber-like materials (rubber compounds with vulcanized natural rubber as the prototype or synthetic rubbers produced with sulphur or other additives), plastics, polyurethanes, as well as composites. These seals normally operate dynamically under broad operating conditions, with sealed pressures of up to 80 MPa, sliding speeds of up to 15 m/s, and temperatures varying roughly between 70 and +250 C, depending on application. Figure 1 shows typical hydraulic actuators and some reciprocating seals of various shapes, including rod, piston, and rotary-vane seals [14]. It is characteristic that the depicted seal shapes are just a few of many complex designs that have evolved over decades of theoretical and applied research. A hydraulic reciprocating seal is a rather neglected machine element in the scientic literature, in spite of its vital role in many applications. The neglect is partly attributed to the complexity of seal behaviour, which is owed to the large number of variables signicantly affecting sealing performance. The major
JET607 IMechE 2009

Un c

orr ec te

Abstract: Hydraulic seals are complicated machine elements. The engineering research on hydraulic reciprocating seals, which commenced roughly in the 1930s, has achieved a basic understanding of performance issues. This article provides a review of the experimental and theoretical research conducted over a period of eight decades, discussing more than 200 of the most signicant publications from the related literature. The topics discussed include reciprocating seal designs, materials, experimental methods, theoretical studies, elastohydrodynamic lubrication, solid and contact mechanics, performance issues, and optimization.

dP roo

DOI: 10.1243/13506501JET607

difculty is attributed to seal exibility, which precludes obtaining analytical solutions and complicates any numerical solution process, particularly in transient conditions. Moreover, typical seal materials such as elastomers obey highly complex, non-linear stress strain laws of nite elasticity or thermoviscoelasticity, which are strongly affected by temperature. In fact, basic mechanical properties of hydraulic seals such as the moduli of elasticity and rigidity, Poissons ratio, hardness, and compressibility all depend strongly on temperature. Additional inuential factors such as chemical interaction with hydraulic uids, material (e.g. elastomer or rubber) oxidation, and ageing play major roles in sealing performance. In spite of the difculties in sealing performance evaluation, hydraulic seals are met in many critical applications with machinery costing hundreds to millions of times more than the seals. A characteristic example was the dramatic destruction of the NASA space shuttle Challenger in 1986, which was attributed to the loss of sealing ability of a static elastomeric O-ring because of low ambient temperature the night before the shuttles launch [5], an engineering error that cost several human lives. Therefore, the correct engineering design and evaluation of hydraulic seals is of paramount importance to avoid costly mistakes. As far as the author is aware, the scientic research on hydraulic reciprocating seals was initiated before
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

The manuscript was received on 21 December 2008 and was accepted after revision for publication on 16 April 2009.

G K Nikas

Fig. 1

World War II; it then rapidly progressed in the 1960s and 1970s. Following one of the early studies on the network theory of rubber elasticity by Meyer et al. [6] in 1932, the doctoral thesis of Gronau [7] in 1935 was one of the earliest known publications on hydraulic seals. However, the rst breakthrough probably was the pioneering work of White and Denny [8, 9] from 1944 to 1947, an exhaustive experimental and theoretical
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

Un c

Hydraulic actuators for linear and rotary motion, and some examples of rod seals (on the right), piston seals (on the left), and rotary-vane seals (top, right) (from references [1] to [4])

orr ec te
work on reciprocating seals, which remains a source of reference. Denny [1016] continued his pioneering work on reciprocating seals in the 1950s and 1960s, dealing mainly experimentally with the issues of lubrication, leakage, and friction. Some other noteworthy, early experimental studies during the 1950s were those of Cheyney et al. [17] and Morrison [18] on static and dynamic O-rings, as well as the work
JET607 IMechE 2009

dP roo

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

REVIEW OF EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON RECIPROCATING SEALS AND RELATED TOPICS

Although the work of Gronau [7] in 1935 is one of the earliest recorded studies on hydraulic seals, the work of White and Denny [8, 9] between September 1944 and December 1946 is probably the rst major research contribution on seals. Their 130-page nal report [9], containing over 110 gures and drawings, was based on an exhaustive experimental study amidst World War II. In fact, the study was supported by the Ministry of Aircraft Production and the Royal Aircraft Establishment in the UK in the interests of improving hydraulic system reliability. The work of Deny under the direction of Professor White at Imperial College in London dealt with the experimental study of exible packings, including rectangular, toroidal, and U-cup seals of various polymeric materials. Their measurements at various sealed pressures, speeds, and temperatures involved the friction coefcient and force at the sealing contact, leakage rates, seal wear, and failure mechanisms involving abrasion and extrusion. They studied the effects of seal material hardness (which they showed to decrease abrasion and extrusion) and sealed-uid properties on leakage and friction, and came up with seal housing arrangements such as

Un c

JET607 IMechE 2009

orr ec te

of some researchers in Germany [19, 20]. By the late 1950s, the foundations of the elastohydrodynamic theory of lubrication had been laid [21] and the theory was swiftly applied to reciprocating seals with increasing success since the 1960s. The progress in sealing research was continuous between 1960 and 2000 with a variety of valuable experimental [2229] and theoretical studies [3046] exploring fundamental issues of friction and leakage performance on a variety of seal shapes, including rectangular seals, toroidal seals (O-rings), U-cups, step-seals, tandem seals, and a few others. These are discussed in later sections of the article, together with the more recent studies of 20002008. Very few reviews on reciprocating seals have been published over the past 80 years, most notably the general reviews of Nau [47, 48] covering some of the work done up to the 1990s, the study of Field and Nau [49] on experimental research up to the 1970s, the general discussions of Flitney [50] in 1982, and Ramsdell [51] in 1986, the detailed reviews of Kanters [52] and Visscher and Kanters [53] in 1990 (mainly on experimental issues), the presentations of reciprocating-seal tribology and designs of Bisztray-Balku [54, 55], and, nally, book chapter [1]. The present article is a review of the majority of the signicant theoretical and experimental studies on reciprocating seals and related topics, discussing the major contributions in this eld and listing over 200 references for a complete bibliography on the subject.

back-up rings to avoid extrusion. Their experiments on interfacial phenomena involving surface roughness effects are of great importance because they demonstrated, perhaps for the rst time in hydraulic seals, the relation between stiction, static and dynamic friction on the roughness value and texture. Furthermore, by measuring the friction force in reciprocating motion at various stroking velocities, they realized the connection with the lm thickness at the sealing contact and the transition from boundary or partial lubrication with roughnessasperity interactions at low speeds to elastohydrodynamic lubrication at higher speeds. The latter was much later explained by the Stribeck curve, although some differences exist between the Stribeck curve of hard-elastohydrodynamic contacts and that of exible, reciprocating seals [56, 57]. White and Denny also managed to measure the contact pressure at the sealing interface and locate the zone of maximum seal strain. This provided two important observations: (a) elastomeric seals are nearly incompressible (the Poissons ratio is very close to 0.5), which means that the hydraulic pressure exerted on (preloaded by radial interference) seals is readily transferred to the sealing contact, allowing seals to achieve automatic sealing (Fig. 2); (b) the mechanism of sealing is hidden in the inlet zone of the contact and related to the gradient of the contact pressure distribution at the inexion point (more on that later). Four experimental studies from the classic sealing conferences organized by the British Hydromechanics Research Association in the 1960s provided valuable new information on seal lubrication and friction, using a variety of measuring techniques. In 1964, Cnops [58] devised a spring-loaded piston in a hydraulic cylinder

dP roo

Fig. 2 Rectangular elastomeric seal with an anti-extrusion ring in a linear hydraulic actuator (only the upper half of the seal, ring and housing depicted), demonstrating how the seal automatically adjusts to sealed-pressure variations by transferring it to the sealing contact via its nearly incompressible material (see arrows)
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

G K Nikas

containing brake uid of harmonically varying volume to measure the friction of cup, piston, and elastomeric seals. With that rig, Cnops observed the mechanism of oil lm formation at the sealing contact, the thickness of which varied with the stroking speed from partially collapsed at low speeds to relatively thick at higher speeds. In terms of friction, Cnops observed the effects of stiction and elastomer relaxation and creep, which characterize the viscoelastic nature of rubberlike materials, particularly after long periods in static conditions. In fact, these effects had been discussed years earlier by, for example, Denny [15] in 1959. The friction and lubrication of natural-rubber, piston seals, were also studied by Lawrie and ODonoghue [23] in 1964, who utilized displacement transducers for their friction and piston-velocity measurements. Their sealing rig, which consisted of a pump-pressurized, brake-uid lled cylinder, allowed for simultaneous measurement of contact pressure, friction force, and stroking velocity for a complete operating cycle via a multi-channel recorder. The seal rubber used was conducting to allow for contact resistance measurements and establishing whether the uid lm at the sealing contact had collapsed (zero resistance) or was full (innite resistance). It was thus possible to measure the sealing performance in transient conditions and identify potential problems with seal abrasive wear for collapsed uid lm or, simply, observe lm development and variation during an operating cycle. The development of a uid lm at a sealing contact and the transition from boundary (partially collapsed lm) to hydrodynamic (full lm) lubrication was also the focus of Mllers experimental work [22] in 1964. His experiments with elastomeric toroidal seals and quad (X ) rings revealed the effects of the stroking velocity, seal preloading, and uid viscosity on sealing performance in terms of leakage and friction. Of particular importance was his discussion on the lmthickness difference between instrokes and outstrokes (see Fig. 2 for the direction clarication), as well as on the elastohydrodynamic lm thickness of elastomeric reciprocating seals. In 1969, Aston et al. [59] made a signicant contribution by presenting their experimental work on rubber seal friction at temperatures of up to 200 C. The importance of that work was on the demonstrated relation between temperature and rubberspecimen dimensions, which affected the frictional force. Moreover, Aston et al. studied the relaxation and subsequent recovery rate of rubber after periods of inactivity, which caused a reduction of the frictional force in time. Such viscoelastic phenomena are crucial in sealing performance and met in many hydraulic-seal applications such as those in the aerospace sector. They are also related to the natural ageing of elastomeric materials and can be explained via the network theory of rubber [60].

