001 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals，自1930年以来液压往复式密封综述文章

7/28/2019 001 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals 1930

1/23

REVIEW 1

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocatingseals: review of tribological studies and relatedtopics since the 1930sG K NikasMechanical Engineering Department, Tribology Group, Imperial College London, Exhibition Road, London SW7 2AZ, UK.

email: [email protected]; [email protected]

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

DOI: 10.1243/13506501JET607

Abstract: Hydraulic seals are complicated machine elements. The engineering research onhydraulic reciprocating seals, which commenced roughly in the 1930s, has achieved a basicunderstanding of performance issues. This article provides a review of the experimental andtheoretical research conducted over a period of eight decades, discussing more than 200 of themost significant publications from the related literature. The topics discussed include recipro-cating seal designs, materials, experimental methods, theoretical studies, elastohydrodynamiclubrication, solid and contact mechanics, performance issues, and optimization.

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

1 INTRODUCTION

Hydraulic reciprocating seals are critical machineelements used in a variety of industrial, automo-bile, aerospace, and medical applications that involvelinear and rotational motion such as in hydraulicactuators [1]. They are usually made of polymericor thermoplastic materials, including elastomers andrubber-like materials (rubber compounds with vul-canized natural rubber as the prototype or syntheticrubbers produced with sulphur or other additives),plastics, polyurethanes, as well as composites. These

seals normally operate dynamically under broad oper-ating conditions, with sealed pressures of up to 80MPa, sliding speeds of up to 15 m/s, and temperaturesvarying roughly between70 and+250 C, dependingon application. Figure 1 shows typical hydraulic actu-ators and some reciprocating seals of various shapes,including rod, piston, and rotary-vane seals [14]. It ischaracteristic that the depicted seal shapes are just afew of many complex designs that have evolved overdecades of theoretical and applied research.

A hydraulic reciprocating seal is a rather neglectedmachine element in the scientific literature, in spiteof 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 sig-nificantly affecting sealing performance. The major

difficulty is attributed to seal flexibility, which pre-cludes obtaining analytical solutions and complicatesany numerical solution process, particularly in tran-sient conditions. Moreover, typical seal materials suchas elastomers obey highly complex, non-linear stressstrain laws of finite elasticity or thermoviscoelasticity,which are strongly affected by temperature. In fact,basic mechanical properties of hydraulic seals suchas the moduli of elasticity and rigidity, Poissons ratio,hardness, and compressibility all depend strongly ontemperature. Additional influential factors such aschemical interaction with hydraulic fluids, material

(e.g. elastomer or rubber) oxidation, and ageing playmajor roles in sealing performance.In spite of the difficulties in sealing performance

evaluation, hydraulic seals are met in many criticalapplications with machinery costing hundreds to mil-lions of times more than the seals. A characteristicexample was the dramatic destruction of the NASAspace shuttle Challenger in 1986, which wasattributedto the loss of sealing ability of a static elastomericO-ring because of low ambient temperature the nightbefore the shuttles launch [5], an engineering errorthat cost several human lives. Therefore, the correctengineering design and evaluation of hydraulic seals

is of paramount importance to avoid costly mistakes.As far as the author is aware, the scientific research

on hydraulic reciprocating seals was initiated before

JET607 IMechE 2009 Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology


2/23

2 G K Nikas

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

World War II; it then rapidly progressed in the 1960sand 1970s. Following one of the early studies on thenetworktheoryofrubberelasticitybyMeyeretal. [6] in1932, the doctoral thesis of Gronau [7] in1935was oneof the earliest known publications on hydraulic seals.

However, the first breakthrough probably was the pio-neering work of White and Denny [8, 9] from 1944to 1947, an exhaustive experimental and theoretical

work on reciprocating seals, which remains a sourceof reference. Denny [1016] continued his pioneeringwork on reciprocating seals in the 1950s and 1960s,dealing mainly experimentally with the issues oflubrication, leakage, and friction. Some other note-

worthy, early experimental studies during the 1950swere those of Cheyney et al. [17] and Morrison [18]on static and dynamic O-rings, as well as the work

Proc. IMechE Vol. 223 Part J: J. Engineering Tribology JET607 IMechE 2009


3/23


4/23

4 G K Nikas

containing brake fluid of harmonicallyvaryingvolumeto measure the friction of cup, piston, and elastomericseals. With that rig, Cnops observed the mechanismof oil film formation at the sealing contact, the thick-

ness of which varied with the stroking speed frompartially collapsed at low speeds to relatively thick athigher speeds. In terms of friction, Cnops observed theeffects of stiction and elastomer relaxation and creep,which characterize the viscoelastic nature of rubber-like materials, particularly after long periods in staticconditions. In fact, these effects had been discussedyears earlier by, for example, Denny [15] in 1959.

The friction and lubrication of natural-rubber, pis-tonseals,werealsostudiedbyLawrieandODonoghue[23] in 1964,whoutilizeddisplacement transducers fortheir friction and piston-velocity measurements.Theirsealing rig, which consisted of a pump-pressurized,

brake-fluid filled cylinder, allowed for simultaneousmeasurement of contact pressure, friction force, andstroking velocity for a complete operating cycle viaa multi-channel recorder. The seal rubber used wasconducting to allow for contact resistance measure-ments and establishing whether the fluid film at thesealing contact had collapsed (zero resistance) or wasfull (infinite resistance). It was thus possible to mea-sure the sealing performance in transient conditionsand identify potential problems with seal abrasivewear for collapsed fluid film or, simply, observe filmdevelopment and variation during an operating cycle.

The development of a fluid film at a sealing contactand the transition from boundary (partially collapsedfilm) to hydrodynamic (full film) lubrication was alsothe focus of Mllers experimental work [22] in 1964.His experiments with elastomeric toroidal seals andquad (X) rings revealed the effects of the strokingvelocity, seal preloading, and fluid viscosity on seal-ing performance in terms of leakage and friction. Ofparticular importance was his discussion on the film-thickness difference between instrokes and outstrokes(see Fig. 2 for the direction clarification), as well as onthe elastohydrodynamic film thickness of elastomericreciprocating seals.

In 1969, Aston et al. [59] made a significant con-tribution by presenting their experimental work onrubber seal friction at temperatures of up to 200 C.The importance of that work was on the demon-strated relation between temperature and rubber-specimen dimensions, which affected the frictionalforce. Moreover, Aston et al. studied the relaxationand subsequent recovery rate of rubber after peri-ods of inactivity, which caused a reduction of thefrictional force in time. Such viscoelastic phenom-ena are crucial in sealing performance and met inmany hydraulic-seal applications such as those in the

aerospace sector. They are also related to the naturalageing of elastomeric materials and can be explainedvia the network theory of rubber [60].

