R. A.

BURTON
Staff Scientist,
Southwest Research Institute,
San Antonio, Texas. Mem. ASME

Effects of Two-Dimensional, Sinusoidal

Roughness on the Load Support
Characteristics of a Lubricant Film
An analytical study is made of the effects of two-dimensional, sinusoidal roughness on
pressure and shear stress in a lubricant film between two parallel plates engaged in
steady, parallel, relative motion.
The effects of pressure and heating upon viscosity,
as well as shear elasticity are accounted for in the case where roughness height is small
relative to film thickness.
Second-order influences which contribute to net load support
by the film are computed in terms of the first-order solution.
The results give evidence as
to when boundary roughness may be negligible in its influence on hydrodynamic film
calculations.
Most important, however, they give evidence of a type of instability which
may contribute to film breakdown in some marginal lubrication
situations.

Introduction

It will be shown that first-order analysis permits prediction of

pressure and shear-stress variations along the surfaces. On the
other hand, the net increase of shearing drag or load support cannot be accounted for until second-order influences are incorporated
in the analysis. These second-order effects are essentially expressions of departures from linearity. The very existence of such
nonlinearity prohibits extrapolation of the results to apply to
cases where the roughness is large relative to the separation of the
plates. On the other hand, there is no harm in looking over the
results for trends.

THE purpose of this investigation is to explore the

effects of a simple type of boundary roughness on the load support and friction characteristics of a lubricant film. For purposes
of clarity and simplicity of results, the analysis is restricted to
relative sliding of parallel plates carrying a two-dimensional,
sinusoidal roughness, where the characteristic wavelength is the
same on each plate. As will be shown, some account is taken of
pressure-viscosity, temperature-viscosity, and shear-elasticity influences in the fluid, since each of these is of possible significance
in the practical applications which may be related to the theoretical problem dealt with here.

Further restrictions in generality of the results occur in the

form of detailed assumptions introduced where needed in the
derivation. It is not felt, however, that an}r of these are sufficiently sweeping to negate the ultimate goal of the derivations:
to determine the relative significance of the several active factors
which influence lubricant film characteristics when small boundary roughness effects may be present.

The problem is of interest from two points of view:

(1) It provides a guide as to when roughness may or may not
be neglected in hydrodynamic- bearing computations.
(2) It sheds some light on processes which may be of major
significance (along with other effects) in the regime of "transition" between hydrodynamic and boundary lubrication.

General Considerations

Contributed by the Lubrication Division and presented at the

Lubrication Symposium, Miami, Fla., June 4-6, 1962, of THE
A M E R I C A N
S O C I E T Y
OF
M E C H A N I C A L
ENGINEERS.
Manuscript received at ASME Headquarters, January 2, 1962. Paper No. 62LubS-1.

Fig. 1 illustrates the significant geometry of the problem. The

upper surface is moving to the right and the lower surface is
moving to the left relative to a reference point in the fluid, halfway between the plates.
Nomenclature for wavelength, speed,

Nomenclaturea
A
b
c
B

G =
h =
H

i
J
IC
L

=
=
=
=

pressure-viscosity coefficient
dimensionless parameter accounting for pressure viscosity effect
temperature-viscosity coefficient
specific heat of solid
dimensionless parameter accounting for temperature viscosit}'
effect
shear modulus of fluid (1 /K)
instantaneous, local film thickness
dimensionless measure of film
thickness variation
operator
conversion factor, ft l b / B t u
coefficient of thermal expansion
dimensionless measure of roughness wavelength
relaxation number, proportional
to ratio of relaxation time for
passage of waves

258 / june

pressure

V
P

dimensionless pressure
heat flow rate per unit of projected surface area

time
fluid velocity along direction of

movement
= relative sliding velocity plates

specific volume of fluid

coordinate of position measured
parallel

to

mean

surface

of

boundaries
V

coordinate
normal

position
to

mean

measured
surface

of

boundaries
a

parameter of film thickness wave

parameter of film thickness wave

phase angle

K
X
/J
p

T
T
ip
X
ip
)o

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

shear compliance of fluid (1 /<?)

wave length of roughness
viscositj'
density of solid
phase angle
shear stress
dimensionless shear stress
fluidity of film (\/ix)
phase angle
phase angle
subscript refers to zero roughness

reference state
) ' = prime refers to
quantities

)c =

perturbation

subscript refers to centerline of

film
| | = absolute value
*- = indicates vector quantity in timephase diagram

temperature

Transactions of the A S M E

1963

Copyright 1963 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/08/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Thus
d2p

di2

dr

bu

dx

dy

b2p \
bxbtj

dp

dx

dip
by

b-u
by2
(5)

Equations (2) and (5) will be used in modified form in the remainder of the derivation.