Another signicant contribution from the 1960s is the work of Dowson and Swales [25], who combined experimental work with theoretical predictions via the elastohydrodynamic lubrication theory. They devised a rotating disc machine to test a cylindrical rubber block, emulating reciprocating seals and very long strokes. The sealing contact pressure was measured by a piezo-electric transducer and the lm thickness was measured via capacitance techniques. The theory, generally, supported the experimental ndings showing increase of lm thickness with speed and decrease with contact pressure. Moreover, the fundamental sealing mechanism of reciprocating seals, i.e. the leakage difference between outstrokes and instrokes, was revealed. The latter, obviously, resulted in concluding that seal leakage-per-cycle (in reciprocating seals, an operating cycle consists of one outstroke followed by one instroke) is zero if the uid that leaked during the outstroke is fully returned to the sealed chamber during the instroke. Moving on to the 1970s, the experimental contributions of Field and Nau [24, 49], focusing on rectangular rubber seals, improved the understanding of sealing mechanisms and performance issues. By using optical interferometry and electrical transducers to measure the lm thickness, they produced results on leakage, friction, and contact pressure. However, those results were characterized by some inconsistencies. The reason for the latter, apart from a probable lack of high-precision instrumentation at that time, could be found in a study of Flitney and Nau [61] in the late 1980s, which revealed a scatter in results obtained from seven laboratories located in different countries, yet based on experiments under controlled conditions. A possible explanation postulated in reference [61] was that the adherence to test specications was hindered by the lack of standardized methods in sealing technology. Another signicant contribution from the 1970s was the experimental work of Hirano and Kaneta [27] in 1971 who measured the friction force and leakage of nitrile-rubber D -rings in reciprocating motion. They observed how the mixing of air bubbles with hydraulic uid in the sealing contact affected leakage and friction. (Similar observations about air bubbles indicating cavitation at the edges of the contact and leading to lm depletion because of the oil obstruction by the bubbles have been reported by Rana [62], although that was happening in low-load contacts after long periods of operation (more than 30 min) and the phenomenon was weak when the contact load was increased.) Hirano and Kaneta [27] also observed the now well-known phenomena of rubber stiction at the start-up and the reversal of motion, owing to the collapse of the uid lm at the sealing contact. They also showed how friction and leakage were related to the stroking length and how it became unstable

Un c

orr ec te

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo

JET607 IMechE 2009

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

Fig. 3 The variation of the minimum lm thickness of a rectangular rubber seal during outstrokes and instrokes (from Field and Nau [29])
JET607 IMechE 2009

Un c

orr ec te

dP roo

in short stroking-length situations. In fact, they discussed how the development of a stable hydrodynamic lm in the sealing contact depends on the ratio of the stroking length to the seal contact width. If the said ratio is >2, sealed uid, which is transported through the sealing contact at about half the speed of the contact counterfaces, can reach the outlet zone of the contact and, thus, leakage takes place. This observation is, obviously, of paramount importance in reciprocating-seal leakage, friction, and wear. The same conclusion was reached in an equally signicant study by Field and Nau [29] in 1975, who, additionally, studied the effects of seal hardness and preloading or initial interference, seal edge (or corner) geometry, and back-up clearance. These parameters were much later included in theoretical models by other researchers and their effects quantied (more on that later). What is perhaps most worthy of remembering from Field and Nau [29] is their graphs on the variation of the minimum lm thickness and friction force of a reciprocating rubber seal during a full cycle see Fig. 3. The differences between outstroke and instroke dictate

the leakage-per-cycle and explain the seal behaviour during each stroke. In the rst 40 or so years of sealing research (up to and including the 1960s), the main parameters affecting sealing performance had been identied and experimentally studied. Naturally, the quality of the experimental work was depending on the quality of the laboratory equipment and the efciency of the techniques used. From the oil weighing for leakage measurements in the 1940s to the video-camera recording of the sealing contact in the late 1990s, there has been a long way of custom-built apparatuses and measurement techniques of variable success. Four variables are of major importance in all of those studies, namely the contact pressure distribution and width, the contact lm thickness, the seal frictional force, and the leakage rate. The measurement of static contact pressure distributions [34, 6370] has been performed by using strain gauges, piezo-electric force transducers [24, 25, 71], photoelastic methods [72], as well as inductive transducers for measuring displacements. The latter has also been used in lm-thickness measurements, in addition to electrical capacitance [24, 25, 29, 49, 66, 71] and resistance methods [23, 67, 73], as well as optical interference and uorescence techniques [7476]. Recently developed methods on lm-thickness measurements such as ultrasonic techniques have also been used, although the latter has been applied to mechanical seals [77] and not to reciprocating seals yet as far the author is aware. The measurement of friction of rubber-like reciprocating seals has been the focus of most experimental studies. Lack of standardized methods and commercial apparatuses dictated the construction of various rigs and devices to t specic purposes. The complexity and individuality of those approaches make a detailed discussion very difcult but a lot of information can be found in the doctoral theses and related publication of Kanters and Visscher [51, 52, 78] for studies conducted up to 1990. The measurement of leakage of reciprocating seals is usually done by weighing the leaked uid after removing it from piston rods. This is most likely the oldest method and has been used by most researchers [9, 22, 24, 27, 71, 79, 80]. A few other methods have also been used such as measuring the electrical capacitance of leaked oil layers with one or two electrodes [81] as well as by measuring the oil ow necessary to maintain a constant sealed pressure [24, 71, 82, 83]. Other important variables such as the static and dynamic extrusion of elastomeric seals into large clearances [84] have also been measured but the main focus was on the phenomena taking place at a sealing interface. The use of optical interferometry since at least the 1960s gave new results to consider in the study of hydrodynamic lms, involving the contacts between polymers (including rubber),
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

G K Nikas

Fig. 4 Test rigs for reciprocating seals developed by Rana [62]: (a) the original, simpler version [62, 90] and (b) the nal, advanced version [62, 91]
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology JET607 IMechE 2009

Un c

orr ec te

dP roo

steel, and, especially, glass. In this respect, the work of Blok and Koens [74] in 1965 was important because it addressed the problem of poor reectivity of rubber surfaces (owed to high surface roughness and dark colour) by using an externally aluminized, thin, plastic-sheet cover on the rubber. The method was applied to rubber lubrication a few years later by Roberts and Tabor [85], too. Optical interferometry in the study of sealing contacts has more recently been used by Kanzaki et al. [86, 87] as well as Kaneta et al. [26]. In the latter study, a mono-chromatic technique was used in D-rings and lip-shaped, nitrile-rubber, stationary seals on sinusoidally reciprocating glass. Unfortunately, in order to improve rubber reectivity, the specimens had to be specially moulded to improve their smoothness, which destroyed their natural surface roughness. A better solution to this problem (better still than that in references [74] and [85] discussed earlier) was used by Rana [62]: by applying a gold sputtering method, seal specimens were coated with four layers of gold, each being 50 nm thick.

This gave very high reectivity without altering significantly the original average roughness, which, in the case of elastomeric seals, is quite high (typical values in the order of 1.5 m [1]). Apart from optical interferometry, direct observation of lubricating lms in sealing contacts was also done by cameras and video recording. Schrader [88] in the late 1970s and Kawahara et al. [67] at the beginning of the 1980s used high-speed cameras to photograph seals sliding on glass cylinders. More recently, Rana [62], in collaboration with seal manufacturers in England [89], developed a test rig for stationary elastomeric seals on a reciprocating glass plate, which was equipped with a microscope and computer datalogging of video-recorded images (Fig. 4(a)). Several tests of rectangular seals were performed with this rig under static, dynamic, dry, and lubricated conditions, varying the contact load on the seal, the reciprocating frequency, and the stroking length [90]. Substitution of different seals (of various dimensions and roughness proles) is straightforward. Apart from leakage

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

and friction results, this type of sealing-contact analysis offered real-time data on the dynamic variation of hydrodynamic lms, including cavitation from hydraulic-uid starvation, air bubbles at the edges of the sealing contact, as well as obstruction of uid replenishment by the accumulation of debris particles (often fragments of seal material). Ranas rig [62, 90] was re-designed to allow for greater exibility and experimental precision. The advanced rig [62, 91] (Fig. 4(b)) consisted of a hollow, transparent, and high-strength tube connected to a motor, which transferred reciprocating motion to the tube via a gear mechanism. Gland, elastomeric seals were accommodated by a steel casing enveloping and supporting the tube, whereas a hydraulic circuit supplied red hydraulic uid to the stationary seals (refer to Fig. 4(b)) with pressures up to 7 MPa (although the maximum sealed pressure in the tests was kept below 1 MPa for safety reasons). A still, externally mounted boroscope with integral lighting focused on a seal and signalled clear images to a CCD camera and attached computer for data logging and subsequent processing. That rig provided an array of results on seal leakage, friction, extrusion, cavitation, and wear, as well as results on surface-roughness deformation in dynamic conditions, uid lm development and collapse, debris particle entrainment, and so on. Visual observation of the sealing interface shows that the entrainment of debris particles, including seal fragments and foreign contaminants, increases leakage by distorting the seal surface. If the debris are harder than the seal material, they stick to the seal and may abrade the contact counterface (e.g. a piston rod). The thus-created scoring grooves act like microchannels, allowing pressurized uid to escape to the low-pressure side of the seal (similar grooves were articially created by White and Denny [9] in their experiments to test this hypothesis, which they veried). In the experiments of Tanoue et al. [92] with used lubricating oils, it was found that shaft wear was signicantly affected by sub-micrometre particles (<0.25 m) and was proportional to the concentration of the particles. Remarkably, signicant wear was observed even for small particle concentrations, e.g. 0.2 per cent by weight. Another important nding from the work of Rana [62] was that, during the initial running-in period, seals became smoother. Specically, in Ranas tests, the average roughness was reduced from 1.8 to 1.1 m and skewness (a measure of the asymmetry of the roughness prole about the mean line) reduced from 1.07 to 0.23 m, even though the seal was sliding on an (ultra smooth) glass surface. Wear was reduced after the initial running-in period and was higher at the end of the strokes because of a reduction of the lm thickness caused by the lower sliding speed (or instantaneously zero speed during the reversal of the entrainment velocity). Such results are of importance

in designing optimized seals and should complement global optimization algorithms that normally take into account only basic performance parameters [44, 93]. 3 REVIEW OF THEORETICAL STUDIES ON RECIPROCATING SEALS, MATERIALS, AND RELATED TOPICS

Un c

The theoretical analysis of reciprocating seals began with the pioneering studies of the 1930s and 1940s (e.g. [7, 9]) but was hindered and delayed by the challenging nature of the elastohydrodynamics and contact mechanics problems of exible seals. The challenges, which are detailed in reference [1] and briey in reference [94], are explained next for the sake of completeness, and blended with the discussion of progression in the theoretical modelling of hydraulic reciprocating seals and their performance evaluation. They concern both the mechanics and the lubrication modelling of hydraulic seals. The main problem is the exible nature of reciprocating seals, which are made of either polymeric materials (including elastomers and, generally, rubber compounds), thermoplastics such as polytetrauoroethylene (PTFE), ultra-high-molecular-weightpolyethylene (UHMWPE), polyurethanes, and composite materials such as bronze-lled PTFE in coaxial seals [95], PTFE with glass bres bonded with elastomers as in rotary vane seals (Fig. 1) [4, 96, 97], or PTFE lled with stainless steel or graphite. Even when the main sealing element is not really exible, the supporting sealing element denitely is in order to allow automatic adjustment of the contact pressure to sealed pressure variations (e.g. observe the glydring rod seal at the bottom-right corner in Fig. 1). Polymeric and composite materials have a non-linear stressstrain behaviour, including viscoelasticity (as in elastomers), viscoplasticity (as in PTFE), and, generally, nite elasticity, involving several experimentally derived coefcients, which make their mechanics modelling a complicated task. 3.1 Studies on hydraulic-seal materials and constitutive laws

JET607 IMechE 2009

orr ec te

dP roo

Elastomers suit hydraulic seal applications because of their resilience. They accept large tensile, compressive, and shear strains without permanent deformation, which is perfect for tting in different housings and adapting to pressure variations. This is owed to their low elastic and shear moduli, as well as incompressibility (Poissons ratio very close to 0.5, normally >0.490). However, their mechanical properties strongly depend on temperature, the imposed strain and strain rate, and change in time as they age. Their Youngs modulus often exhibits up to two orders of magnitude change when the temperature
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