Another significant contribution from the 1960s isthe work of Dowson and Swales [25], who combinedexperimental work with theoretical predictions via theelastohydrodynamic lubrication theory. They devised

a rotating disc machine to test a cylindrical rubberblock, emulating reciprocating seals and very longstrokes. The sealing contact pressure was measuredby a piezo-electric transducer and the film thicknesswas measured via capacitance techniques. The theory,generally, supported the experimental findings show-ing increase of film thickness with speed and decreasewith contact pressure. Moreover, the fundamentalsealing mechanism of reciprocating seals, i.e. the leak-age difference between outstrokes and instrokes, wasrevealed. The latter, obviously, resulted in concludingthat seal leakage-per-cycle (in reciprocating seals, anoperating cycle consists of one outstroke followed by

one instroke) is zero if the fluid that leaked duringthe outstroke is fully returned to the sealed chamberduring the instroke.

Moving on to the 1970s, the experimental contribu-tionsofFieldandNau[24, 49], focusing on rectangularrubber seals, improved the understanding of seal-ing mechanisms and performance issues. By usingoptical interferometry and electrical transducers tomeasure the film thickness, they produced resultson leakage, friction, and contact pressure. However,those results were characterized by some inconsisten-cies. 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 resultsobtained from seven laboratories located in differentcountries, yet based on experiments under controlledconditions. A possible explanation postulated in refer-ence [61] was that the adherence to test specificationswas hindered by the lack of standardized methods insealing technology.

Another significant contribution from the 1970s wasthe experimental work of Hirano and Kaneta [27]in 1971 who measured the friction force and leak-age of nitrile-rubber D-rings in reciprocating motion.

They observed how the mixing of air bubbles withhydraulic fluid in the sealing contact affected leakageand friction. (Similar observations about air bubblesindicating cavitation at the edges of the contact andleading to film depletion because of the oil obstruc-tion by the bubbles have been reported by Rana [62],although that was happening in low-load contactsafter long periods of operation (more than 30 min)and thephenomenon was weak when thecontact loadwas increased.) Hirano and Kaneta [27] also observedthe now well-known phenomena of rubber stiction atthe start-up and the reversal of motion, owing to the

collapse of the fluid film at the sealing contact. Theyalso showed how friction and leakage were relatedto the stroking length and how it became unstable



5/23

Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals 5

in short stroking-length situations. In fact, they dis-cussedhowthedevelopmentof a stablehydrodynamicfilm in the sealing contact depends on the ratio ofthe stroking length to the seal contact width. If the

said ratio is>

2, sealed fluid, which is transportedthrough the sealing contact at about half the speedof the contact counterfaces, can reach the outlet zoneof the contact and, thus, leakage takes place. Thisobservation is, obviously, of paramount importancein reciprocating-seal leakage, friction, and wear. Thesame conclusion was reached in an equally significantstudy by Field and Nau [29] in 1975, who, additionally,studied the effects of seal hardness and preloading orinitialinterference,sealedge(orcorner)geometry,andback-up clearance. These parameters were much laterincluded in theoretical models by other researchersand their effects quantified (more on that later). What

is perhaps most worthy of remembering from Fieldand Nau [29] is their graphs on the variation of theminimum film thickness and friction force of a recip-rocating rubber seal during a full cycle see Fig. 3. Thedifferences between outstroke and instroke dictate

Fig.3 The variation of the minimum film thickness ofa rectangular rubber seal during outstrokes andinstrokes (from Field and Nau [29])

the leakage-per-cycle and explain the seal behaviourduring each stroke.

In the first 40 or so years of sealing research (upto and including the 1960s), the main parameters

affecting sealing performance had been identified andexperimentally studied. Naturally, the quality of theexperimentalworkwasdependingonthequalityofthelaboratory equipment and the efficiency of the tech-niques used. From the oil weighing for leakage mea-surements in the 1940s to the video-camera recordingof the sealing contact in the late 1990s, there has beena long way of custom-built apparatuses and measure-ment techniques of variable success. Four variablesare of major importance in all of those studies, namelythe contact pressure distribution and width, the con-tact film thickness, the seal frictional force, and theleakage rate.

The measurement of static contact pressure distri-butions[34, 6370]hasbeenperformedbyusingstraingauges, piezo-electric force transducers [24, 25, 71],photoelastic methods [72], as well as inductive trans-ducers for measuring displacements. The latter hasalso been used in film-thickness measurements, inaddition to electrical capacitance [24, 25, 29, 49, 66,71] andresistance methods [23, 67, 73],aswellasopti-cal interference and fluorescence techniques [7476].Recently developed methods on film-thickness mea-surements such as ultrasonic techniques have alsobeen used, although the latter has been applied to

mechanical seals [77] and not to reciprocating sealsyet as far the author is aware.The measurement of friction of rubber-like recipro-

cating seals has been the focus of most experimentalstudies. Lack of standardized methods and commer-cial apparatuses dictated the construction of variousrigs and devices to fit specific purposes. The com-plexity and individuality of those approaches make adetailed discussion very difficult but a lot of informa-tion can be found in the doctoral theses and relatedpublication of Kanters and Visscher [51, 52, 78] forstudies conducted up to 1990.

Themeasurementof leakage of reciprocating seals is

usually done by weighing the leaked fluid after remov-ing it from piston rods. This is most likely the oldestmethod and has been used by most researchers [9, 22,24, 27, 71, 79, 80]. A few other methods have also beenused such as measuring the electrical capacitance ofleaked oil layers with one or two electrodes [81]aswellas by measuring the oil flow necessary to maintain aconstant sealed pressure [24, 71, 82, 83].

Other important variables such as the static anddynamic extrusion of elastomeric seals into largeclearances [84] have also been measured but themain focus was on the phenomena taking place at

a sealing interface. The use of optical interferometrysince at least the 1960s gave new results to con-sider in the study of hydrodynamic films, involvingthe contacts between polymers (including rubber),



6/23

6 G K Nikas

steel, and, especially, glass. In this respect, the workof Blok and Koens [74] in 1965 was important becauseit addressed the problem of poor reflectivity of rub-ber surfaces (owed to high surface roughness and

dark colour) by using an externally aluminized, thin,plastic-sheet cover on the rubber. The method wasapplied to rubber lubrication a few years later byRoberts and Tabor [85], too. Optical interferometry inthe study of sealing contacts has more recently beenused by Kanzaki et al. [86, 87] as well as Kaneta et al.[26]. In the latter study, a mono-chromatic techniquewas used in D-rings and lip-shaped, nitrile-rubber,stationary seals on sinusoidally reciprocating glass.Unfortunately, in order to improve rubber reflectivity,the specimenshad to be specially moulded to improvetheir smoothness, which destroyed their natural sur-face roughness. A better solution to this problem

(better still than that in references [74] and [85] dis-cussed earlier) was used by Rana [62]: by applying agold sputtering method, seal specimens were coatedwith four layers of gold, each being 50 nm thick.

This gave very high reflectivity without altering signif-icantly the original average roughness, which, in thecase of elastomeric seals, is quite high (typical valuesin the order of 1.5m [1]).