Small Perturbation Considerations

Zero subscripts will be used to indicate base magnitudes of
terms, such as would prevail if roughness were absent. Primed
quantities will indicate incremental contributions due specifically
to the roughness. For example, the sheai stress can be broken up
as follows:

Fig. 1

etc., are illustrated here and are explained verbally in the list of
symbols.
The location of the reference is not arbitrary with respect to
plates, but is at that position where wave peaks of both plates
will concur simultaneously. At this point fluctuation in pressure will be maximal, as it will be at corresponding points spaced
a wavelength apart. Between these active points will be "nodal"
points where fluctuations of pressure and film thickness do not
occur.
The fluid film will be assumed continuous. In effect it will be
assumed that ambient pressure is sufficiently high to prevent cavitation at pressure "lows." Even under moderate pressure,
cavitation voids would not be expected to nucleate in the short
time available, especially when small-scale roughness is accompanied by sizable sliding speeds. For cases where it may be
of interest, this effect has been investigated elsewhere [l]. 1
Temperature effects on viscosity will be explored but expansion
effects will be neglected. These are of significance in the closely
related problem of the " w a v y plate" thrust bearing [2, 3]. The
overall temperature rise along the surfaces will be ignored since
this can lie expected to contribute very little to the film properties
for any single wavelength of roughness. Such an overall rise
has been discussed by Shaw in terms of the "thermal wedge [4]."
Estimates of local flashes as asperities pass one another are,
however, of sufficient interest to be incorporated into this stud}'.
Omitted from present consideration is Cameron's load support
effect [5] which may supplement those discussed here.
The basic equation for a thin film of a Maxwell fluid has been
presented in detail [6, 7 ] and will lie taken as a starting point
here in the form of a shear equation:
k

dr

H f>T

dt

br
Y x

br
"ST

(2)

dj/

T o account for pressure effects the equation may be differentiated

and the creeping flow, pressure-shear relation,
br

dp

(3)

d:r

d2r

cU'df/

5T_ _du ^
ds

dy

a2r

dr

dc?

d2i

c>yc)i

by

by

by

Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper.

Journal of Basic Engineering

(6)

This simplification is valid where shear-elasticity effects are small,

and serves as a first approximation where they are significant [7].
On this basis certain significant factors may be tabulated, all relations applying to the center plane between plates:
bii/by = U/h

(a)

<p = <p0(l -

(b)
(e)

br/bx =

br'/bx

(d)

br/bt =

br'/dt

(e)

T =

(/)
()

h = h + h'

T' +

ap'

(7)

To

Inserting these relations into Equation (2):

(
\

dbrr ' \
, br'
+ <p(l U'
+
dt
bx
dt J

ap' + bd')(T0 + r ' ) =

U
ho + h'
(8)

Rearranging, grouping, making use of the first two terms of a binomial expansion for the right side, and retaining terms of the
order of the perturbations, or below,
<POTO +

w '

br'

bt

Uh'

h0

h o2

"T"

a<p0T0p + BIPOV'TO =

Relative order of magnitude for the terms in the equation is

indicated by numbers below the brackets. T o obtain a similar
equation for pressure, Equation (5) may be modified through expansion of bhi/by2 in terms of an assumed velocity profile, according to Equation (6).
bhi

(10)

8 ujh*

Making use of the continuity equation, and the assumption of incompressible flow, and u = 0 at x = 0,
(4)

(2y/h)*] + Uy/h

~b7

may be inserted:
/

u = uc[1 -

(1)

by

+ <pr =

T'

To +

Here r 0 is the value of shear that would prevail for smooth plates,
and r ' represents a perturbation, superimposed on this as a result
of effects ultimately connected with roughness.
Let us now restrict the Equations (2) and (5) to apply at the
center plane of the film (halfway between plates). Further, in
order to evaluate du/dy and d2u/dy2, let us assume that the
velocity profile variation of u across the film is made up of a linear
and a parabolic component such that:

bu

The substantive derivative dr/dt may be expanded, allowing

for time-dependent effects, noting that the velocity component
normal to the surface is negligible in thin films, and noting that
the velocity component into the plane of Fig. 1 is zero for twodimensional flow:

K [ u

T =

r bh dx
2h J o bt
i

(11)

JUNE 1 9 6 3 / 259

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/08/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

(9)

Thus

T - i.'YT = -H
d2u

11

by 2

"

Jo

Expanding h and retaining only the fii

first-order term,

12

bhi
>y2

(13)

ha

bx

D( j8 +( B ) +

('%)]

12
~~

Cx bV
Jo

36^

l
fX

d/i'

Jo

rfx

(14)

First-Order Solutions
Retaining only the terms of the first order in the shear and pressure equations, we may write:
br'
<P<,T' + K
bl
ar' U
7 7 +
02 /io

ipoaTop' + <pobo'TO =
b-p
bxbt

bp'
+ 95o
bx

12

ho3 J o

Uh'/ho*

dx
*

Noting that in terms of a harmonic analysis, the first-order solution must have the same spatial and temporal periodicity as the
boundaries, and taking account of symmetry, more explicit statements may be made regarding the principal variables:
(a)

/i' = j/i'| cos ax cos /?<

(&)

p ' = |p'j cos ax cos (j3t + i/O

(c)

r ' = |r'| cos a x cos (fit +

(d)

0' = |0'| cos a x cos Wt + k)

|p'|/T,

(d) H

( )

|T'|/TO

( e )

(c) iV =

2meV
VoX

=
=

(/I)

X / / I

(/) B = 6/ro

1963

Temperature Effect
One further step must be made before completion of a solution
of Equations (17) and (18), this being the evaluation of 0 in terms
of T. For sinusoidal temperature variation it can be shown [10]
that:
|g'| =

l/2\/kpcJ3\6'\

(19)

p = 490 lb/ft 3
c = 0.15 B t u / l b deg F
k = 0.007 B t u / f t sec deg F
Thus
|?'| = O.35\/|S|0'

(16)

tion is accomplished through multiplication by i/yS. The sole

reason for introducing these vectors is for the simplified writing
of the principal equations, to permit a rapid appraisal of the
various terms by inspection. In terms of these, the shear and
pressure equations may be written as follows:
/ june

(18)

An additional simplification may be introduced, by noting that

all of the terms in each equation are spatially in phase with one
another, while their phase relationship in time is as yet not
known, but must be independent of position. Consequently, we
may symbolize P, T, and H as vectors. For example P is a vector
having as its modulus P, and located in a complex plane which
serves as a phase diagram. Corresponding definitions hold for the
vectors T and H. For such vectors differentiation with respect
to time is accomplished through multiplication by
integra-

260

LiYT

The quantities a and b represent typical values taken from the

A S M E Pressure-Viscosity Report [8], Magnitudes of relaxation
time, K/P, may be found in Reference [9].
The quantity Ar may be taken as a "relaxation number," being
interpretable as the ratio of fluid relaxation time (K/<P) to the
time required for the pressure cycle to pass through one radian
of its period. Thus the order of N, according to the above list,
could range from 1 0 t o 102. It would not be unreasonable then
to expect magnitudes in the range of 1 to 10 at times.
For present purposes let us restrict the magnitude of L to 1,
recognizing that there are many wavelengths of interest in typical situations.
The pressure-viscosity coefficient A may range from 10
to
10 l , while the temperature-viscosity coefficient B may range from
1 0 _ I to 102. The ratio of A to B, however, does not range so far
since the factors involved tend to change together. Thus, the
order of A /B does range on both sides to 10 * 2 , but does not approach, at all, the extreme values of 10 ~5 to 102.