G K Nikas

Fig. 5

Stressstrain curves of an elastomer used in hydraulic reciprocating seals, with glass transition temperature of 47 C (see for example references [1], [89], [94], [98], and [99])

is changed between positive and sub-zero values [98, 99], and is different in tension than in compression see Fig. 5. The stiffening of elastomers with dropping temperature is maximized near the glass transition temperature (usually between 0 and 70 C, depending on the particular material and signifying the transition from the rubbery to the glassy state), where potentially irreversible structural changes ensue [100], which are characteristic of the molecular structure of elastomers. This fact, in combination with the typically high thermal expansion coefcient of elastomers (104 3 104 K1 [95]) implying large dimensional changes with temperature, is critical in aerospace applications and can cause sealing failure from loss of contact pressure at low temperatures [1, 4, 94], the most dramatic example of which was the destruction of the NASA space shuttle Challenger in 1986 [1, 5, 94]. Dimensional changes of hydraulic seals in the form of swelling are also met in cases where porous seals absorb hydraulic uid. Further complications in the modelling of elastomer mechanics arise by the elastomer not following the same stressstrain path in loading/unloading (hysteresis) and by responding to load depending on the magnitude of past acquired strain (memory). Such non-linear effects are stronger at temperatures near or lower than the glass transition temperature and become apparent when seals remain stationary (set) for long periods of time. The latter leads to seals adhering to their metallic counterfaces and having high friction during the starting up of motion (see e.g. the transient frictional behaviour of the rotary vane seals in reference [4]; see also the study of Gibson et al. [101]). It also causes stick-slip and vibration, which is reduced by anti-extrusion rings (Fig. 2) or, practically, avoided by using thermoplastics instead of

elastomers (e.g. the glyd rings in Fig. 1) or twin-lipped seals (Fig. 1), naturally retaining lubricant between their lips and avoiding adhesion. In addition, elastomer ageing [102] from oxidation, which is, naturally, faster at higher temperatures, and (sometimes) chemical degradation from incompatible hydraulic uids, cause material hardening and, eventually, embrittlement and fragmentation. In fact, rubber ageing has been found to reduce friction and increase abrasive wear in lubricated conditions [102]. A realistic description of the thermomechanics of elastomeric materials [60] such as those used for reciprocating seals is based on the statisticalmolecular or network theory of rubber elasticity [6], which is quite old but has passed the test of time. According to the theory, elastomers are compounds of chemically cross-linked macro-molecules (see section 1.5 in reference [100]), which create a three-dimensional network. The macro-molecules (long molecular chains) are folded, kinked, and of three types: linear, branched, and cross-linked. The linear chains move easily reciprocally, giving elastomers the characteristic softening when heated or stiffening when cooled. The crosslinked chains however resist reciprocal motion, giving elastomers resistance to ow when heated. Thermally agitated atoms from said macro-molecules can assume a variety of statistically determined conformations [103] (hence the statistical-molecular title of the theory), allowing for continuous variation of the free space between the molecular chains. This neatly explains the extensibility of elastomers at temperatures higher than the glass transition temperature and their stiffening at temperatures close to or below the glass transition temperature when the transient chain motion is slowed down or almost ceases, making elastomers behave like brittle solids. Although in a few reciprocating-seal modelling studies the elastomer mechanics have been modelled in the frame of viscoelasticity (e.g. by using a generalized Maxwell model [103]), nearly all other published studies have been based on the linear theory of elasticity. However, according to the present authors work [89, 98, 99] on comparing the linear and the most popular non-linear (MooneyRivlin) model in reciprocating seals at temperatures between 54 and +135 C, the linear theory of elasticity in reciprocating elastomeric seals is adequate for maximum seal strains up to 10 per cent; above that limit, models of nite elasticity should, ideally, be employed to give more accurate leakage and friction results. The most popular phenomenological models on rubber hyperelasticity can be found in some books dealing with nite elasticity such as Holzapfels book [104]. A lot of related material can be found in reviews Q1 [60, 103, 105107], among which the papers of Treloar [103] in 1976 and Ogden [107] in 1986 (both pioneers in rubber thermoelasticity) are of lasting value. The models usually deal with incompressible, hyperelastic

Un c

orr ec te

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo

JET607 IMechE 2009

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

dP roo
i = i (2) W pc i

where i (i = 1, 2, 3) stands for principal stretch (ratio of deformed to reference length). In the Ogden model [108110] in particular, the strain function is
N

Having decided which constitutive model to use, the Cauchy (true) principal stresses are given by [104] (i = 1, 2, 3) (4)

W =
n=1

n n n n + 2 + 3 3 n 1

where n and n (n = 1, 2, . . ., N ) are constant shear moduli and dimensionless constants, respectively, which are experimentally derived (for typical values of these constants, see page 236 in reference [104]). Additionally, for incompressible materials, 1 2 3 = 1. According to Holzapfel (page 239 in reference [104]), Ogdens model for N = 3 (equation (2)) excellently replicates the nite-strain behaviour of rubber-like materials as proved in references [108], and [111] to [114] among others. However, it should be emphasized that the difference between Ogdens model and other phenomenological models becomes apparent only at high stretches. Based on the present authors research, e.g. [89, 98, 99], typical polymeric reciprocating seals are usually not strained >15 per cent during operation. This normally justies the use of the classic linear (Hookean) theory of elasticity [98], which, moreover, is capable of directly accounting for thermal strains, a feature absent from the popular non-linear models unless approximately (not rigorously) introduced as was done by the present author in references [89], [98], [99], and [115] to [117] with a modied MooneyRivlin model. Despite the effectiveness of Ogdens model, the MooneyRivlin model based on the pioneering work of Mooney [118] in 1940 and Rivlin [119] in 1948 on nite isotropic elasticity is the most popular, followed by the simpler NeoHookean model. In fact, the aforementioned models can be derived from Ogdens model (equation (2)) by setting (N = 2, 1 = 2, 2 = 2) for the MooneyRivlin model and (N = 1, 1 = 2) for the NeoHookean model. Several other constitutive approaches for incompressible, rubber-like materials such as the Varga model [120] can be found in the literature and some are readily available to use in niteelement commercial software but the Ogden model with N = 3 in equation (1), the MooneyRivlin, and the NeoHookean model, as summarized in equation (3), are met most often and, in this authors research experience, are deemed sufcient in reciprocating seals,
JET607 IMechE 2009

where pc is a hydrostatic pressure, calculated from equilibrium equations and boundary conditions (for details, see references [1] and [98]). For the Mooney Rivlin model, a standard engineering stressstrain test of the material in question at the temperature of interest sufces to derive the necessary constants [98]. Nevertheless, in lack of such results, a reasonable approximation to use is 1 = 42 (see page 733 in reference [121]). Combining the latter with the condition of consistency between the MooneyRivlin and the classic linear (Hookean) model, expressed by G = 1 2 (see equation (6.120) in reference [104]) where G = E /(2 + 2) is the shear modulus with E being the Youngs modulus and the Poissons ratio, and taking = 0.5 for incompressible materials, the following approximation is obtained: 1 = 4E /15 and 2 = E /15. The phenomenological models discussed thus far refer to rubber-like materials and are suitable for polymeric reciprocating seals. The basic mechanics analysis of such seals, consisting of calculating the three principal stresses for known strains by equation (4), is sufcient when the seals are of simple shape such as rectangular. As far as the author is aware (year: 2008), it is surprising that there are no publications in the literature utilizing the non-linear models in reciprocating seals and all rely on the linear model, except those of the present author [98, 99, 115117]. In cases of seal shapes other than simple, e.g. step seals, U-cups, and so on (Fig. 1), a simple mechanics analysis is unfeasible. In the latter case, the nite-element method has been utilized, which readily allows the use of non-linear models, even those that incorporate thermal and compressibility effects. Unfortunately, there are several other properties of rubber-like materials, particularly those ller- or particle-reinforced composites, which make their mechanical analysis even with commercial nite-element software problematic. Those properties include stress softening in cyclic loading (Mullins effect), strain stiffening at large stretch, load-frequency-dependent response, temporal softening at high temperature because of scission of
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

Un c

orr ec te

(rubber-like) materials and express the mechanical properties in terms of the energy function. Specically, the elastic strain energy per unit volume, W , is expressed as a function of the three strain invariants, that is W = W (I1 , I2 , I3 ), where 2 2 I1 = 2 1 + 2 + 3 2 2 2 I2 = (1 2 ) + (2 3 ) + (3 1 ) (1) I3 = (1 2 3 )2

with preference to the rst two n n n n 1 + Ogden : W = 2 + 3 3 n n=1 2 1 (I1 3) (I2 3) MooneyRivlin : W = 2 2 1 NeoHookean : W = (I1 3) 2
3

(3)

10

G K Nikas

molecular cross-links that can even cause permanent set of the material, and so on. Some constitutive models have been developed to deal with some of the said effects as in references [122] to [126]. However, their applicability may be limited to very specic cases and they always require experimental verication. Even though the majority of published studies deal with elastomeric seals, some studies have included PTFE, UHMWPE, polyurethanes, and composite seals. The main benets of these materials over elastomers are their increased wear resistance, avoidance of stick-slip motion and extrusion, lower friction, and broader operating-temperature range. Zhangs review [127] on polymer tribology and related book [100] (chapter 16) comprise an excellent source of reference. PTFE in particular has been used in hydraulic sealing since the 1950s [128132]. It is a thermoplastic better known for its low-friction properties. It has a very high resistance to ageing [129] and may be used in various compounds for temperatures in excess of 250 C [133], i.e. temperatures much higher than those allowed in elastomeric-seal applications. Its low frictional resistance, apart from its low surface energy, is also attributed to surface porosity, which results in a small contact area. Moreover, in hydraulic reciprocating seals, surface pores of PTFE act as lubricant pockets. This results in exceptionally low friction and avoidance of stick-slip and vibration, even after long periods of inactivity or low stroking velocities. However, the porosity may increase leakage. Moreover, the low stiffness of PTFE leads to accelerated wear because of delamination [134] when the material is rubbed against metallic surfaces such as piston rods. In fact, accelerated wear of the PTFE may occur even when piston rods are made very smooth (e.g. super nished), which results in polishing the PTFE during extended periods of sliding and in a signicant increase in friction. For these reasons, PTFE is normally met in compounds and composites, e.g. lled with bronze in coaxial seals [95], lled with stainless steel, graphite, or glass bres and elastomeric compounds as in rotary vane seals [4, 96, 135]. Unfortunately, PTFE in its various compounds is, mechanically, a very complex material, with different response in tension and compression, whereas its Youngs modulus, yield point, and Poissons ratio all greatly depend on its composition [136138]. Li and Mays [137] have effectively demonstrated this complexity in their specially adapted nite-element analysis of PTFE rotary seals. Other materials used in hydraulic seals pose no less complexity and may only suit particular applications. For example, UHMWPE cannot be used if the operating temperature normally exceeds 80 C [135]. Thus, matching the seals to their intended use and operating environment is the rst priority in seal selection, as is realized by studying product catalogues of seal manufactures [2, 3].

3.2

Studies on hydraulic-seal mechanics and elastohydrodynamics

As is realized from section 3.1, the mechanical analysis of hydraulic seals is a complicated task. The complexity of the available phenomenological models for rubber-like materials precludes (even approximate) analytical solutions in the solid mechanics of hydraulic reciprocating seals in all but the simplest geometries such as rectangular. This trend is clear in all related literature studies. The older studies resorted to either approximate analytical solutions for very simple geometries or numerical solutions for seal shapes other than rectangular, yet still rather simple (e.g. toroidal). Moreover, they all used the linear theory of elasticity or elementary stress analysis to resolve seal stresses and strains in the context of solid mechanics. In most recent studies (after the year 2004 or so), commercial nite-element software has been used to deal with complex geometries such as for step and U-cup seals. The simple, approximate analytical solutions of older studies remain valuable as they provide much clearer understanding of the sealing mechanisms and ways to optimize seals. In chronological order, most of the signicant contributions in this eld can be found in the publications of Hooke et al. [32, 43] (rubber O-rings), Johannesson [34] (rubber O-rings), Dragoni and Strozzi [139] (rubber O-rings), Field and Nau [31] (perfectly rectangular rubber seals), Strozzi [68] (rectangular-rounded, elastomeric seals), Johannesson and Kassfeldt [140] (elastomeric seals of arbitrary cross-section), Nikas [89, 98, 99, 115117, 141143] (rectangular-rounded elastomeric seals), Nikas and Sayles [97] (rectangular-rounded composite seals), and Nikas [4, 96] (rectangular-rounded, composite, and rotary vane seals in alternating rotation). In the aforementioned studies, the contact pressure at a sealing contact is calculated by either assuming plane-strains conditions or via an elementary stress analysis with strains calculated from the amount of surface interference. Shear from contact friction is usually neglected, although shear stresses inside a seals body can be taken into account see for example Nikas [141]. Simple analytical studies have also been conducted by Karaszkiewicz [144] on O-rings and composite seals with O-ring and PTFE parts [145]. For seal shapes other than rectangular and/or when numerical accuracy is of priority, the nite-element method is used [46, 52, 68, 70, 82, 146160]. A review of this method for the period 19762003 on rubberlike materials with an extensive bibliography can be found in reference [161]. Various types of hydraulic seals have been analysed with this method including rectangular with rounded or chamfered ends [46, 52, 68, 147, 154, 156], O-rings [147, 149, 156, 158], X-rings [148], U-cups [150, 151, 153, 155, 157, 159, 160], and step seals [160].