Apart from optical interferometry, direct observa-tion of lubricating films in sealing contacts was alsodone by cameras and video recording. Schrader [88]in the late 1970s and Kawahara et al. [67] at the begin-ning of the 1980s used high-speed cameras to photo-graph seals sliding on glass cylinders. More recently,Rana [62], in collaboration with seal manufacturersin England [89], developed a test rig for stationaryelastomeric seals on a reciprocating glass plate, whichwas equipped with a microscope and computer data-logging of video-recorded images (Fig. 4(a)). Severaltests of rectangular seals were performed with this rigunder static, dynamic, dry, and lubricated conditions,

varying the contact load on the seal, the reciprocatingfrequency, and the stroking length [90]. Substitutionof different seals (of various dimensions and rough-ness profiles) is straightforward. Apart from leakage

Fig.4 Test rigs for reciprocating seals developed by Rana [62]: (a) the original, simpler version [62,90] and (b) the final, advanced version [62, 91]



7/23


and friction results, this type of sealing-contact anal-ysis offered real-time data on the dynamic varia-tion of hydrodynamic films, including cavitation fromhydraulic-fluid starvation, air bubbles at the edges

of the sealing contact, as well as obstruction of fluidreplenishment by the accumulation of debris particles(often fragments of seal material).

Ranas rig [62, 90] was re-designed to allow forgreater flexibility and experimental precision. Theadvanced rig [62, 91] (Fig. 4(b)) consisted of a hollow,transparent, and high-strength tube connected to amotor, which transferred reciprocating motion to thetube via a gear mechanism. Gland, elastomeric sealswere accommodated by a steel casing enveloping andsupporting the tube, whereas a hydraulic circuit sup-plied red hydraulic fluid to the stationary seals (referto Fig. 4(b)) with pressures up to 7 MPa (although

the maximum sealed pressure in the tests was keptbelow 1 MPa for safety reasons). A still, externallymounted boroscope with integral lighting focused ona seal and signalled clear images to a CCD cameraand attached computer for data logging and subse-quent processing. That rig provided an array of resultson seal leakage, friction, extrusion, cavitation, andwear, as well as results on surface-roughness defor-mationin dynamic conditions, fluid film developmentand collapse, debris particle entrainment, and so on.

Visual observation of the sealing interface shows thatthe entrainment of debris particles, including seal

fragments and foreign contaminants, increases leak-age by distorting the seal surface. If the debris areharder than the seal material, they stick to the sealand may abrade the contact counterface (e.g. a pistonrod). The thus-created scoring grooves act like micro-channels, allowing pressurized fluid to escape to thelow-pressure side of the seal (similar grooves wereartificially created by White and Denny [9] in theirexperiments to test this hypothesis, which they ver-ified). In the experiments of Tanoue et al. [92] withused lubricating oils, it was found that shaft wearwas significantly affected by sub-micrometre particles(0.490). However, their mechanical prop-

erties strongly depend on temperature, the imposedstrain and strain rate, and change in time as theyage. Their Youngs modulus often exhibits up to twoorders of magnitude change when the temperature



8/23

8 G K Nikas

Fig.5 Stressstrain curves of an elastomer used in

hydraulic reciprocating seals, with glass tran-sition temperature of 47 C (see for examplereferences [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 droppingtemperature is maximized near the glass transitiontemperature (usually between 0 and 70 C, depend-ing on the particular material and signifying the tran-sition from the rubbery to the glassy state), where

potentiallyirreversible structural changes ensue[100],which are characteristic of the molecular structure ofelastomers. This fact, in combination with the typi-cally high thermal expansion coefficient of elastomers(104 3 104 K1 [95]) implying large dimensionalchanges with temperature, is critical in aerospaceapplications and can cause sealing failure from lossof contact pressure at low temperatures [1, 4, 94], themost dramatic example of which was the destructionof the NASA space shuttle Challenger in 1986 [1, 5, 94].Dimensional changes of hydraulic seals in the formof swelling are also met in cases where porous sealsabsorb hydraulic fluid.

Further complications in the modelling of elastomermechanics arise by the elastomer not following thesame stressstrain path in loading/unloading (hys-teresis) and by responding to load depending on themagnitude of past acquired strain (memory). Suchnon-linear effects are stronger at temperatures nearor lower than the glass transition temperature andbecome apparent when seals remain stationary (set)for long periods of time. The latter leads to seals adher-ing to their metallic counterfaces and having highfriction 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 Gibsonet 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-lippedseals (Fig. 1), naturally retaining lubricant betweentheir lips and avoiding adhesion. In addition, elas-tomer ageing [102] from oxidation, which is, naturally,

faster at higher temperatures, and (sometimes) chem-ical degradation from incompatible hydraulic fluids,cause material hardening and, eventually, embrittle-ment and fragmentation. In fact, rubber ageing hasbeen found to reduce friction and increase abrasivewear in lubricated conditions [102].

A realistic description of the thermomechanics ofelastomericmaterials[60]suchasthoseusedforrecip-rocating seals is based on the statisticalmolecularor network theory of rubber elasticity [6], which isquite old but has passed the test of time. According tothe theory, elastomers are compounds of chemicallycross-linked macro-molecules (see section 1.5 in ref-

erence [100]), which create a three-dimensional net-work. The macro-molecules (long molecular chains)are folded, kinked, andof three types:linear, branched,and cross-linked. The linear chains move easily recip-rocally, giving elastomers the characteristic softeningwhen heated or stiffening when cooled. The cross-linked chains however resist reciprocal motion, givingelastomers resistance to flow when heated. Ther-mally agitated atoms from said macro-molecules canassume a variety of statistically determined confor-mations [103] (hence the statistical-molecular titleof the theory), allowing for continuous variation of

the free space between the molecular chains. Thisneatly explains the extensibility of elastomers at tem-peratures higher than the glass transition temperatureand their stiffening at temperatures close to or belowthe glass transition temperature when the transientchain motionis sloweddown or almostceases, makingelastomers behave like brittle solids.

Although in a few reciprocating-seal modellingstudies the elastomer mechanics have been mod-elled in the frame of viscoelasticity (e.g. by using ageneralized Maxwell model [103]), nearly all otherpublished studies have been based on the linear the-ory of elasticity. However, according to the present

authors work [89, 98, 99] on comparing the linear andthe most popular non-linear (MooneyRivlin) modelin reciprocating seals at temperatures between 54and +135 C, the linear theory of elasticity in recip-rocating elastomeric seals is adequate for maximumseal strains up to 10 per cent; above that limit, modelsof finite elasticity should, ideally, be employed to givemore accurate leakage and friction results.

The most popular phenomenological models onrubber hyperelasticity can be found in some booksdealing with finite 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 pioneersin rubber thermoelasticity) are of lasting value. Themodels usually deal with incompressible, hyperelastic



9/23


(rubber-like) materials and express the mechanicalproperties in terms of the energy function. Specifi-cally, the elastic strain energy per unit volume, W, isexpressed as a function of the three strain invariants,

that is W=

W(I1, I2, I3

), where

I1 = 21 +

22 +

23

I2 = (12)2+ (23)

2+ (31)

2

I3 = (123)2

(1)

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

W=

Nn=1

n

n

n1 +

n2 +

n3 3

(2)

where n and n (n = 1,2, . . .,N) are constant shearmoduli and dimensionless constants, respectively,which are experimentally derived (for typical valuesof these constants, see page 236 in reference [104]).Additionally, for incompressible materials, 123 = 1.According to Holzapfel (page 239 in reference [104]),Ogdens model for N= 3 (equation (2)) excellentlyreplicates the finite-strain behaviour of rubber-likematerials as proved in references [108], and [111] to[114] among others. However, it shouldbe emphasizedthat the difference between Ogdens model and other

phenomenological models becomes apparent only athigh stretches. Based on the present authors research,e.g. [89, 98, 99], typical polymeric reciprocating sealsare usually not strained >15 per cent during opera-tion.This normally justifies 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 modelsunless approximately (not rigorously) introduced aswas done by the present author in references [89], [98],[99],and[115] to [117] with a modified MooneyRivlinmodel.