( f f ) G = \B\/T
OTO

(17)

T o take an example, for steel

Here a = 2ir/\, 0 = 2tV/\, and the phase angles i/', f , and remain to be evaluated.
Let us now define the following dimensionless quantities to permit further generalization and simplification of the equations:
() P

= iVllAI

BO

T o facilitate interpretation of these equations, reasonable magnitudes must be assigned to the parameters N, L, A, and B. Before doing this, it is necessary to set limits on the physical variables they represent. Let us consider cases covering the ranges
indicated:

(15)

f)

iXP

V ranging from 0 to 100 in./sec

hn ranging from 1 0 - 6 to 1 0 - 3 in.
r 0 ranging from 10 to 1000 lb/in. 2
X ranging from 1 0 - 6 to 1 0 - 3 in.
a ranging from 1 0 - 4 to 1 0 - 3 in.
b ranging from 1 0 - 4 to 10~3 in. 2 /lb
K/<P ranging from 10 _ s to 10" sec

Equation (5) can now be written as follows:

dx

P -

(12)

dt

+ AP

Noting that the maximum heat flow rate would be, into either
wall
Iff'l = V.|r'| U/J
Thus
|r'|/|0'| =

IA\//3J2/U*

(20)

If /3 is 2irU/\, then in terms of the ranges of variables assumed in

the preceding section, |0'|/|T'| is found to range from 1 0 _ 9 t o 10~5.
Thus it can be shown that the maximum value of bd =

br

= BT, where B ranges from 10 ~9 to 1 0 - 3 the latter value prevailing only under the extremes of speed and stress.
Similarly, a|p| = aroP = AP, where A ranges from 1 0 - 3 to 1.
Thus if P and T are of the same order of magnitude, pressure and
temperature can have roughly corresponding effects on viscosity.
As will be shown, however, P is often much larger than T and the

Transactions of the A S M E

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/08/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

effects of temperature therefore may disappear in such cases.

In the closely related rolling-contact problem, a component of
temperature rise has been attributed to compression of the
lubricant, in addition to the above shearing effect. The maximum
temperature rise possible for this process is:
KvBa

(21)

where K is the expansion coefficient [11], A term of the same

form as the above pressure-viscosity effect may be written as
follows:
, ,
i>n Kv60 ,
Ap' =
p
00 c

(22)

Note that K is approximately 8 X 10~6 deg F - 1 , v is approximately 0.02 ft 3 /lb, and C is roughly 0.5. Taking the previously
used range of bp,/bd cc ( 1 0 - 3 to 10 - 5 ), and taking 60 arbitrarily at
500 R , it is found that A ranges from 10 ~7 to 10 ~9. This is several
orders smaller than the previous A factor and consequently is
negligible.
A further comment should be added that the above estimate of
the effects of shearing on temperature are subject to more reservations than are most of the factors dealt with here. Essentially
the heat-transfer calculation assumes that no energy is convected
by the film, but that the bounding surfaces provide the sole
modifying effect on temperature. Some improvement might be
made by using a modified diffusivity and conductivity for the
metal to allow for conduction through the film; however, it is not
felt that such complications are justified at present since the purpose of this investigation is primarily to determine the kind and
order of magnitude of the effects to be found, and not to provide
precisely calculated magnitudes. On the basis of the conservative magnitude of the temperature which this calculation yields,
it is shown that temperature-vicosity effects may well be of the
same general magnitude as pressure-viscosity effects, a finding
believed to be significant.

Discussion of Particular Cases

Since an explicit solution of Equations (17) and (18) offers little
advantage in comprehensibility over the vector equations, we
shall turn directly to these to determine the roles of the major
factors in several cases.
Case I

N = 0,

A = 0,

B = 0,

L = 1

(23)

77

(24)

P = t'1277

(25)

Thus we see that P is 90 deg out of phase with T and is of 12

times the magnitude.
Case 2

N = 1 to 10,
T p -

A = 0,

B = 0,

iATT =
iNP

L = 1

(26)

- H

(27)

iUH

(28)

Solving further
T = H/V1

+ N2

P = \2Hls/\

N1

Again the ratio of magnitudes is preserved, as well as the 90 deg

phase angle between T and P. However, H now lags T by
a phase angle t a n - 1 N. P and T are correspondingly reduced in
magnitude by a factor ranging from 0.707 when JV = 1 to 0.1 for
N = 10.
Case 3

N = 0,

L = 1

T = -H

P = t'1277

Journal of Basic Engineering

1,

B = 0

(29)

AP
(30)

In this case Equation (29) becomes effectively

T =

AP

(31)

Thus T would be almost in phase with P and almost equal in

magnitude.
N = 0,

Case 4

L = 1,

A = 1,

B = 1

Adding the information that for sinusoidal temperature variation,

0 lags T by 45 deg
f

77 + AP By/2/2(1

OT

(32)

or, dropping 77 as before, and solving

(1 -

V2/2)T + iV2/2T = P

(33)