Un c

orr ec te

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo

JET607 IMechE 2009

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

11

h3 p x

= 6V

( h) ( h) + 12 x t

where p = p(x , t ) and h = h(x , t ) are the local pressure and the local lm thickness at the sealing contact, respectively, V is the sum of the tangential velocities of the contact counterfaces, = (p) and = (p) are the local mass density and the local dynamic viscosity of the sealed uid at the sealing contact for a given operating temperature, respectively, and t stands for time. A more general, two-dimensional (2D) form of the Reynolds equation was used by Nikas [89, 141] and in subsequent publications [98, 99, 115117] dealing with various issues of reciprocating seals, because the intention was to account for uid transportation between roughness asperities transversely to the direction of motion in an attempt to improve accuracy in leakage calculations. However, this adds complexity to the solution process and is, generally, not really necessary. The usual simplication of equation (5) is to ignore the last term ( h)/ t dealing with transient effects and, thus, treat the lubrication problem for steadystate conditions only. This is applicable only when the stroking length is signicantly greater than twice the sealing-contact size and, additionally, both the beginning and the ending of strokes are ignored. The remaining Reynolds equation can be solved numerically either for lm-thickness or for the contactpressure distribution with appropriate kinematical and boundary conditions, e.g. the no-slip and the cavitation conditions [143]. The early solutions of the Reynolds equation for reciprocating seals were based on assumed lm thickness and/or measured contact pressure distributions. For example, White and Denny [9] calculated lm thickness by assuming a tapered lm prole and a parabolic pressure distribution. Mller [22] used measured contact pressure distributions and a tapered lm
JET607 IMechE 2009

orr ec te

dP roo
(5) (d2 q )/(dx 2 )H 3 dH = dx 6V 3(dq )/(dx )H 2

Naturally, the main goal of theoretical models is to evaluate sealing performance in terms of leakage and friction. This requires accounting for the sealeduid effect at a sealing contact, which the previously mentioned computation of the pressure distribution is only a part of. It is established experimentally and theoretically [1] that a lubricating lm of nanometre to micrometre thickness is present at a sealing contact under reciprocating conditions. The calculation of that lm thickness and its distribution in a contact is based on the theory of elastohydrodynamic lubrication [162], which is essentially represented by the Reynolds equation in its various forms, depending on application. Reciprocating seals are normally axisymmetric, which means that leakage takes place along the seal axis of symmetry. Thus, the one-dimensional form of the Reynolds equation has been employed in almost all studies [143]

prole, which was different between outstrokes and instrokes. In fact, the Reynolds equation is normally solved for the lm thickness h because the contact pressure is calculated from a solid-mechanics analysis as if the contact were dry. The latter is fully justied [143] by the thinness of typical uid lms in reciprocating seals, which imposes a radial strain negligibly small in comparison with the normal strains from seal interferences and loading. The fact that the contact pressure can be considered known has been taken advantage of in the literature in the so-called inverse hydrodynamic (IH) theory [163]. According to that theory, the Reynolds equation (5) is developed to a cubic algebraic equation for the lm thickness [162]. However, the application of this method to elastomeric reciprocating seals met numerical obstacles caused by the exibility of the seals. Specically, in calculating the roots of the cubic polynomial, imaginary roots should be correctly identied and resolved, otherwise numerical instability will quickly destroy the convergence to the correct solution [37, 40]. Nevertheless, the method has been extensively applied [30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 3841, 43, 52, 71, 72, 164166]. A modied version of the IH theory was developed by Nikas [143] and applied in elastomeric and composite rod and rotary-vane seals in references [4], [96], [97], and [143] for reciprocating motion in curved contact geometries, including transient effects [4, 96]. Instead of analytically solving the cubic polynomial of the lm thickness, the following rst-order, ordinary differential equation was derived [143]

(6)

where H h and dq /dx (dp/dx )/( 2 ). An inlet boundary condition was applied [143] (and an additional initial condition in the case of transient analysis [4]). Equation (6) was then solved with a robust numerical method, which allowed great numerical stability and consistency with sub-nanometre precision in the lm thickness [96, 97, 143], as well as extremely fast (practically instantaneous) computation. Apart from the IH method, other numerical methods have also been applied, e.g. the RungeKutta method [167] and the PetrovGalerkin method [168]. These are iterative methods and vary in complexity. The simplest or most direct ones are those that derive the contact pressure from an elementary stress analysis of the seal and solve the Reynolds equation for the lm thickness iteratively, until the contact pressure and lm thickness are in agreement. The study of Field and Nau [31] is representative of this methodology. However, it is also characteristic of the numerical instability of the method, which is reected on the slow numerical convergence rate, the wavy pressure and lm thickness results, and the inability to derive results
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

Un c

12

G K Nikas

for instrokes [31]. The cause of instability is the sensitivity of pressure to lm thickness variations, which is characteristic of the high non-linearity of the Reynolds equation. Nevertheless, similar direct approaches can be found in other studies [71, 141, 167]. In a series of papers [98, 99, 115117, 141] that dealt with the 2D form of the Reynolds equation for rod seals that included surface roughness effects [141], Nikas tackled the instability problem of the direct approach by separating the effect of pressure ripples created by the roughness asperities from the bulk contact pressure. The bulk contact pressure was left out of the convergence iterations and only the perturbations of the roughness asperities were included. Continuing with the simpler methodologies in solving the Reynolds equation for reciprocating seals, the efcient techniques of Hooke on soft lubricated contacts [169171] that dealt with the elastohydrodynamic inlet and exit zones provide a useful insight into the lubrication problem. His work is particularly relevant in reciprocating seals because the average lm thickness in the contact is almost completely governed by the conditions at the inlet zone [143]. This is of major importance in both leakage and friction, as well as during the reversal of the entrainment velocity (end of stroke and reversal of motion in reciprocating seals). The latter causes lm thinning [172] and increased seal wear, as has been veried experimentally in several studies, e.g. references [62] and [86]. A method to avoid much of the numerical instability from the inherent coupling between contact pressure and lm thickness in the Reynolds equation was developed by Ruskell [46]. It was applied to rectangular rubber seals with chamfered ends under steadystate conditions and for perfectly smooth contacts. Ruskell adapted the numerical technique developed by Rohde and Oh [173, 174] who used a Newton iteration scheme. In Ruskells work [46], the elasticity equation of the seal and the Reynolds equation were combined into a single integrodifferential equation, which was solved iteratively. Thus, convergence was fast and consistent because the reciprocation between the separate contact pressure and lm thickness equations to correct one with the predictions of the other was avoided. However, Ruskells method still lacked outright computational speed because the contact pressure had to be calculated separately (for a static, frictionless contact) by a (naturally) time-consuming nite-element analysis. Prati and Strozzi [72] used a similar method. In recent years (20062008), some more sophisticated numerical methods were developed to tackle the steady-state elastohydrodynamic problem of hydraulic seals of various shapes. In the studies of Salant, Maser, and Yang [153, 155, 157, 159, 160, 175], which are essentially based on the thesis of Maser [153] and built on past research experience of Salant and co-workers on rotary seals, inter-asperity cavitation is

Un c

orr ec te

incorporated into the Reynolds equation to deal with rough contacts. So far, only the seal surface roughness has been considered; the other contact counterface has been assumed to be perfectly smooth. Surface roughness is treated approximately in the context of the GreenwoodWilliamson model [176], i.e. it is simulated, idealized roughness. Finite-element analysis has been used to compute the contact pressure of the seals in dry, static contact, which gives freedom in dealing with complex seal shapes and utilizing models of nite elasticity. The main deciency of previous studies is that the coupled elastohydrodynamic problem has not been tackled, i.e. the deformation of the seals from friction in the sealing contacts is unaccounted. This means that the contact pressure is calculated for stationary contact counterfaces. However, in hydraulic seals, normally, the motion of a counterface deects the seal because of contact friction and, thus, changes the pressure distribution at the contact inlet. This, in turn, affects the development of the hydrodynamic lm and, consequently, the average lm thickness and friction in the contact. The coupling between pressure and lm thickness or between stroking velocity and contact friction needs to be resolved iteratively. If this is not done, the sealing performance is essentially evaluated only for unrealistic, idealized (static) conditions. From a computational-uid-dynamics or nite-element point of view, the said coupling is treated with the so-called uidstructure interaction. A couple of recent studies began to address this problem for simple seal geometries, namely the study of ngn et al. [158] on O-rings, and Stupkiewicz and Marciniszyn [156] on rectangular seals and O-rings. Needless to say that such studies are complicated and still deal with steady-state conditions, i.e. they are applicable only for very long strokes. 3.3 Transient lubrication effects In reality, reciprocating seals exhibit clearly transient behaviour, particularly at the ends of strokes and during the reversal of the entrainment velocity. The transient elastohydrodynamic problem in reciprocating seals, as expressed by equation (5), has been theoretically studied in around 1970 by Hirano and Kaneta [36, 38] for idealized parabolic and Gaussian contact-pressure distributions. Their work conrmed numerous experimental observations (e.g. reference [27]) regarding the importance of the ratio of the stroking length to the contact width in the development of a full elastohydrodynamic lm. As already explained, the said ratio must exceed two if it is to allow sealed uid, which is normally dragged at half the sliding velocity of the contact, to travel from the contact inlet to the outlet. The value of a transient analysis is obvious when dealing with seal friction, which is greatly affected by
JET607 IMechE 2009

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

13

Fig. 6

JET607 IMechE 2009

Un c
Examples of lm thickness maps at the sealing contacts of rectangular, elastomeric rod seals. (a) Theoretical [141] and (b) experimental [62, 91]: (a) Film thickness contour maps of a rectangular, elastomeric rod seal, showing lm collapse (left to right) as the sealed pressure is reduced from 27.7 to 0.07 Mpa. The darkest spots are contacting roughness asperities. (From the theoretical work of Nikas [142].), and (b) Contact interface between a rectangular, elastomeric rod seal and glass. High-pressure side is on the left side of both images. Sealed pressure: 0.69 Mpa on the left with moving rod and less than 0.34 Mpa on the right image with stationary rod. (From the experimental work of Rana [62, 91].).
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

orr ec te

dP roo

minute changes (in the order of nanometres) in the average lm thickness in the contact. Obviously, wear is also signicantly affected [62]. In fact, squeeze-lm collapse during long periods of inactivity or during the reversal of entrainment motion can cause friction so high that seals may be rearranged in their housings and subsequently fail. The experimental study of Nwagboso [177] on elastomeric-seal rolling is characteristic in this respect. As far as the author is aware (year: 2008), very few other studies have so far dealt with solving the transient elastohydrodynamic lubrication problem in reciprocating seals, namely his own [4, 89, 96, 117]. The problem belongs to the category of soft elastohydrodynamics in which there are several general studies in the literature, e.g. references [178], and [179]. A simple approach, dealing with the transient elastohydrodynamics of compliant solids (which could be applied to reciprocating seals), was presented by Ikeuchi et al. [180]. In fact, the solution of the transient

problem may be simplied by ignoring the left-hand side of equation (5). The resulting reduced equation is merely a classic, rst-order differential equation of wave propagation. The latter approach has been veried by Chang [181]. It has also been applied by the present author in reciprocating, rotary vane seals [4, 96] as a means of fast computations in parametric analyses. 3.4 Surface-roughness effects