Despite the effectiveness of Ogdens model, the

MooneyRivlin model based on the pioneering workof Mooney [118] in 1940 and Rivlin [119] in 1948 onfinite isotropic elasticity is the most popular, followedby the simpler NeoHookean model. In fact, the afore-mentionedmodels can be derivedfromOgdens model(equation (2)) by setting (N= 2, 1 = 2, 2 = 2) forthe MooneyRivlin model and (N= 1, 1 = 2) forthe NeoHookean model. Several other constitutiveapproaches for incompressible, rubber-like materialssuch as the Varga model [120] can be found in the lit-erature and some are readily available to use in finite-element commercial software but the Ogden model

withN= 3inequation(1),theMooneyRivlin,andtheNeoHookean model, as summarized in equation (3),are met most often and, in this authors research expe-rience, are deemed sufficient in reciprocating seals,

with preference to the first two

Ogden : W =3

n=1

n

n n1 +

n2 +

n3 3

MooneyRivlin : W =

1

2(I1 3)

2

2(I2 3)

NeoHookean : W=1

2(I1 3)

(3)

Having decided which constitutive model to use, theCauchy (true) principal stresses are given by [104]

i= iW

i pc (i= 1,2,3) (4)

where pc is a hydrostatic pressure, calculated from

equilibrium equations and boundary conditions (fordetails, see references [1] and [98]). For the MooneyRivlin model, a standard engineering stressstrain testof the material in question at the temperature of inter-est suffices to derive the necessary constants [98].Nevertheless, in lack of such results, a reasonableapproximation to use is 1 = 42 (see page 733in reference [121]). Combining the latter with thecondition of consistency between the MooneyRivlinand the classic linear (Hookean) model, expressed byG= 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, thefollowing approximation is obtained: 1 = 4E/15 and2 = E/15.

The phenomenological models discussed thus farrefer to rubber-like materials and are suitable forpolymeric reciprocating seals. The basic mechanicsanalysis of such seals, consisting of calculating thethree principal stresses for known strains by equation(4), is sufficient when the seals are of simple shapesuch as rectangular. As far as the author is aware (year:2008), it is surprising that there are no publicationsin the literature utilizing the non-linear models in

reciprocating seals and all rely on the linear model,exceptthose of thepresent author[98, 99, 115117].Incases of seal shapes other than simple, e.g. step seals,U-cups, and so on (Fig. 1), a simple mechanics analy-sis is unfeasible. In the latter case, the finite-elementmethod has been utilized, which readily allows theuse of non-linear models, even those that incorporatethermal and compressibility effects. Unfortunately,there are several other properties of rubber-like mate-rials, particularly those filler- or particle-reinforcedcomposites, which make their mechanical analysiseven with commercial finite-element software prob-

lematic. Those properties include stress softening incyclic loading (Mullins effect), strain stiffening at largestretch, load-frequency-dependent response, tempo-ralsofteningathightemperaturebecauseofscissionof



10/23

10 G K Nikas

molecular cross-links that can even cause permanentset of the material, and so on. Some constitutive mod-els have been developed to deal with some of the saideffects as in references [122] to [126]. However, their

applicability may be limited to very specific cases andthey always require experimental verification.Even though the majority of published studies deal

with elastomeric seals, some studies have includedPTFE, UHMWPE, polyurethanes, and composite seals.The main benefits of these materials over elas-tomers are their increased wear resistance, avoidanceof stick-slip motion and extrusion, lower friction,and broader operating-temperature range. Zhangsreview [127] on polymer tribology and related book[100] (chapter 16) comprise an excellent source ofreference.

PTFE in particular has been used in hydraulic seal-

ing since the 1950s [128132]. It is a thermoplasticbetter known for its low-friction properties. It has avery high resistance to ageing [129] and may be usedin various compounds for temperatures in excess of250 C [133], i.e. temperatures much higher than thoseallowed in elastomeric-seal applications. Its low fric-tional resistance, apart from its low surface energy, isalso attributed to surface porosity, which results ina small contact area. Moreover, in hydraulic recipro-cating seals, surface pores of PTFE act as lubricantpockets. This results in exceptionally low friction andavoidance of stick-slip and vibration, even after long

periods of inactivity or low stroking velocities. How-ever, the porosity may increase leakage. Moreover,the low stiffness of PTFE leads to accelerated wearbecause of delamination [134] when the material isrubbed against metallic surfaces such as piston rods.In fact, accelerated wear of the PTFE may occur evenwhen piston rods are made very smooth (e.g. superfinished), which results in polishing the PTFE dur-ing extended periods of sliding and in a significantincrease in friction. For these reasons, PTFE is nor-mally met in compounds and composites, e.g. filledwith bronze in coaxial seals [95], filled with stain-less steel, graphite, or glass fibres and elastomeric

compounds as in rotary vane seals [4, 96, 135]. Unfor-tunately, PTFE in its various compounds is, mechani-cally, a very complex material, with different responsein tension and compression, whereas itsYoungs mod-ulus, yield point, and Poissons ratio all greatly dependon its composition [136138]. Li and Mays [137] haveeffectively demonstrated this complexity in their spe-cially adapted finite-element analysis of PTFE rotaryseals. Other materials used in hydraulic seals pose noless complexity and may only suit particular applica-tions. For example, UHMWPE cannot be used if theoperating temperature normally exceeds 80 C [135].

Thus, matching the seals to their intended use andoperatingenvironmentisthefirstpriorityinsealselec-tion, as is realized by studying product catalogues ofseal manufactures [2, 3].

3.2 Studies on hydraulic-seal mechanics andelastohydrodynamics

As is realized from section 3.1, the mechanical analysisof hydraulic seals is a complicated task. The com-plexity of the available phenomenological models forrubber-like materials precludes (even approximate)analyticalsolutionsinthesolidmechanicsofhydraulicreciprocating seals in all but the simplest geome-tries such as rectangular. This trend is clear in allrelated literature studies. The older studies resorted toeither approximate analytical solutions for very sim-ple geometries or numerical solutions for seal shapesother than rectangular, yet still rather simple (e.g.toroidal). Moreover, they all used the linear theory ofelasticity or elementary stress analysis to resolve sealstresses and strains in the context of solid mechan-

ics. In most recent studies (after the year 2004 or so),commercial finite-element software has been used todeal with complex geometries such as for step andU-cup seals.