In this case, T leads P in phase by an angle of about 14 deg and

the magnitude of T is reduced moderately.
Case 5

N = 12,

L =

1,

A =

1,

B =

W e may write approximately

tl2T = - 7 7 + P
il'2P = il277 -

(34)

10T

(35)

Again the last term in Equation (35) is negligible and

T - ^ f f
24

(36)

P = 77

(37)

These examples illustrate the relative importance of the terms

in the equations and also show how the fluid properties interact
to determine the magnitudes of pressure and shear stress. Case 1
shows that, for a simple Newtonian fluid, pressure dominates
shear as the primary stress on the wall. Case 2 shows that, if the
influence of shear compliance (elasticity) is taken into account,
the shear-pressure relationship is unchanged, and that the magnitudes of these quantities are altered greatly only when the relaxation number N is very large. The general tendency of increased shear compliance is to reduce pressure and shear.
Returning to the simple viscous fluid, and then taking account
of pressure-viscosity effect, it is found in Case 3 that this can have
a profound influence not only bringing pressure and shear stress
into phase, but also bringing their relative magnitudes into correspondence. This latter change is accomplished through raising
the shear stress. This trend is also found to be true when temperature-viscosity effect is taken into account (Case 4), with only
a moderate shift of phase and magnitudes of shear stress and
pressure.
T o determine how shear compliance affects a film with a
significant pressure-viscosity coefficient, Case 5 has been selected,
with a relatively large value of the relaxation number. As in Case
2 the viscoelastic effect is to reduce pressure and shear, the degree of reduction being almost the same for the two eases. On the
other hand, pressure and shear are no longer nearly in-phase as in
Cases 3 and 4. Furthermore, shear stress is reduced in magnitude, corresponding closety to Cases 1 and 2. These observations will serve as guides in the remaining derivations.

Second-Order Effects
Returning to Equation (14) and lumping the second-order
terms together into the function F 2 , we may write
by

bp'

12

rxbh'

bT' U

+ F 2

Integrating with respect to x

JUNE

1 9 6 3 / 261

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/08/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

dp'
1 2
7 \ " + <Pap = f
dx
J0h*J0

dx

+ jX

higher than first order need not be written down, since they would
give rise to even higher orders when fed back into the equations
as velocity profile corrections.

f - ^ -

J0

fXy~~
C)X ho
I

F2dx -

(POP' + 7

a2P
K

If P is expressible as a Fourier series, comprising a constant plus

a sequence of harmonic terms, the first harmonic term would be
represented by the first-order equation already discussed. The
first-order approximation of the constant term would be found
by evaluation of

<j)(j)pdxdt,
where second-order terms would

be evaluated in terms of first-order solutions. This assumes that

substitution of second or higher order items into second-order
terms would produce even higher order terms, which would vanish
when h/ho <3C 1. Thus

/ / vdxdt =i / / [ -

- 7 C),

r ? .r

( W ) -: o -

Jo

I '
W J>0
o

=0

, V

yoalp'l2
2 a/3

_ y>ob |fl'/p'| cos xlff'l 2

eta

2 a/3

(39)

(40)

where X is a phase angle relating 6' and p'. Combining and

solving for the mean value of p' (which may be called p'),
5' = }

ip'i 2 (O

cos x

(41)

T o illustrate the factors that determine the magnitude of the

terms in parentheses, note that in many of the worked-out examples \p'\ was approximately 12H, or
\v'\

12T|/J'|A,

Recognizing that the pressure-viscosity factor can be related to

the previously used A, and that the temperature-viscosity factor
can be expressed in terms of vB, where n is a number less than
unity, we may rewrite Equation (41)
p ' = 72(ro/i'Ao) 2 (A -

p' = 12{p.Uh'/ho2)\A

nB)

nB)

(42)

(43)

In looking over Equation (43), note that the terms in the parentheses produce an unstable solution whenever nB exceeds A.
Under ordinary conditions this would probably not occur. There
is one situation, however, where speed, load, and temperatureviscosity coefficient all may exceed the previously listed table of
limits, thereby producing an exceptional^ large value for nB,
and this is the case of sliding, concentrated contact. Such contact is found in numerous lubricity test rigs and is encountered in
practice in the case of gear teeth.