Apart from transient effects, there are other aspects of reciprocating seals that have not been given significant emphasis in theoretical studies. Surface roughness is one of those neglected aspects, except in the previously discussed studies of Salant, Maser, Yang, and Nikas. It is worth mentioning that, according to the work of Salant and his co-workers (e.g. reference [155]), a critical value of average roughness is predicted to be the limit between a leaking and

14

G K Nikas

non-leaking seal, which, naturally, depends on the operating conditions and seal geometry. It is also noteworthy that, according to the modelling work of Nikas [89, 141], reciprocating seals normally operate in the mixed lubrication regime but roughness mainly affects the maximum and the minimum lm thickness, not so much the average lm thickness. Figure 6 shows the theoretical predictions of Nikas [141] on the lm thickness distribution of a rectangular, elastomeric rod seal, and some related experimental results of Rana [62, 91] in accordance with the trend of the theoretical predictions. It is characteristic that the lubrication of the seal is improved at higher sealed pressures as predicted in reference [141] and veried in references [62, 91]. A further discussion on the roughness effects can be found in section 4 of reference [143]. Useful ndings have also been reported in the experimental and theoretical work on rough, rectangular, elastomeric, and reciprocating seals by Kanters and Visscher [182], and Kanters [183]. In the latter study, Kanters used the average-ow model of Patir and Cheng [184, 185] (as has been done by Salant and coworkers more recently) to analyse the effects of seal roughness on seal leakage and friction. He found that when the lambda ratio (dened as the central lm thickness for an ideally smooth contact divided by the composite RMS roughness of the real contacting surfaces) is >4, a full hydrodynamic lm is developed and seal roughness appears unsuppressed. When the ratio drops below about 2, the seal operates in the mixed lubrication regime as roughness asperities are partially but not completely compressed and engage with those of the piston rod. However, roughness modelling remains simplistic because several inuential factors have yet to be accounted, such as the transient elastohydrodynamic inter-asperity interactions, asperity viscoelasticity [186], and inter-asperity adhesive forces (such as van der Waals forces) in mixed lubricated conditions [187, 188]. Such parameters should be addressed in order to simulate experimentally observed elastomeric seal behaviour including stick-slip phenomena [189] and instabilities in the transition between dry and wet regimes [190], Schallamach waves [191, 192], and abrasive wear [100, 127, 193, 194]. The work of Jalisi [195] on the contact mechanics of rough elastomeric contacts gives a good idea of a numerical approach via nite-element analysis. Further insight is gained by the general studies of Jin and Dowson [196] and Kim et al. [197] on the modelling of soft and rough elastohydrodynamic contacts. Nevertheless, the omission of surface roughness in theoretical models as a rst approximation may be justied. This is so because elastomeric seals are smoothened during running-in, even when rubbed against glass [62, 91]. Moreover, the typical contact of dynamic seals is rarely in the state originally conceived and simulated: polymeric lms from worn or

run-in polymers may be deposited onto hard metallic surfaces, effectively creating a coating with roughness different from that of the hard substrate [198200]. 3.5 Other topics (seal extrusion, back-up rings, tandem seals)

Un c

orr ec te
Fig. 7 Extrusion of a rectangular, elastomeric, rod seal (top picture). Shape of the extruded part and its contact pressure with the piston rod for two corner radii of the seal (r = 0 and 0.2 mm) (bottom graph). Based on the analytical study of Nikas [142]
JET607 IMechE 2009

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo

There are extremely few studies in the literature that deal with specialized topics such as anti-extrusion rings and tandem seals. This is so because, until recently, the analysis and evaluation of reciprocatingseal performance was more empirical than scientic. However, such issues are known for decades. White and Denny [8, 9] in the 1940s discussed seal extrusion as a factor causing seal damage and sealing failure in the long run. Seal extrusion (Fig. 7) is the squeezing of a part of a seal into a narrow clearance such as the clearance between a seal housing and the piston rod in a linear hydraulic actuator. It is caused by the sealed pressure (static extrusion) and the friction of the seal on its counterface (e.g. a piston rod) during

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

15

outstrokes (dynamic extrusion). When the localized strain at the extruded part is repeated hundreds or thousands of times in normal reciprocating motion, permanent deformation may occur, accompanied by sealing failure. The static and dynamic extrusion of elastomeric seals have been studied by Reddy and Nau [84] in 1984. Apart from experimental investigations on the causes and effects of extrusion, an analytical solution to the problem was presented by Nikas [89, 142] for elastomeric, rectangular rounded or chamfered, and reciprocating rod seals. The solution was also applied to rotary vane seals under alternating rotation [4, 96]. In the aforementioned analytical study [142], algebraic equations were derived predicting the shape of the extruded part of a seal and the pressure on it at its contact with its counterface (piston rod). Moreover, simple criteria in the form of algebraic inequalities were mathematically developed, involving the parameters affecting extrusion and establishing exactly when extrusion commences. The conclusion was that the best way to avoid extrusion is to use anti-extrusion or back-up rings. Another potential solution was later investigated by the author [97] and found to be viable, namely the replacement of a given elastomeric seal with a composite seal of the same dimensions, comprising a central elastomeric part bonded with two outer PTFE parts along the direction of reciprocation. The elastomer-PTFE volumetric proportion was parametrically optimized to produce a composite seal outperforming the original elastomeric seal in terms of leakage, friction, and extrusion resistance. With regard to anti-extrusion rings (see for example the Polypac PHD seal in Fig. 1), they are used to prevent not only seal extrusion but also roll deformation [179]. However, they normally interfere with the sealing of the supported seal. The author is not aware of any studies in the literature on the modelling of back-up rings except for his own modelling work [89, 116]. In the latter studies, which are computationally complicated, parametric analyses were conducted to quantify the effect of back-up rings of rectangular cross-section and relatively low stiffness on the sealing performance of rectangular, elastomeric rod seals. The operating temperature was varied from 54 to +135 C and the sealed pressure from 1 to 35 MPa. Among some interesting conclusions of the study was that the contact pressure and the average surface roughness of the back-up ring can be optimized to minimize the leakage-per-cycle of the sealring pair. Another interesting topic in sealing research concerns the use of tandem (dual) seal arrangements (Fig. 8). Those consist of a primary seal, which does the major sealing job at the sealed-pressure side, and a secondary seal, which wipes off uid leaking from the primary seal and, also, prevents dirt ingression into the system in the absence of a scraping element.
JET607 IMechE 2009

Un c

orr ec te

dP roo
Fig. 8 Tandem seal arrangement (top) and an example of its theoretical analysis (bottom diagram) showing the interseal-pressure abrupt rise after about 1600 strokes (Nikas and Sayles [115])

The performance of tandem seals has been experimentally investigated in very few studies [80, 201 203]. All concluded that sealing is mainly controlled by the primary seal but it is inuenced by the interseal pressure (Fig. 8) and, naturally, by the edge geometry of both seals at their low-pressure sides. Moreover, leakage and friction are also inuenced by any back-up rings present in the system [202]. Field and Nau [201, 202] in the early 1970s discovered that in some tandem seal arrangements (mainly those of identical seals), an abrupt pressure rise in the interseal space takes place after a number of operating cycles. This is caused by leaked uid ooding the interseal space. They found that this phenomenon can cause seal extrusion and even complete failure of the system if the interseal pressure is not vented before abruptly exceeding the sealed pressure (see Fig. 4 in Field and Nau [201]). The phenomenon of interseal-pressure rise has been theoretically analysed by Nikas and Sayles [115] by accounting for a compressible mixture of air and leaked uid in the interseal space, and using the van der Waals equation of state for air to simulate the temporal change of pressure with the leaking uid and the
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

16

G K Nikas

EXPERIENCE GAINED FROM SEALING RESEARCH AND THE FUTURE

1. The values of surface-roughness parameters such as the average and the RMS roughness are critical in achieving zero leakage under given operating conditions. An optimal seal roughness value exists and it should be targeted to produce non-leaking seals, at least in the rst half of a seals life. 2. The effect of temperature on sealing performance is major. Seal preloading has to take this into account to avoid a sealing failure at low temperatures, e.g. in aerospace applications.
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

Un c

The knowledge and experience gained from past research on hydraulic reciprocating seals has beneted the sealing industry immensely. The topics discussed in the previous sections covered the fundamental aspects of sealing performance, i.e. leakage, friction, and wear. It was shown that seals can be optimized to offer better sealing performance with increased reliability and longer service lives. This concerns both existing seal designs and new, innovative designs for future applications. With regard to existing seal designs (shapes), past research has proved the value of paying attention to details. Some examples are listed next.

orr ec te

number of strokes. A result of this simulation is shown in the bottom diagram of Fig. 8, which depicts the interseal pressure rise and interseal gas-volume reduction with the number of strokes. This way, the number of strokes before the pressure starts to peak is predictable. The simulation also included back-up rings on both elastomeric seals in a complex, quasi-steady elastohydrodynamic and non-linear mechanics analysis with surface roughness effects on all elements, followed by performance analysis in terms of leakage and friction for operating temperatures between 54 and +135 C, and sealed pressure between nearly 0 and 35 MPa. The tandem seal arrangement showed clear benets in terms of leakage and friction and could be optimized for given operating conditions. The phenomenon of the interseal pressure rise is also met in twin-lipped seals. Kanzaki et al. [204] investigated this experimentally for sinusoidally reciprocating motion. They found that the interlip pressure increases with the sealed pressure and the oil trapped between the seal lips lubricated the seal, reducing friction. This is a well-known benet of twin-lipped seals [2] and the stored lubricant not only reduces friction but also prevents the seal from running dry (even after periods of inactivity), thus eliminating stick-slip motion and vibrations [94]. The operation of scraping elements [205] should also be seen under the same light and as inuential of the overall performance of a sealing system.

3. Seal extrusion is a problem, which can and should be avoided. Anti-extrusion rings (separate or integral to the seals), composite (e.g. elastomeric/ PTFE-glass-bre), and multi-component seals (e.g. the polypac PHD seal in Fig. 1) have been designed to avoid this problem based on past experience and research. 4. The corner geometry of reciprocating seals at sealing contacts has the greatest inuence on leakage, friction, and wear. Experimental research and experience had already shown how this could be improved before theoretical research showed mathematically that the corner geometry can be optimized. See for example the application of this research in the design of the step seal and the twin-lipped U-cup seal in Fig. 1. 5. Seal materials have improved as a result of experimental research. Material properties such as stiffness, hardness, and general stressstrain mechanical behaviour have been under scrutiny in order to produce seals that suit particular applications, i.e. specic range of operating conditions. 6. As a nal but probably most convincing example of the gain from applied research is the evolution of seal design based on tribological and mechanical principles learned from research and experience. The seals depicted in Fig. 1, particularly the leftbottom two, utilize a number of innovations such as anti-extrusion rings, energizing O-rings, composite materials for low-friction and high-wear rate, and asymmetrical corner geometry optimizations to minimize leakage. Such innovations are not products of imagination but of applied research. With regard to future seal design, it can be predicted that this will be a matter of optimizing existing designs and selecting the best seal for a given application based on end-user requirements. For example, different or conicting requirements would be minimum leakage, minimum friction, and/or minimum wear. Unfortunately, scientic research has shown that the aforementioned constraints cannot be simultaneously satised. There will always be a compromise between leakage, friction, and wear. It is a matter of end-user priorities which one performance variable should be optimized. This is exactly where advanced theoretical research comes hand-in-hand with past industrial experience to solve a problem, which is by all means, very complex. The days of empirical solutions in sealing research are numbered because the competition is stiff and customers are intolerable (and rightly so) to sealing partial or total failures. Therefore, sealing research will continue on a more scientic basis, taking advantage of improved computing equipment and numerical models capable of more realistic predictions. The elds where research is lagging and is more urgently needed include those of surfacial (e.g.
JET607 IMechE 2009

dP roo

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

17

dP roo

abrasive) wear of reciprocating seals, and estimation of life expectancy. Ideally, the latter should be in the form of a performance-degradation curve depicting the temporal reduction of sealing ability (e.g. increase of leakage in time). Given the complexity of seal design and countless performance issues, it would be optimistic to expect a reliable lifetime prediction method such as that adopted in, e.g. the rolling-bearings industry. Nevertheless, some form of prediction method may, eventually, be developed, even if it is restricted to very specic operating conditions. In pursuit of this target, engineers may have to rely, once again, on semiempirical methods. In this authors experience, sealing research has still a long way to go. 5 CONCLUSIONS