The simple, approximate analytical solutions ofolder studies remain valuable as they provide muchclearer understanding of the sealing mechanisms andways to optimize seals. In chronological order, most ofthe significant contributions in this field can be foundin the publications of Hooke et al. [32, 43] (rubberO-rings), Johannesson [34] (rubber O-rings), Drag-oni and Strozzi [139] (rubber O-rings), Field and Nau[31] (perfectly rectangular rubber seals), Strozzi [68](rectangular-rounded, elastomeric seals), Johannes-son and Kassfeldt [140] (elastomeric seals of arbitrarycross-section), Nikas [89, 98, 99, 115117, 141143](rectangular-rounded elastomeric seals), Nikas andSayles [97] (rectangular-rounded composite seals),and Nikas [4, 96] (rectangular-rounded, composite,and rotary vane seals in alternating rotation). Inthe aforementioned studies, the contact pressure ata sealing contact is calculated by either assumingplane-strains conditions or via an elementary stressanalysis with strains calculated from the amount ofsurface interference. Shear from contact friction is

usually neglected, although shear stresses inside aseals body can be taken into account see for exam-ple Nikas [141]. Simple analytical studies have alsobeen conducted by Karaszkiewicz [144] on O-ringsand composite seals with O-ring and PTFE parts[145].

For seal shapes other than rectangular and/or whennumerical accuracy is of priority, the finite-elementmethod is used [46, 52, 68, 70, 82, 146160]. A reviewof this method for the period 19762003 on rubber-like materials with an extensive bibliography can befound in reference [161]. Various types of hydraulicseals 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], andstep seals [160].



11/23


Naturally, the main goal of theoretical models isto evaluate sealing performance in terms of leakageand friction. This requires accounting for the sealed-fluid effect at a sealing contact, which the previously

mentioned computation of the pressure distributionis only a part of. It is established experimentally andtheoretically [1] that a lubricating film of nanometreto micrometre thickness is present at a sealing con-tact under reciprocating conditions. The calculationof that film thickness and its distribution in a contactis based on the theory of elastohydrodynamic lubri-cation [162], which is essentially represented by theReynolds equation in its various forms, depending onapplication. Reciprocating seals are normally axisym-metric, which means that leakage takes place alongthe seal axis of symmetry. Thus, the one-dimensionalform of the Reynolds equation has been employed in

almost all studies [143]

x

h3

p

x

= 6V

(h)

x+ 12

(h)

t(5)

where p = p(x, t) and h = h(x, t) are the local pres-sure and the local film thickness at the sealing contact,respectively, V is the sum of the tangential velocitiesof the contact counterfaces, = (p) and = (p) arethe local mass density and the local dynamic viscos-ity of the sealed fluid at the sealing contact for a givenoperating temperature, respectively, and t stands for

time. A more general, two-dimensional (2D) form ofthe Reynolds equation was used by Nikas [89, 141]andinsubsequentpublications[ 98, 99, 115117]deal-ing with various issues of reciprocating seals, becausethe intention was to account for fluid transporta-tion between roughness asperities transversely to thedirection of motion in an attempt to improve accuracyin leakage calculations. However, this adds complex-ity to the solution process and is, generally, not reallynecessary.

The usual simplification of equation (5) is to ignorethe last term (h)/t dealing with transient effectsand, thus, treat the lubrication problem for steady-

state conditions only. This is applicable only whenthe stroking length is significantly greater than twicethe sealing-contact size and, additionally, both thebeginning and the ending of strokes are ignored. Theremaining Reynolds equation can be solved numer-ically either for film-thickness or for the contact-pressure distribution with appropriate kinematicaland boundary conditions, e.g. the no-slip and thecavitation conditions [143].

The early solutions of the Reynolds equation forreciprocating seals were based on assumed film thick-ness and/or measured contact pressure distributions.

For example, White and Denny [9] calculated filmthickness by assuming a tapered film profile and aparabolic pressure distribution. Mller [22] used mea-sured contact pressuredistributions anda tapered film

profile, which was different between outstrokes andinstrokes. In fact, the Reynolds equation is normallysolved for the film thickness h because the contactpressure is calculated from a solid-mechanics analy-

sis as if the contact were dry. The latter is fully justified[143] by the thinness of typical fluid films in recipro-cating seals, which imposes a radial strain negligiblysmall in comparison with the normal strains from sealinterferences and loading.

The fact that the contact pressure can be con-sidered known has been taken advantage of in theliterature in the so-called inverse hydrodynamic (IH)theory [163]. According to that theory, the Reynoldsequation (5) is developedto a cubic algebraic equationfor the film thickness [162]. However, the applica-tion of this method to elastomeric reciprocating sealsmet numerical obstacles caused by the flexibility of

the seals. Specifically, in calculating the roots of thecubic polynomial, imaginary roots should be correctlyidentified and resolved, otherwise numerical instabil-ity will quickly destroy the convergence to the correctsolution [37, 40]. Nevertheless, the method has beenextensively applied [30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 3841, 43, 52,71, 72, 164166].

A modified version of the IH theory was developedby Nikas [143] and applied in elastomeric and com-posite rod and rotary-vane seals in references [4], [96],[97], and [143] for reciprocating motion in curvedcontact geometries, including transient effects [4, 96].

Instead of analytically solving the cubic polynomial ofthe film thickness, the following first-order, ordinarydifferential equation was derived [143]

dH

dx=

(d2q)/(dx2)H3

6V 3(dq)/(dx)H2(6)

where H h and dq/dx (dp/dx)/(2). An inletboundary condition was applied [143] (and an addi-tional initial condition in the case of transient analysis[4]).Equation(6)wasthensolvedwitharobustnumer-ical method, which allowed great numerical stabilityand consistency with sub-nanometre precision in the

film thickness [96, 97, 143], as well as extremely fast(practically instantaneous) computation.

Apart from the IH method, other numerical meth-ods have also been applied, e.g. the RungeKuttamethod [167] and the PetrovGalerkin method [168].These are iterative methods and vary in complexity.The simplest or most direct ones are those that derivethe contact pressure from an elementary stress anal-ysis of the seal and solve the Reynolds equation forthe film thickness iteratively, until the contact pres-sure and film thickness are in agreement. The study ofField and Nau [31] is representative of this methodol-

ogy. However, it is also characteristic of the numericalinstabilityofthemethod,whichisreflectedontheslownumerical convergence rate, the wavy pressure andfilmthicknessresults,andtheinabilitytoderiveresults



12/23

12 G K Nikas

for instrokes [31]. The cause of instability is the sensi-tivity of pressure to film thickness variations, which ischaracteristic of the high non-linearityof theReynoldsequation. Nevertheless, similar direct approaches can

be found in other studies [71, 141, 167].Ina series ofpapers [98, 99, 115117, 141] that dealtwith the 2D form of the Reynolds equation for rod sealsthat included surface roughness effects [141], Nikastackled the instability problem of thedirect approachby separating the effect of pressure ripples created bythe roughness asperities from the bulk contact pres-sure. The bulk contact pressure was left out of theconvergence iterations and only the perturbations ofthe roughness asperities were included.

