Understanding Non-Lubricated Journal Bearings

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cyrus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Journal
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of non-lubricated journal bearings, particularly focusing on the dynamics of a spool of cable under constant torque and the effects of static and kinetic friction during operation. Participants explore the implications of friction on the movement of the spool within the bearing.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the initial behavior of a spool on a journal bearing, noting that as torque increases, the spool 'walks' up the journal until reaching maximum static friction, after which slipping occurs.
  • The same participant argues that once slipping begins, the normal force remains constant while the friction force decreases, leading to a potential downward translation of the spool.
  • Another participant suggests that the contact point would remain constant when the horizontal pull equals the gravitational pull, although they acknowledge that this may not hold true under changing loads.
  • One participant reflects on their experience with pulling tinfoil, drawing a parallel to the behavior of the spool, suggesting that it would find a comfortable position before rolling and then settle at a lower point once rolling begins.
  • Another participant agrees with the reasoning presented but admits to limited experience with non-lubricated journal bearings, noting that most bearings they have encountered are thin film lubricated.
  • A different participant introduces the idea that the transition between static and kinetic friction may not be instantaneous, suggesting that the gradient of the coefficient of friction could affect the oscillations of the spool.
  • One participant expresses satisfaction with their intuition regarding the behavior of the axle in the bearings, confirming their understanding of the dynamics involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the behavior of the spool in the journal bearing, with some agreeing on the general mechanics while others present alternative interpretations. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on the dynamics of friction and movement.

Contextual Notes

Participants note various assumptions, such as the effects of changing loads and the nature of friction transitions, which may influence the behavior of the spool. There is also mention of limited practical experience with non-lubricated journal bearings, which may affect the depth of analysis.

Cyrus
Messages
3,246
Reaction score
17
For some time I have was having trouble fully understanding what was going on in a journal bearing that is non-lubricated (So that dry friction holds true). Here is what I was having trouble with. Let's say you have something like a spool of heavy cable on a journal bearing, and its being turned at a constant rate with an applied torque. Initially, the spool will rest at the bottom, and the point of contact will be directly in line with the weight vector. But as you increase the moment, the spool will start to 'walk' up the journal that's holding it in place. So its walking up the inside of a circular orifice (to help you visualize it). So as this shaft 'walks' up the journal, the normal force is decreasing. This means the amount of static friction is also decreasing. You will eventually reach a point where it is at maximum static friction. Now you have reached what is known as the 'static friction circle'. But as this moment keeps on steadily increasing to its final value, it will surpass being static friction and start to slip. Now, in the book they say,
Hibbeler said:
'As the shaft rotates in the direction shown in the figure, it rolls up against the wall of the bearing to some point A where slipping occurs.'
At first, I thought it would roll up to the limiting case where static friction is maximum, and just start slipping at that same location and stay there; however, after thinking about it for a while, I have come to the conclusion that this is false. I agree fully that it will roll up until some point where it reaches the maximum static friction; however, once it starts slipping, the friction force will drop significantly, but the normal force will stay the same (at that instant). So now you just lost a big component of your force in the tangential direction to sustain equilibrium. So I argue that this thing will start to translate back down the jounral, thus allowing the normal to increase once again. As the normal increases, the kinetic friction force will increase, and it will start to translate back up. And this process should damp out over time until it finally reaches some point A, which is Below where it initially started slipping when static friction gave out. Also, I thought about the possibility of it changing from kinetic back to static friction, and 'walking' back up the jounrnal, but came to the realization that this is impossible. The reason being, in order for it to start rolling without slipping once again, the local velocity has to be zero at the point of contact. But were talking about tolerances here that are a few millimeters at most. So this thing is not going to translate back down at such a speed that it will stop slipping. The final point where it comes to rest can then be considered where the 'kinetic friction circle' occurs, because there is constant relative speed between the jounral and the shaft, and so the angle between the normal and the reaction is \phi_k. Am I wrong, or does this sound like reasonable logic to anyone?

Somehow, I'm very temped to say I am right, because I thought long and hard about this.
http://sns.chonbuk.ac.kr/manufacturing/bearing-9.jpg
The picture sucks, but its the best I can find online. Appologies.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MrMoe
Engineering news on Phys.org
You're way beyond me with those technicalities, Cyrus. My common-sense approach (which unfortunately sometimes breaks down under the harsh reality of math), would be that the contact point would remain constant as soon as the pull from the side equals the downward pull of gravity, assuming that the load doesn't change. In reality, though, the gravitational force would be constantly decreasing if your spool is unwinding, or increasing if more cable is being added to it. By my reasoning, then, the contact point would be continually walking either up or down in order to equalize the forces. There's probably something wrong with that, but I don't know what it is.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MrMoe
Yeah, I used a bad example, sorry. Forget about the wire being unwound. Just assume its a constant load that's spinning.
 
In that case, it still seems to me that it would just find a spot where it's comfortable and stay there. My only actual experience with such a thing, though, is pulling tinfoil from the box. The roll always rides up the side. I guess that really isn't a similar situation.
 
This is what I am getting at danger. Get your tin foil, and pull on it gently. It will ride up the inside of the box and stop at some point before it starts rolling. Then any additional force will start the thing turning, and it will creep back down into the box once its rolling and settle at a second lower point. (Although with a box the place of contact will be one side of the box, so the analysis would be a little different).

EDIT:I tried it with the al-foil, unfortunately the roll is too light and the friction too small to see any effect.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm... I'm going to have to think on this a mite. A couple of other aspects of the question popped up and I'm not sure what to make of them.
 
I have to agree with your reasoning. However, I can't say that I have ever looked at a non lubricated journal bearing before. They are mostly thin film lubed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MrMoe
IMO, your reasoning would certainly be correct if the gradient of the coefficient of friction at transition point between static and kinetic friction was infinite.
For finite gradients in which there is a gradual (sharp, maybe but gradual) decrease of coefficient of friction, I don't believe the oscillations would be very high.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MrMoe
Aha!

Beer-Johnston said:
Physically, this is explained by the fact that, when the wheels are set in motion, the axle "climbs" in the bearings until slippage occurs. After sliding back slightly, the axle settles more or less in the position shown

So, my intuition was right, for once, good.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MrMoe

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K