Q2

1 Nikas, G. K. Research on the tribology of hydraulic reciprocating seals. In Tribology research trends (First chapter in the book) (Ed. T. Hasegawa), 2008, pp. 1156 (Nova Science Publishers, New York, USA). 2 Hydraulic Seals Linear; Rod seals. Trelleborg sealing solutions catalogue, edition April 2007; PDF le available from www.tss.trelleborg.com. 3 Hydraulic Seals Linear; Piston seals. Trelleborg sealing solutions catalogue, edition April 2007; PDF le available from www.tss.trelleborg.com. 4 Nikas, G. K., Burridge, G., and Sayles, R. S. Modelling and optimization of rotary vane seals. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2007, 221(J6), 699715. 5 Flitney, R. K. (Ed.) Redesigning the space shuttles solid rocket motor seals. Sealing Technol., 1996, 1996(26), 1012. 6 Meyer, K. H., von Susich, G., and Valko, E. Kolloidzeitschrift, 1932, 59, 208216.
JET607 IMechE 2009

Un c

REFERENCES

orr ec te

After 80 years of scientic research and development on reciprocating hydraulic seals, the main performance issues have been identied and relatively well understood. Nevertheless, exible hydraulic seals are elements of complex mechanical behaviour and predicting their performance in real (variable) operating conditions with satisfactory precision is a very challenging task. A signicant amount of work remains to be done on the modelling front to produce realistic and reliable computational models of the seal mechanics and tribology, not suitable for the average user yet (this is rather ambitious) but for the engineer who wants to design or optimize such seals. Experiments performed over a period of decades as well as practical experience suggest that there are many parameters that have to be accounted for in order to have a good understanding of sealing performance. Engineering errors such as that which led to the destruction of the NASA space shuttle Challenger in 1986 should not be repeated.

7 Gronau, H. Investigations on gland packings and sealing rings for high hydraulic pressures. Doctoral Thesis, University of Berlin, Germany, 1935. 8 White, C. M. and Denny, D. F. The sealing mechanism of exible packings. MAP Scientic and Technical Memorandum No. 4/45 (interim report), London, England, 1945. 9 White, C. M. and Denny, D. F. The sealing mechanism of exible packings. Scientic and Technical Memorandum No. 3/47, UK Ministry of Supply, 1947. 10 Denny, D. F. The friction of rubber sealing rings. British Hydromechanics Research Association, Res. report No. 458, Harlow, UK, 1953. 11 Denny, D. F. The inuence of load and surface roughness on the friction of rubber-like materials. Proc. Phys. Soc. B , 1954, 66, 721727. 12 Denny, D. F. The lubrication of uid seals. In Proceedings of the IMechE Conference on Lubrication and wear, 1957. 13 Denny, D. F. Leakage and friction characteristics of some single-lip U-seals tted to reciprocating shafts. British Hydromechanics Research Association, report RR 595, August 1958. 14 Denny, D. F. Sealing characteristics of multiple-lip seals tted to reciprocating shafts. British Hydromechanics Research Association, report RR 614, February 1959. 15 Denny, D. F. Time effects in the static friction of lubricated rubber. Wear, 1959, 2(4), 264272. 16 Denny, D. F. Leakage characteristics of rubber seals tted to reciprocating shafts. In Proceedings of the IMechE Symposium on Oil hydraulic power transmission and control, London, England, 1961, pp. 259268. 17 Cheyney, L. E., Mueller,W. J., and Duval, R. E. Frictional characteristics of O-rings with a typical hydraulic uid. Trans. ASME, 1950, 72(4), 291297. 18 Morrison, J. B. O-rings and interference seals for static applications. Mach. Des., 1957, 29(3), 9194. 19 Hopp, H. Untersuchungen ber den reibungswert von dichtelementen fr hubbewegungen. Hydraulik und Pneumatik Technik, 1957, 1, Heft 2. 20 Lang, C. M. Untersuchungen an berhrungsdichtungen fr hydraulishe arbeitszylinder. Dissertation, Technishe Hochschule Stuttgart, Germany, 1960. 21 Dowson, D. and Higginson, G. R. A numerical solution to the elastohydrodynamic problem. J. Mech. Eng. Sci., 1959, 1(1), 615. 22 Mller, H. K. Leakage and friction of exible packings at reciprocating motion with special consideration of hydrodynamic lm formation. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964, pp. 1328 (BHRA). 23 Lawrie, J. M. and ODonoghue, J. P . The mechanism of lubrication in a reciprocating seal. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964, pp. 6980 (BHRA). 24 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. An experimental study of reciprocating rubber seals. In Proceedings of the IMechE Symposium on Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication, Leeds, England, 1972, pp. 2936. 25 Dowson, D. and Swales, P. D. The development of elastohydrodynamic conditions in a reciprocating seal. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1969, pp. 210 (BHRA).

Q3

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

18

G K Nikas

26 Kaneta, M., Todoroki, H., Nishikawa, H., Kanzaki, Y., and Kawahara, Y. Tribology of exible seals for reciprocating motion. ASME J. Tribol., 2000, 122(4), 787795. 27 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Experimental investigation of friction and sealing characteristics of exible seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 3348 (BHRA). 28 Nau, B. S. Friction of oil-lubricated sliding rubber seals. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 8196 (BHRA). 29 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. The effects of design parameters on the lubrication of reciprocating rubber seals. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1975, pp. 113 (BHRA). 30 Dowson, D. and Swales, P . D. An elastohydrodynamic approach to the problem of the reciprocating seal. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1967, pp. 3344 (BHRA). 31 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. A theoretical study of the elastohydrodynamic lubrication of reciprocating rubber seals. ASLE Trans., 1975, 18(1), 4854. 32 Hooke, C. J., Lines, D. J., and ODonoghue, J. P . A theoretical study of the lubrication of reciprocating O-ring seals. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1967, pp. 4556 (BHRA). 33 Johannesson, H. L. Oil leakage and friction forces of reciprocating O-ring seals considering cavitation. ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1983, 105(2), 288296. 34 Johannesson, H. Calculation of the pressure distribution in an O-ring seal contact. In Proceedings of the 5th LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology, 1978, pp. 379387. 35 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamics of rubber seals for reciprocating motion, lubricating lm thickness, and out-leakage of O-seals. Ind. Eng. Che. Prod. Res. Dev., 1987, 26(11), 21802185. 36 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Theoretical investigation of friction and sealing characteristics of exible seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 1732 (BHRA). 37 Ruskell, L. E. C. Reynolds equation and elastohydrodynamic lubrication in metal seals. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1976, 349(1658), 383396. 38 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Dynamic behaviour of exible seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1969, pp. 1120 (BHRA). 39 Theyse, F. H. The inverse hydrodynamic theory and its application in the design of controlled leakage seals between moving parts. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1967, pp. 1732 (BHRA). 40 Fazekas, G. A. On reciprocating toroidal seals. ASME J. Eng. Ind., 1976, 98, 783787. 41 Karaszkiewicz A. Hydrodynamics of rubber seals for reciprocating motion. Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev., 1985, 24(2), 283289. 42 Medri, G., Prati, E., and Strozzi, A. Elastohydrodynamic lubrication in elastomeric reciprocating seals.

43

44

Un c

orr ec te

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo
46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59

45

In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1981, pp. 5571 (BHRA). Hooke, C. J., Lines, D. J., and ODonoghue, J. P . Elastohydrodynamic lubrication of O-ring seals. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, 19661967, 181(Part 1, No. 9), 205210. Johannesson, H. L. Optimum pressure distributions of hydraulic cylinder seals. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1981, pp. 87102 (BHRA). Chivers, T. C. and Hunt, R. P. The achievement of minimum leakage from elastomeric seals. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1978, pp. 3140 (BHRA). Ruskell, L. E. C. A rapidly converging theoretical solution of the elastohydrodynamic problem for rectangular rubber seals. Proc. IMechE, Part C: J. Mechanical Engineering Science, 1980, 22(1), 916. Nau, B. S. The state of the art of rubber-seal technology. Rubber Chem. Technol., 1987, 60(3), 381416. Nau, B. S. An historical review of studies of polymeric seals in reciprocating hydraulic systems. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 1999, 213(J3), 215226. Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. Film thickness and friction measurements during reciprocation of a rectangular section rubber seal ring. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1973, pp. 4556 (BHRA). Flitney, R. K. Reciprocating seals. Tribol. Int., 1982, 15(4), 219226. Ramsdell, R. G. A primer on uid power sealing. Fundamentals of reciprocating seals. Hydraul. Pneum., 1986, 39(11), 6365. Kanters, A. F. C. On the calculation of leakage and friction of reciprocating elastomeric seals. PhD Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1990. Visscher, M. and Kanters, A. F. C. Literature review and discussion on measurements of leakage, lubricant lm thickness and friction of reciprocating elastomeric seals. STLE Lubr. Eng., 1990, 46(12), 785791. Bisztray-Balku, S. Tribology of elastomeric and composite and reciprocating hydraulic seals. Period. Polytech. Ser. Mech. Eng., 1999, 43(1), 6380. Bisztray-Balku, S. Design development and tribology of reciprocating hydraulic seals. Period. Polytech. Ser. Mech. Eng., 2004, 47(1), 163178. Kaneta, M., Yamagata, Y., Nishikawa, H., Kanzaki, Y., Ono, S., and Kawahara, Y. Stribeck curve of exible seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 2003, pp. 203216 (BHRA). Kaneta, M., Takeshima, T., Togami, S., Nishikawa, H., and Kanzaki, Y. Stribeck curve in reciprocating seals. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 2005, pp. 333347 (BHRA). Cnops, R. F. The friction of elastomer seals. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964, pp. 8191 (BHRA). Aston, M. W., Fletcher, W., and Morrell, S. H. Sealing force of rubber seals and its measurement. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1969, pp. 6475 (BHRA).
JET607 IMechE 2009

Q4

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

19

Q5

Q6

60 Chadwick, P . Thermo-mechanics of rubberlike materials. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1974, 276(1260), 371403. 61 Flitney, R. K. and Nau, B. S. Performance variation in reciprocating rubber seals for uid power applications. STLE Lubr. Eng., 1988, 44(12), 9931000. 62 Rana, A. S. A tribological study of elastomeric reciprocating seals for hydraulic actuators. PhD Thesis, Imperial College London, Mechanical Engineering Department, 2005. 63 May, E. M. Pressure drop across a packing. Appl. Hyd., 1957, 10(5), 110114. 64 Olssen, E. Friction forces and oil leakage of O-rings on axially moving shafts. PhD Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, 1972. 65 Molari, P. G. Stresses in O-ring gaskets. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1973, pp. 1531 (BHRA). 66 Austin, R. M., Flitney, R. K., and Nau, B. S. Contact stress, friction and the lubricant lm of hydraulic cylinder seals. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1978, pp. 1120 (BHRA). 67 Kawahara, Y., Ohtake, Y., and Hirabayashi, H. Oil lm formation of oil seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1981, pp. 7385 (BHRA). 68 Strozzi, A. Static stresses in an unpressurized, rounded, rectangular, elastomeric seal. ASLE Trans., 1986, 29(4), 558564. 69 Johannesson, H. L. and Kassfeldt, E. Computer aided hydraulic cylinder seal design. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987, pp. 314329 (BHRA). 70 Lindgren, H. Pressure distribution in scraper ring contacts. Wear, 1987, 115(12), 3140. 71 Field, G. J. The elastohydrodynamic lubrication of rectangular section rubber seals under conditions of reciprocating motion. PhD Thesis, City University London, England, 1973. 72 Prati, E. and Strozzi, A. A study on the elastohydrodynamic problem in rectangular, elastomeric seals. ASME J. Tribol., 1984, 106(4), 505512. 73 Wernecke, P . W. Analysis of the reciprocating sealing process. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987, pp. 249277 (BHRA). 74 Blok, H. and Koens, H. J. The breathing lm between a exible seal and a reciprocating rod. Proc. IMechE, Part B: J. Engineering Manufacture, 1965/66, 180(part 3B), 221223. 75 Krauter, A. I. Measurement of lm thickness for application to elastomeric Stirling engine rod seals. ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1982, 104(4), 455459. 76 Kassfeldt, E. Analysis and design of hydraulic cylinder seals. PhD Thesis, 1987 Lule University of Technology, Sweden, 1987. 77 Reddyhoff, T. and Dwyer-Joyce, R. Ultrasonic measurement of lm thickness in mechanical seals. Sealing Technol., 2006, 2006(7), 711. 78 Visscher, M. The measurement of the lm thickness and roughness deformation of lubricated elastomers. PhD Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1992.