Continuing with the simpler methodologies in solv-ing the Reynolds equation for reciprocating seals,the efficient techniques of Hooke on soft lubricated

contacts [169171] that dealt with the elastohydrody-namic inlet and exit zones provide a useful insight intothe lubrication problem. His work is particularly rel-evant in reciprocating seals because the average filmthicknessin thecontact is almostcompletely governedby the conditions at the inlet zone [143]. This is ofmajor importance in both leakage and friction, as wellas during the reversal of the entrainment velocity (endof strokeand reversal of motionin reciprocating seals).Thelattercausesfilmthinning[172]andincreasedsealwear, as has been verified experimentally in severalstudies, e.g. references [62] and [86].

A method to avoid much of the numerical instabilityfrom the inherent coupling between contact pres-sure and film thickness in the Reynolds equation wasdeveloped by Ruskell [46]. It was applied to rectangu-lar rubber seals with chamfered ends under steady-state conditions and for perfectly smooth contacts.Ruskell adapted the numerical technique developedby Rohde and Oh [173, 174] who used a Newton iter-ation scheme. In Ruskells work [46], the elasticityequation of the seal and the Reynolds equation werecombined into a single integrodifferential equation,which was solved iteratively. Thus, convergence wasfast andconsistent because the reciprocation between

the separate contact pressureand film thickness equa-tions to correct one with the predictions of the otherwas avoided. However, Ruskells method still lackedoutright computational speed because the contactpressure had to be calculated separately (for a static,frictionless contact) by a (naturally) time-consumingfinite-element analysis. Prati and Strozzi [72] used asimilar method.

In recent years (20062008), some more sophisti-cated numerical methods were developed to tacklethe steady-state elastohydrodynamic problem ofhydraulic 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 andco-workers on rotary seals, inter-asperity cavitation is

incorporated into the Reynolds equation to deal withrough contacts. So far, only the seal surface roughnesshas been considered; the other contact counterfacehas been assumed to be perfectly smooth. Surface

roughness is treated approximately in the context ofthe GreenwoodWilliamson model [176], i.e. it is sim-ulated, idealized roughness. Finite-element analysishas been used to compute the contact pressure ofthe seals in dry, static contact, which gives freedom indealing with complex seal shapes and utilizing modelsof finite elasticity.

The main deficiency of previous studies is that thecoupled elastohydrodynamic problem has not beentackled, i.e. the deformation of the seals from frictionin the sealing contacts is unaccounted. This meansthat the contact pressure is calculated for station-ary contact counterfaces. However, in hydraulic seals,

normally, the motion of a counterface deflects theseal because of contact friction and, thus, changesthe pressure distribution at the contact inlet. This, inturn, affects the development of the hydrodynamicfilm and, consequently, the average film thickness andfriction in the contact. The coupling between pres-sure and film thickness or between stroking velocityand contact friction needs to be resolved iteratively.If this is not done, the sealing performance is essen-tially evaluated only for unrealistic, idealized (static)conditions. From a computational-fluid-dynamics orfinite-element point of view, the said coupling is

treated with the so-called fluidstructure interaction.A couple of recent studies began to address this prob-lem for simple seal geometries, namely the study ofngn et al. [158] on O-rings, and Stupkiewicz andMarciniszyn [156] on rectangular seals and O-rings.Needless to say that such studies are complicated andstill deal with steady-state conditions, i.e. they areapplicable only for very long strokes.

3.3 Transient lubrication effects

In reality, reciprocating seals exhibit clearly transientbehaviour, particularly at the ends of strokes andduring the reversal of the entrainment velocity. Thetransient elastohydrodynamic problem in reciprocat-ing seals, as expressed by equation (5), has beentheoretically studied in around 1970 by Hirano andKaneta [36, 38] for idealized parabolic and Gaussiancontact-pressure distributions. Their work confirmednumerous experimental observations (e.g. reference[27]) regarding the importance of the ratio of thestroking length to the contact width in the develop-ment of a full elastohydrodynamic film. As alreadyexplained, the said ratio must exceed two if it is toallow sealed fluid, which is normally dragged at half

the sliding velocity of the contact, to travel from thecontact inlet to the outlet.

The value of a transient analysis is obvious whendealing with seal friction, which is greatly affected by



13/23


minute changes (in the order of nanometres) in theaverage film thickness in the contact. Obviously, wearis also significantly affected [62]. In fact, squeeze-filmcollapse during long periods of inactivity or during

the reversal of entrainment motion can cause fric-tion so high that seals may be rearranged in theirhousings and subsequently fail. The experimentalstudy of Nwagboso [177] on elastomeric-seal rollingis characteristic in this respect.

As far as the author is aware (year: 2008), veryfew other studies have so far dealt with solving thetransient elastohydrodynamic lubrication problem inreciprocating seals, namely his own [4, 89, 96, 117].The problem belongs to the category of soft elastohy-drodynamics in which there are several general stud-ies in the literature, e.g. references [178], and [179].A simple approach, dealing with the transient elas-

tohydrodynamics of compliant solids (which couldbe applied to reciprocating seals), was presented byIkeuchi etal. [180]. In fact, the solution of the transient

problem may be simplified by ignoring the left-handside of equation (5). The resulting reduced equationis merely a classic, first-order differential equationof wave propagation. The latter approach has been

verified by Chang [181]. It has also been applied bythe present author in reciprocating, rotary vane seals[4, 96] as a means of fast computations in parametricanalyses.

3.4 Surface-roughness effects

Apart from transient effects, there are other aspectsof reciprocating seals that have not been given signif-icant emphasis in theoretical studies. Surface rough-ness is one of those neglected aspects, except in thepreviously 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. ref-erence [155]), a critical value of average roughnessis predicted to be the limit between a leaking and

Fig.6 Examples of film thickness maps at the sealing contacts of rectangular, elastomeric rodseals. (a) Theoretical [141] and (b) experimental [62, 91]: (a) Film thickness contour mapsof a rectangular, elastomeric rod seal, showing film collapse (left to right) as the sealedpressure 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 betweena rectangular, elastomeric rod seal and glass. High-pressure side is on the left side of bothimages. Sealed pressure: 0.69 Mpa on the left with moving rod and less than 0.34 Mpa onthe right image with stationary rod. (From the experimental work of Rana [62, 91].).



14/23

14 G K Nikas

non-leaking seal, which, naturally, depends on theoperating conditions andseal geometry. It is also note-worthy that, according to the modelling work of Nikas[89, 141], reciprocating seals normally operate in the

mixedlubricationregime but roughnessmainly affectsthe maximum and the minimum film thickness, notso much the average film thickness. Figure 6 showsthe theoretical predictions of Nikas [141] on the filmthicknessdistributionofarectangular,elastomericrodseal, and some related experimental results of Rana[62, 91] in accordance with the trend of the theoreti-cal predictions. It is characteristic that the lubricationof the seal is improved at higher sealed pressuresas predicted in reference [141] and verified in refer-ences [62, 91]. A further discussion on the roughnesseffects can be found in section 4 of reference [143].Useful findings have also been reported in the exper-

imental 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-flow model of Patir andCheng [184, 185] (as has been done by Salant and co-workers more recently) to analyse the effects of sealroughness on seal leakage and friction. He found thatwhen the lambda ratio (defined as the central filmthickness for an ideally smooth contact divided by thecomposite RMS roughness of the real contacting sur-faces) is>4, a full hydrodynamic film is developed andseal roughness appears unsuppressed. When the ratio

drops below about 2, the seal operates in the mixedlubricationregimeasroughnessasperitiesarepartiallybutnotcompletely compressed andengagewith thoseof the piston rod.

