Wear rates and friction of plastics

  • Thread starter Thread starter es_shoes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friction
AI Thread Summary
For replacing brass and steel components with plastic, materials like Delrin and Nylon offer high wear resistance and low friction, making them suitable for machining. PTFE (Teflon) is another viable option, known for its excellent wear properties, though it poses machining challenges. Engineered plastics such as ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) and polyphenylene sulfide (PPS) also provide strong wear resistance and machinability. These materials can effectively meet the requirements for applications involving Eddy current probes. Selecting the right plastic will depend on specific performance needs and machining capabilities.
es_shoes
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I am looking to replace a set of brass and steel sleeve and cylinder having a ceramic tip with a plastic sleeve and cylinder having a plastic tip. The only question I have actually has two parts... are there any plastic, machineable materials that have comparable wear rates to that of ceramic? The probe enclosed on this setup works off the Eddy current, so the tip can't be metal. Just wondering if anything pops out at you guys for a strong plastic with good wear rates, and low friction between two layers of that material. Thanks in advance.



Ben
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ign plastics such as Delrin and Nylon are commonly used for applications with high wear resistance, low friction, and the ability to be machined. PTFE (Teflon) is another option that has excellent wear resistance and low friction, although it is more difficult to machine. Depending on your application, you may want to look into some of the newer engineered plastics, such as ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) or polyphenylene sulfide (PPS). These materials have excellent wear resistance, good strength, and can be machined.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top