79 Iwanami, S. and Tikamori, N. Oil leakage from an O-ring packing. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1961, paper B2 (BHRA). 80 Kaneta, M. Sealing characteristics of double reciprocating seals. J. Jpn. Soc. Lubr. Eng., 1985, 30(3), 194200. 81 Kambayashi, H. and Ishiwata, H. A study of oil seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964, pp. 2940 (BHRA). 82 Lindgren, H. Scraper ring properties and behaviour in hydraulic cylinders. MSc Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden, 1986. 83 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamic lubrication of rubber seals for reciprocating motion; leakage of seals with an O-ring. Tribol. Int., 1988, 21(6), 361367. 84 Reddy, D. and Nau, B. S. The static and dynamic extrusion of elastomer seals into large clearances. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1984, pp. 189196 (BHRA). 85 Roberts, A. D. and Tabor, D. Fluid lm lubrication of rubber an interferometric study. Wear, 1968, 11(2), 163166. 86 Kanzaki, Y., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, M. Optical interferometric observations of oil lm behaviour in reciprocating rubber seals. Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng. C, 1996, 62(600), 32293236. 87 Kanzaki, Y., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, M. Oil lm behaviour and friction characteristics in reciprocating rubber seals. Part 1: single contact. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1997, pp. 7995 (BHRA). 88 Schrader, K. Beitrage zur klaerung des abdichtvorganges gummielastischer abdichtungen axial verschiebbarer hydrostatischer bauteile. PhD Thesis, Dresden University of Technology, Germany, 1978. 89 Nikas, G. K. Determination of polymeric sealing principles for end user high reliability. Technical Report DOW-08/01, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tribology Group, Imperial College London, England, 2001. 90 Rana, A., Sayles, R. S., Nikas, G. K., and Jalisi, I. An experimental technique for investigating the sealing principles of reciprocating elastomeric seals for use in linear hydraulic actuator assemblies. In Proceedings of the 2nd World Tribology Congress, Vienna, Austria, 2001 (on CD-ROM). 91 Rana, A. S. and Sayles, R. S. An experimental study on the friction behaviour of aircraft hydraulic actuator elastomeric reciprocating seals. In Proceedings of the 31st LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology, 2004. 92 Tanoue, H., Ishiwata, H., and Tada, H. Effects of solid particles in lubricating oil on the wear of oil seals and shafts. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 3748 (BHRA). 93 Shouten, M. J. W., Dollevoet, R. P. B., and de Laat, B. M. Design of optimized seals for leak-free hydraulic cylinders. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1997, pp. 111131 (BHRA). 94 Nikas, G. K. Fundamentals of sealing and tribology of hydraulic reciprocating seals. In Proceedings of the IMechE 1-Day Seminar Focus on Reciprocating Seals, London, England, 25 June 2008.

Q3

Un c

orr ec te

dP roo

Q3

Q4 Q3

JET607 IMechE 2009

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

20

G K Nikas

Q3

95 Mller, H. K. and Nau, B. S. Fluid sealing technology (Mechanical Engineering Series 117), 1998 (Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, USA). 96 Nikas, G. K. Research of fundamental sealing mechanisms needed for zero-leakage high-reliability rotary vane actuators. Technical Report SMI-10/04, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tribology Group, Imperial College London, England, 2004. 97 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Modelling and optimization of composite rectangular reciprocating seals. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2006, 220(J4), 395412. 98 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Nonlinear elasticity of rectangular elastomeric seals and its effect on elastohydrodynamic numerical analysis. Tribol. Int., 2004, 37(8), 651660. 99 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Nonlinear elasticity of rectangular elastomeric seals and its effect on elastohydrodynamic numerical analysis. Sealing Technol., 2005, 2005(3), 611. 100 Zhang, S.-W. Tribology of elastomers (Tribology and Interface Engineering Series 47), 2004 (Elsevier, London, England). 101 Gibson, I. A., Hooke, C. J., and ODonoghue, J. P . The frictional behaviour of reciprocating O -ring seals under starting conditions. In Proceedings of the IMechE Symposium on Elastohydrodynamic lubrication, Leeds, England, April 1972, paper C13/72. 102 Modi, M., Kassfeldt, E., and Prakash, B. Tribological behaviour of elastomer aged in different oils. Tribol. Int., 2008, 41(910), 860866. 103 Treloar, L. R. G. The mechanics of rubber elasticity. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A., 1976, 351(1666), 301330. 104 Holzapfel, G. A. Nonlinear solid mechanics, 2000 (Wiley, New York, USA). 105 Price, C. Thermodynamics of rubber elasticity. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A., 1976, 351(1666), 331350. 106 Chadwick, P. and Creasy, C. F. M. Modied entropic elasticity of rubberlike materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 1984, 32(5), 337357. 107 Ogden, R. W. Recent advances in the phenomenological theory of rubber elasticity. Rubber Chem. Technol., 1986, 59(3), 361383. 108 Ogden, R. W. Large deformation isotropic elasticity on the correlation of theory and experiment for incompressible rubberlike solids. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A., 1972, 326(1567), 565584. 109 Ogden, R. W. Elastic deformations of rubberlike solids. In Mechanics of solids, the Rodney Hill 60th anniversary volume (Eds H. G. Hopkins and M. J. Sewell), 1982, pp. 499537 (Pergamon Press, Oxford, England). 110 Ogden, R. W. Non-linear elastic deformations, 1997 (Dover Publications, New York, USA). 111 Duffett, G. and Reddy, B. D. The analysis of incompressible hyperelastic bodies by the nite element method. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 1983, 41(1), 105120. 112 Sussman, T. and Bathe, K.-J. A nite element formulation for nonlinear incompressible elastic and inelastic analysis. Comput. Struct., 1987, 26(12), 357409. 113 Simo, J. C. and Taylor, R. L. Quasi-incompressible nite elasticity in principal stretches. Continuum basis and

114

115

116

Un c

orr ec te
122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo
118 119 120 121

117

numerical algorithms. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 1991, 85(3), 273310. Miehe, C. Aspects of the formulation and nite element implementation of large strain isotropic elasticity. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 1994, 37(12), 19812004. Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Computational model of tandem rectangular elastomeric seals for reciprocating motion. Tribol. Int., 2006, 39(7), 622634. Nikas, G. K. Theoretical study of solid back-up rings for elastomeric seals in hydraulic actuators. Tribol. Int., 2004, 37(9), 689699. Nikas, G. K. Transient elastohydrodynamic lubrication of rectangular elastomeric seals for linear hydraulic actuators. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2003, 217(J6), 461473. Mooney, M. A theory of large elastic deformation. J. Appl. Phys., 1940, 11(9), 582592. Rivlin, R. S. Large elastic deformations of isotropic materials. IV. Further developments of the general theory. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A., 1948, 241(835), 379397. Varga, O. H. Stress-strain behaviour of elastic materials. Selected problems of large deformations, 1966 (Wiley InterScience, New York, USA). Finite Element software MSc.Marc (version 2000) Volume A. MSC software Corp., Munich, Germany. Available from http://www.mscsoftware.com. Horgan, C. O., Ogden, R. W., and Saccomandi, G. A theory of stress softening of elastomers based on nite chain extensibility. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A., 2004, 460(2046), 17371754. Wineman, A. and Shaw, J. A correspondence principle for scission-induced stress relaxation in elastomeric components. ASME J. Appl. Mech., 2004, 71(6), 769773. Qi, H. J. and Boyce, M. C. Constitutive model of stretchinduced softening of the stress-stretch behaviour of elastomeric materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 2004, 52(10), 21872205. Dorfmann, A. and Ogden, R. W. A constitutive model for the Mullins effect with permanent set in particlereinforced rubber. Int. J. Solids Struct., 2004, 41(7), 18551878. Horgan, C. O. and Schwartz, J. G. Constitutive modeling and the trousers test for fracture of rubber-like materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 2005, 53(3), 545564. Zhang, S. W. State-of-the-art of polymer tribology. Tribol. Int., 1998, 31(13), 4960. Bertolet, E. C. Teon use of Teon packings and seals in hydraulic operations. In Proceedings of the 12th National Conference on Industrial hydraulics, USA, 1956, vol. 10, pp. 5668. Atkins, L. E. The design of seals in PTFE. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1975, pp. 1124 (BHRA). Flitney, R. K. and Nau, B. S. Performance of PTFE reciprocating seals. Lubr. Eng., 1983, 39(5), 285291. Lewis, M. W. J. Friction and wear of PTFE-based reciprocating seals. Lubr. Eng., 1986, 42(3), 152158. Prokop, J. and Mller, H. K. Friction behaviour and friction coefcients of PTFE hydraulic rod seals. Konstruktion, 1987, 39(4), 131137.

JET607 IMechE 2009

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

21

133 Duhring, B. and Iversen, G. The application of plastics in dynamic seals. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 1999, 213(J3), 227237. 134 Stachowiak, G. W. and Batchelor, A. W. Engineering tribology, 3rd edition, 2005 (Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, London, UK). 135 Li, W. and Mays, S. Analysis of PTFE material in rotary seals. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 2003, pp. 157165 (BHRA). 136 Lee, N.-J. and Jang, J. The effect of bre-content gradient on the mechanical properties of glass-bremat/polypropylene composites. Compos. Sci. Technol., 2000, 60(2), 209217. 137 Ganghoffer, J.-F., Brillard, A., and De-Borst, R. Description of the mechanical behaviour of micropolar adhesives. Math. Comput. Model., 1998, 27(7), 2349. 138 Caddock, B. D. and Evans, K. E. Negative Poisson ratios and strain-dependent mechanical properties in arterial prostheses. Biomaterials, 1995, 16(14), 11091115. 139 Dragoni, E. and Strozzi, A. Analysis of an unpressurized, laterally restrained, elastomeric O-ring seal. ASME J. Tribol., 1988, 110(2), 193200. 140 Johannesson, H. L. and Kassfeldt, E. Calculation of the pressure distribution of an arbitrary elastomeric seal contact. Wear, 1989, 130(1), 315. 141 Nikas, G. K. Elastohydrodynamics and mechanics of rectangular elastomeric seals for reciprocating piston rods. ASME J. Tribol., 2003, 125(1), 6069. 142 Nikas, G. K. Analytical study of the extrusion of rectangular elastomeric seals for linear hydraulic actuators. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2003, 217(J5), 365373. 143 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Study of leakage and friction of exible seals for steady motion via a numerical approximation method. Tribol. Int., 2006, 39(9), 921936. 144 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamic lubrication of rubber seals for reciprocating motion; leakage of seals with an O-ring. Tribol. Int., 1988, 21(6), 361367. 145 Karaszkiewicz, A. Leakage and friction comparisons in modern seal designs. Power Int., 1986, 32(383), 299301. 146 Medri, G., Molari, P . G., and Strozzi, A. Numerical and experimental stress-strain analysis on rubberlike seals in large elastic deformations under unilateral contact. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1978, pp. 1930 (BHRA). 147 Medri, G. and Strozzi, A. Mechanical analysis of elastomeric seals by numerical methods. Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev., 1984, 23(4), 596600. 148 Dragoni, E., Medri, G., and Strozzi, A. Analysis of an elastomeric X-ring seal. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987, pp. 160174 (BHRA). 149 George, A. F., Strozzi, A., and Rich, J. F. Stress elds in a compressed, unconstrained, elastomeric O-ring seal and a comparison of computer predictions with experimental results. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987, pp. 117137 (BHRA). 150 Naderi, A., Albertson, K., and Peng, S. Finite element analysis of a hydraulic seal: BS U -cup. In Proceedings of the 46th National Conference on Fluid power, NFPA, Chicago, Texas, USA, 1994, pp. 99105.