However, roughness modelling remains simplis-tic because several influential factors have yet tobe accounted, such as the transient elastohydrody-namic inter-asperity interactions, asperity viscoelas-ticity [186], and inter-asperity adhesive forces (suchas van der Waals forces) in mixed lubricated condi-tions [187, 188]. Such parameters should be addressedin order to simulate experimentally observed elas-tomeric seal behaviour including stick-slip phenom-

ena [189] and instabilities in the transition betweendry and wet regimes [190], Schallamach waves [191,192], and abrasive wear [100, 127, 193, 194]. The workof Jalisi [195] on the contact mechanics of rough elas-tomeric contacts gives a good idea of a numericalapproach via finite-element analysis. Further insightis gained by the general studies of Jin and Dowson[196] and Kim et al. [197] on the modelling of soft andrough elastohydrodynamic contacts.

Nevertheless, the omission of surface roughnessin theoretical models as a first approximation maybe justified. This is so because elastomeric seals are

smoothened during running-in, even when rubbedagainst glass [62, 91]. Moreover, the typical contactof dynamic seals is rarely in the state originally con-ceived and simulated: polymeric films from worn or

run-in polymers may be deposited onto hard metallicsurfaces, effectively creating a coating with roughnessdifferent from that of the hard substrate [198200].

3.5 Other topics (seal extrusion, back-up rings,tandem seals)

There are extremely few studies in the literature thatdeal with specialized topics such as anti-extrusionrings and tandem seals. This is so because, untilrecently, the analysis and evaluation of reciprocating-seal performance was more empirical than scientific.However, such issues are known for decades.

White and Denny [8, 9] in the 1940s discussed sealextrusion as a factor causing seal damage and sealingfailure in the long run. Seal extrusion (Fig. 7) is thesqueezing of a part of a seal into a narrow clearancesuch as the clearance between a seal housing and thepiston rod in a linear hydraulic actuator. It is caused bythe sealed pressure (static extrusion) and the frictionof the seal on its counterface (e.g. a piston rod) during

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 twocorner radii of the seal (r= 0 and 0.2 mm) (bot-tom graph). Based on the analytical study ofNikas [142]



15/23


outstrokes (dynamic extrusion). When the localizedstrain at the extruded part is repeated hundreds orthousands of times in normal reciprocating motion,permanent deformation may occur, accompanied by

sealing failure. The static and dynamic extrusion ofelastomeric seals have been studied by Reddy andNau[84] in 1984.

Apart from experimental investigations on thecauses and effects of extrusion, an analytical solu-tion to the problem was presented by Nikas [89,142] for elastomeric, rectangular rounded or cham-fered, and reciprocating rod seals. The solution wasalso applied to rotary vane seals under alternatingrotation [4, 96]. In the aforementioned analyticalstudy [142], algebraic equations were derived pre-dicting the shape of the extruded part of a seal andthe pressure on it at its contact with its counterface

(piston rod). Moreover, simple criteria in the formof algebraic inequalities were mathematically devel-oped,involvingtheparametersaffectingextrusionandestablishing exactly when extrusion commences. Theconclusion was that the best way to avoid extrusion isto use anti-extrusion or back-up rings. Another poten-tial solution was later investigated by the author [97]and found to be viable, namely the replacement of agiven elastomeric seal with a composite seal of thesame dimensions, comprising a central elastomericpart bonded with two outer PTFE parts along thedirection of reciprocation. The elastomer-PTFE vol-

umetric proportion was parametrically optimized toproduce a composite seal outperforming the origi-nal elastomeric seal in terms of leakage, friction, andextrusion resistance.

With regard to anti-extrusion rings (see for exam-ple the Polypac PHD seal in Fig. 1), they are used toprevent not only seal extrusion but also roll defor-mation [179]. However, they normally interfere withthe sealing of the supported seal. The author is notaware of any studies in the literature on the modellingof back-up rings except for his own modelling work[89, 116]. In the latter studies, which arecomputation-ally complicated, parametric analyses wereconducted

to quantify the effect of back-up rings of rectangularcross-section andrelatively low stiffnesson thesealingperformance of rectangular, elastomeric rod seals. Theoperating temperature was varied from54to+135 Cand the sealedpressurefrom1 to35 MPa.Among someinteresting conclusions of the study was that the con-tact pressure and the average surface roughness ofthe back-up ring can be optimized to minimize theleakage-per-cycle of the sealring pair.

Another interesting topic in sealing research con-cerns 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, andasecondaryseal,whichwipesofffluidleakingfromtheprimarysealand,also,preventsdirtingressionintothesystem in the absence of a scraping element.

Fig.8 Tandem seal arrangement (top) and an example

of its theoretical analysis (bottom diagram) show-ing the interseal-pressure abrupt rise after about1600 strokes (Nikas and Sayles [115])

The performance of tandem seals has been exper-imentally investigated in very few studies [80, 201203]. All concluded that sealing is mainly controlledby the primary seal but it is influenced by the intersealpressure(Fig.8)and,naturally,bytheedgegeometryofboth seals at their low-pressure sides. Moreover, leak-age and friction are also influenced by any back-up

rings present in the system [202]. Field and Nau [201,202] in the early 1970s discovered that in some tandemseal arrangements (mainly those of identical seals), anabrupt pressure rise in the interseal space takes placeafter a number of operating cycles. This is caused byleaked fluid flooding the interseal space. They foundthat this phenomenon can cause seal extrusion andeven complete failure of the system if the intersealpressure is not vented before abruptly exceeding thesealed pressure (see Fig. 4 in Field and Nau [201]).

The phenomenon of interseal-pressure rise hasbeen theoretically analysed by Nikas and Sayles [115]

by accounting for a compressible mixture of air andleaked fluid in the interseal space, and using the vander Waals equation of state for air to simulate the tem-poral change of pressure with the leaking fluid and the



16/23

16 G K Nikas

number of strokes. A result of this simulation is shownin the bottom diagram of Fig. 8, which depicts theintersealpressurerise and interseal gas-volumereduc-tion with the number of strokes.This way, the number

of strokes before the pressure starts to peak is pre-dictable. The simulation also included back-up ringson both elastomeric seals in a complex, quasi-steadyelastohydrodynamic and non-linear mechanics anal-ysis with surface roughness effects on all elements,followed by performance analysis in terms of leakageand friction for operating temperatures between 54and+135 C,andsealedpressurebetweennearly0and35 MPa. The tandem seal arrangement showed clearbenefits in terms of leakage and friction and could beoptimized for given operating conditions.

The phenomenon of the interseal pressure rise isalso met in twin-lipped seals. Kanzaki et al. [204]

investigated this experimentally for sinusoidally recip-rocating motion. They found that the interlip pressureincreases with the sealed pressure and the oil trappedbetween the seal lips lubricated the seal, reducing fric-tion. This is a well-known benefit of twin-lipped seals[2] and the stored lubricant not only reduces frictionbut also prevents the seal from running dry (evenafter periods of inactivity), thus eliminating stick-slipmotion and vibrations [94]. The operation of scrapingelements [205] should also be seen under the samelight and as influential of the overall performance of asealing system.