Influence of Velocity Profile Variation

Since second-order effects have been shown to be significant, it
is necessary to review the implications of the parabolic velocity
profile assumption with regard to alteration of second-order influences. Referring back to Equation (5), this may be rewritten as
follows, noting that p0 0 and dr0/dx = 0. In addition, terms

262 / J U N E

1963

dr'

diio

dx

dxdt J

+ <P

dp'
dx

dhi
TdyT2

< 44 >

Note that shear stress is either constant or varies linearly across

the channel (for quasi-static equilibrium), and uo also varies
linearly. Thus two terms appear which would give rise to other
than constant d2u/dy2 across the film.
_/

S>V

dr'

duo

dx2

dx

dy

(45)

This effect on the overall flow tends to balance out, in that

the reduction on one side of the center line offsets the incrementation on the other side. Since the parabolic component of the
velocity profile was only used to estimate the pressure-flow
carried by the channel, these terms would not be expected to
have a significant effect.

Conclusions

Inspection shows that only the temperature-viscosity and

pressure-viscosity terms remain after the integrations are carried
out. These become

tpobd

eta2

^dx
dx

(38)

, dp' _
<p0ap
dx

I Mo

It has been shown that for a fluid whose viscosity increases with
pressure, there can be a net load supporting effect in a parallel
surface slider bearing with two-dimensional surface roughness.
It has further been shown that if fluid viscosity drops with increasing temperature, there is a tendency toward cancellation of
the net load support. In fact, if the temperature-viscosity effect
predominates, the surfaces can actually be drawn together b}'
film forces. The onset of this phenomenon may be thought of as
an instability and is different from the continuous relationship
which may modify film thickness for different loads. Instead, in
this case there is no film thickness which gives a stable solution.
The results of this analysis may be taken as supporting the
views that breakdown of hydrodynamic lubrication in many applications may be due to the onset of film instability rather than
a simple thinning of the film to an unsuitable value. In fact, the
results tend to suggest that asperity contact may occur only if the
film between the asperities becomes locally unstable.
Bearing in mind the idealizations and approximations in this
analysis, the results are nevertheless provocative, suggesting that
a more detailed analytical investigation of boundary roughness
phenomena may very well provide explanations of important
lubrication phenomena, and may thereby reward the efforts
which must be expended in such analysis.

References
1 M. E. Salama, "Effect of Macro-Roughness on Performance of
Parallel Thrust Bearings," Proceedings, I. Mech. E. (War Emergency
Proceedings, no. 59), vol. 163, 1950, pp. 149-158.
2 A. Nahavandi and F. Osterle, " A Novel Form of Self-Acting
Gas Lubricated Thrust Bearings," No. 60LC-13, ASLE-ASME
Lubrication Conference, Boston, Mass., October, 1960.
3 G. I. Taylor and P. G. Saffman, "Effects of Compressibility at
Low Reynolds Number," Journal of Aeronautical Sciences, vol. 24,
1957, p. 553.
4 Milton C. Shaw and E. Fred Macks, "Analysis and Lubrication
of Bearings," McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, N. Y.,
1949.
5 A. A. Cameron, "A Theory of Boundary Lubrication," Trans.
ASLE, vol. 2, no. 2, 1960, p. 195.
6 A. A. Milne, " A Theory of Rheodynamic Lubrication for a
Maxwell Liquid," Proceedings of the Conference on Lubrication and
Wear, I. Mech. E., London, England, 1957.
7 R. A. Burton, "An Analytical Investigation of Visco-Elastic
Effects in the Lubrication of Rolling Contact," Trans. ASLE, vol. 3,
no. 1, 1960, p. 1.
8 "Pressure-Viscosity Report," vol. 1, T H E A M E R I C A N S O C I E T Y
O F M E C H A N I C A L E N G I N E E R S , New York, N . Y., 1 9 5 3 .
9 W. P. Mason and H. J. McSkimin, "Mechanical Properties of
Polymers," Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 31, 1952, p. 122.
10 M. Jakob, "Heat Transfer," vol. 1, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York, N. Y 1949.
11 F. W. Sears, "Thermodynamics," Addison Wesley, Reading,
Mass., 1953.

Transactions of the A S M E

Downloaded From: http://fluidsengineering.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/08/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use