151 Peng, S., Sun, S., and Albertson, K. FEA-Assisted design of low-friction U -cup as spool valve seals. In Proceedings of the 47th National Conference on Fluid power, NFPA, Chicago, Texas, USA, 1996, pp. 175182. 152 Claus, R. G. Development of a high performance, heavy duty piston seal. In Proceedings of the 49th National Conference on Fluid power, NFPA, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, 2002, pp. 383389. 153 Maser, N. B. Numerical model of a reciprocating rod seal, including surface roughness and mixed lubrication. MSc Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Mechanical Engineering, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 2006. 154 Tang, J., Yang, W., Ding, Y.-M., Li, J., Zhang, Y., and Lu, B.-T. Finite element analysis of rectangular rubber seals. Lubr. Eng., Lubr. Seal (Chinese), 2007, 32(2), 3639. 155 Salant, R. F., Maser, N., and Yang, B. Numerical model of a reciprocating hydraulic rod seal. ASME J. Tribol., 2007, 129(1), 9197. 156 Stupkiewicz, S. and Marciniszyn, A. Elastohydrodynamic lubrication and nite conguration changes in reciprocating seals. Tribol. Int., 2009, 42(5), 615627. 157 Yang, B. and Salant, R. F. A numerical model of a reciprocating rod seal with a secondary lip. Tribol. Trans., 2008, 51(2), 119127. 158 ngn, Y., Andr, M., Bartel, D., and Deters, L. An axisymmetric hydrodynamic interface element for nite-element computations of mixed lubrication in rubber seals. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 2008, 222(J3), 471481. 159 Yang, B. and Salant, R. F. Numerical model of a tandem reciprocating hydraulic rod seal. ASME J. Tribol., 2008, 130(3), 032202. 160 Yang, B. and Salant, R. F. Soft EHL simulations of U-cup and step hydraulic rod seals. ASME J. Tribol., 2009, 131(2), 021501. 161 Mackerle, J. Rubber and rubber-like materials, niteelement analyses and simulations, an addendum: a bibliography (19762003). Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng., 2004, 12(5), 10311053. 162 Gohar, R. Elastohydrodynamics, 2nd edition, 2001 (Imperial College Press, London, UK). 163 Blok, H. Inverse problems in hydrodynamic lubrication and design directives for lubricated exible surfaces. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Lubrication and wear, Houston, Texas, USA, 1963. 164 Strozzi, A. An assessment of the inverse hydrodynamic theory. Zag. Eksp. Masz., 1986, 21(1), 123134. 165 Johannesson, H. L. Piston rod seal and scraper ring interaction in hydraulic cylinders. Wear, 1989, 130(1), 1727. 166 Kanters, A. F. C., Verest, J. F. M., and Visscher, M. On reciprocating elastomeric seals: calculation of lm thicknesses using the inverse hydrodynamic lubrication theory. STLE Tribol. Trans., 1990, 33(3), 301306. 167 Yang, Y. and Hughes, F. Elastohydrodynamic analysis of preloaded sliding seals. ASLE Trans., 1984, 27(3), 197202. 168 Strozzi, A. Numerical solution of the elastohydrodynamic problem in soft reciprocating seals. Eng. Comput., 1987, 4(3), 199206. 169 Hooke, C. J. and ODonoghue, J. P . Elastohydrodynamic lubrication of soft, highly deformed contacts. J. Mech. Eng. Sci., 1972, 14(1), 3448.

Un c

orr ec te

dP roo

Q3

JET607 IMechE 2009

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

22

G K Nikas

Q7

Q7

170 Hooke, C. J. The elasto-hydrodynamic lubrication of soft, highly deformed contacts under conditions of nonuniform motion. ASME J. Tribol., 1986, 108(4), 545550. 171 Hooke, C. J. The lubrication of soft contacts. In Proceedings of the 13th LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology (1986) (Tribology Series), 1987, vol. 11, pp. 299305 (Elsevier). 172 Hooke, C. J. The minimum lm thickness in lubricated line contacts during a reversal of entrainment general solution and the development of a design chart. Proc. IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 1994, 208(J1), 5364. 173 Rohde, S. M. and Oh, K. P. A unied treatment of thick and thin lm elastohydrodynamic problems by using higher order element methods. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1975, 343(1634), 315331. 174 Oh, K. P. and Rohde, S. M. Numerical solution of the point contact problem using the nite element method. Int. J. Numeri. Methods Eng., 1977, 11(10), 15071518. 175 Salant, R. F. Progress towards a realistic numerical model for elastomer reciprocating seals. Sealing Technol., 2007, 2007(1), 711. 176 Greenwood, J. A. and Williamson, J. B. P. Contact of nominally at rough surfaces. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1966, 295(1442), 300319. 177 Nwagboso, C. O. Evaluation of surface contact forces on a roll deformed elastomeric seal using the imaging method. STLE Lubr. Eng., 1994, 50(1), 6672. 178 Swales, P. D., Dowson, D., and Latham, J. L. Theoretical and experimental observations of the behaviour of soft elastic materials under elastohydrodynamic conditions. In Proceedings of the IMechE, Symposium on Elastohydrodynamic lubrication, 1972, pp. 2228. 179 Elsharkawy, A. A. Visco-elastohydrodynamic lubrication of line contacts. Wear, 1996, 199(1), 4553. 180 Ikeuchi, K., Fujita, S., and Ohashi, M. Analysis of uid lm formation between contacting compliant solids. Tribol. Int., 1998, 31(10), 613618. 181 Chang, L. A simple and accurate method to calculate transient EHL lm thickness in machine components undergoing operation cycles. STLE Tribol. Trans., 2000, 43(1), 116122. 182 Kanters, A. F. C. and Visscher, M. Lubrication of reciprocating seals: experiments on the inuence of surface roughness on friction and leakage. In Proceedings of the 15th LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology, 1989, pp. 6977. 183 Kanters, A. F. C. On the elastohydrodynamic lubrication of reciprocating elastomeric seals: the inuence of the surface roughness. In Proceedings of the 17th LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology, 1991, pp. 357364 (Elsevier). 184 Patir, N. and Cheng, H. S. An average ow model for determining effects of three-dimensional roughness on partial hydrodynamic lubrication. ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1978, 100(1), 1217. 185 Patir, N. and Cheng, H. S. Application of average ow model to lubrication between rough sliding surfaces. ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1979, 101(2), 220230. 186 Grosch, K. A. The relation between the friction and visco-elastic properties of rubber. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1963, 274(1356), 2139.

187 Drutowski, R. C. Hertzian contact and adhesion of elastomers. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1969, pp. 5257 (BHRA). 188 Wassink, D. B., Lenss, V. G., Levitt, J. A., and Ludema, K. C. Physically based modelling of reciprocating lip seal friction. ASME J. Tribol., 2001, 123(2), 404412. 189 Koenen, A. and Sanon, A. Tribological and vibroacoustic behaviour of a contact between rubber and glass (application to wiper blade). Tribol. Int., 2007, 40(1012), 14841491. 190 Deleau, F., Mazuyer, D., and Koenen, A. Sliding friction at elastomer/glass contact: inuence of the wetting conditions and instability analysis. Tribol. Int., 2009, 42(1), 149159. 191 Schallamach, A. How does rubber slide? Wear, 1971, 17(4), 301312. 192 Cunningham, A., Andrew, K. R., and Roberts, A. D. Short duration sliding contacts between elastomers and smooth rigid substrates: exploratory studies with an instrumented pendulum skid tester. Wear, 1999, 232(1), 122130. 193 Fukahori, Y. and Yamazaki, H. Mechanism of rubber abrasion. Part 3: how is friction linked to fracture in rubber abrasion? Wear, 1995, 188(12), 1926. 194 Zhang, S. W. and Zhaochun, Y. Energy theory of rubber abrasion by a line contact. Tribol. Int., 1997, 30(12), 839843. 195 Jalisi, I. S. Z. A numerical method for the simulation of rough elastomeric contact. PhD Thesis, Imperial College London, Mechanical Engineering Department, 2002. 196 Jin, Z. M. and Dowson, D. A general analytical solution to the problem of microelastohydrodynamic lubrication of low elastic modulus compliant bearing surfaces under line contact conditions. Proc. IMechE, Part C: J. Mechanical Engineering Science, 1997, 211(4), 265272. 197 Kim, A. T., Seok, J., Tichy, J. A., and Cale, T. S. Soft elastohydrodynamic lubrication with roughness. ASME J. Tribol., 2003, 125(2), 448451. 198 Eiss Jr, N. S., Wood, K. C., Herold, J. A., and Smyth, K. A. Model for the transfer of polymer to rough, hard surfaces. ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1979, 101(2), 212219. 199 Eiss Jr, N. S. and Smyth, K. A. The wear of polymers sliding on polymeric lms deposited on rough surfaces. ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1981, 103, 266273. 200 Myshkin, N. K., Petrokovets, M. I., and Kovalev, A. V. Tribology of polymers: adhesion, friction, wear, and mass transfer. Tribol. Int., 2005, 38(1112), 910921. 201 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. Interseal pressure between reciprocating rectangular rubber seals. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 2135 (BHRA). 202 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. Interseal pressure between tandem reciprocating rubber seals with back-up rings. ASLE Trans., 1973, 16(1), 1015. 203 Kaneta, M. Sealing characteristics of double reciprocating seals. J. JSLE Int. Ed., 1986, 7, 141146. 204 Kanzaki, Y., Nakayama, J., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, M. Effects of interlip pressure of reciprocating seals with two lips on sealing and frictional characteristics. Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng. C, 1996, 62(596), 15331539.

Un c

orr ec te

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

dP roo

JET607 IMechE 2009

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals

23

205 Peppiatt, N. The inuence of the rod wiper on the leakage from a hydraulic cylinder gland. Sealing Technol., 2003, 2003(12), 58.

I1 , I2 , I3 p pc q t V W x 1 , 2 , 3 1 , 2 , 3 1 , 2 , 3 1 , 2 , 3

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Q8 Abouel-Kasem, A. Numerical analysis of leakage rate for the selection of elastomeric sealing materials. Sealing Technol., 2006, 2006(11), 711.

APPENDIX Notation E G h H modulus of elasticity shear modulus local lm thickness auxiliary variable, H h

JET607 IMechE 2009

Un c
Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology

orr ec te

dP roo

dimensionless constants local dynamic viscosity principal stretches shear moduli local mass-density Cauchy principal stresses (equation (4))

strain invariants (equation (1)) local pressure hydrostatic pressure auxiliary variable dened implicitly by dq /dx (dp/dx )/( 2 ) time sum of the tangential velocities of the contact counterfaces elastic strain energy per unit volume axial coordinate