4 EXPERIENCE GAINED FROM SEALINGRESEARCH ANDTHE FUTURE

The knowledge and experience gained from pastresearch on hydraulic reciprocating seals has ben-efited the sealing industry immensely. The topicsdiscussed in the previous sections covered the fun-damental aspects of sealing performance, i.e. leakage,friction, and wear. It was shown that seals can beoptimized to offer better sealing performance withincreased reliability and longer service lives. This con-cerns both existing seal designs and new, innovativedesigns for future applications.

With regard to existing seal designs (shapes), pastresearch has proved the value of paying attention todetails. Some examples are listed next.

1. The values of surface-roughness parameters suchas the average and the RMS roughness are critical inachieving zero leakage under given operating con-ditions. Anoptimal sealroughness valueexists andit should be targeted to produce non-leaking seals,at least in the first half of a seals life.

2. The effect of temperature on sealing performance ismajor. Seal preloading has to take this into accountto avoid a sealing failure at low temperatures, e.g.in aerospace applications.

3. Seal extrusion is a problem, which can and shouldbe avoided. Anti-extrusion rings (separate or inte-gral to the seals), composite (e.g. elastomeric/PTFE-glass-fibre), and multi-component seals (e.g.

the polypac PHD seal in Fig. 1) have been designedto avoid this problem based on past experience andresearch.

4. The corner geometry of reciprocating seals at seal-ing contacts has the greatest influence on leak-age, friction, and wear. Experimental research andexperience had already shown how this couldbe improved before theoretical research showedmathematically that the corner geometry can beoptimized. See for example the application of thisresearch in the design of the step seal and thetwin-lipped U-cup seal in Fig. 1.

5. Seal materials have improved as a result of exper-

imental research. Material properties such as stiff-ness, hardness, and general stressstrain mechani-cal behaviour have been under scrutiny in order toproduce seals that suit particular applications, i.e.specific range of operating conditions.

6. As a final but probably most convincing example ofthe gain from applied research is the evolution ofseal design based on tribological and mechanicalprinciples learned from research and experience.The seals depicted in Fig. 1, particularly the left-bottomtwo,utilize a number of innovationssuch asanti-extrusion rings, energizing O-rings, compos-

ite materials for low-friction and high-wear rate,and asymmetrical corner geometry optimizationsto minimize leakage. Such innovations are notproducts of imagination but of applied research.

With regard to future seal design, it can be pre-dicted that this will be a matter of optimizing existingdesigns and selecting the best seal for a given appli-cation based on end-user requirements. For example,different or conflicting requirements would be min-imum leakage, minimum friction, and/or minimumwear.Unfortunately, scientific researchhas shown thatthe aforementioned constraints cannot be simultane-

ously satisfied. There will always be a compromisebetween leakage, friction, and wear. It is a matter ofend-user priorities which one performance variableshould be optimized. This is exactly where advancedtheoretical research comes hand-in-hand with pastindustrial experience to solve a problem, which is byall means, very complex. The days of empirical solu-tions in sealing research are numbered because thecompetition is stiff and customers are intolerable (andrightly so) to sealing partial or total failures. There-fore,sealing research will continue on a more scientificbasis, taking advantageof improved computing equip-

ment and numerical models capable of more realisticpredictions.The fields where research is lagging and is more

urgently needed include those of surfacial (e.g.



17/23


abrasive) wear of reciprocating seals, and estimationof life expectancy. Ideally, the latter should be in theform of a performance-degradation curve depictingthe temporal reduction of sealing ability (e.g. increase

of leakage in time). Given thecomplexity of seal designand countless performance issues, it would be opti-mistic to expect a reliable lifetime prediction methodsuch asthat adopted in,e.g. therolling-bearings indus-try. Nevertheless, some form of prediction methodmay, eventually, be developed, even if it is restrictedto very specific operating conditions. In pursuit of thistarget,engineersmayhavetorely,onceagain,onsemi-empiricalmethods.Inthisauthorsexperience,sealingresearch has still a long way to go.

5 CONCLUSIONS

After 80 years of scientific research and developmenton reciprocating hydraulic seals, the main perfor-mance issues have been identified and relatively wellunderstood. Nevertheless, flexible hydraulic seals areelements of complex mechanical behaviour and pre-dicting their performance in real (variable) operatingconditions with satisfactory precision is a very chal-lenging task. A significant amount of work remains tobedoneonthemodellingfronttoproducerealisticandreliable computational models of the seal mechanicsand tribology, not suitable for the average user yet(this is rather ambitious) but for the engineer whowants to design or optimize such seals. Experimentsperformed over a period of decades as well as practi-cal experience suggest that there are many parametersthat have to be accounted for in order to have a goodunderstanding of sealing performance. Engineeringerrors such as that which led to the destruction of theNASA space shuttle Challenger in 1986 should not berepeated.

REFERENCES

1 Nikas, G. K. Research on the tribology of hydraulicreciprocating seals. In Tribology research trends (Firstchapter in the book) (Ed. T. Hasegawa), 2008, pp. 1156(Nova Science Publishers, NewYork, USA).

2 Hydraulic Seals Linear; Rod seals. Trelleborg seal-ing solutions catalogue, edition April 2007; PDF fileavailable from www.tss.trelleborg.com.

3 Hydraulic Seals Linear; Piston seals. Trelleborg seal-ing solutions catalogue, edition April 2007; PDF fileavailable from www.tss.trelleborg.com.

4 Nikas, G. K., Burridge, G., and Sayles, R. S. Modellingand 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. Kol-loidzeitschrift, 1932, 59, 208216.Q2

7 Gronau, H. Investigations on gland packings and seal-ing rings for high hydraulic pressures. Doctoral Thesis,University of Berlin, Germany, 1935.

8 White, C. M. and Denny, D. F. The sealing mechanismof flexible packings. MAP Scientificand Technical Mem-

orandum No. 4/45 (interim report), London, England,1945.

9 White, C. M. and Denny, D. F. The sealing mech-anism of flexible packings. Scientific and TechnicalMemorandum No. 3/47, UK Ministry of Supply, 1947.

10 Denny, D. F. The friction of rubber sealing rings. BritishHydromechanics Research Association, Res. report No.458, Harlow, UK, 1953.

11 Denny, D. F. The influence of load and surface rough-ness on the friction of rubber-like materials. Proc. Phys.Soc. B, 1954, 66, 721727.

12 Denny, D. F. The lubrication of fluid seals. In Proceed- Q3ingsoftheIMechEConferenceonLubricationandwear,1957.

13 Denny, D. F. Leakage and friction characteristics ofsome single-lip U-seals fitted to reciprocating shafts.British Hydromechanics Research Association, reportRR 595, August 1958.

14 Denny, D. F. Sealing characteristics of multiple-lip sealsfitted to reciprocating shafts. British HydromechanicsResearch Association, report RR 614, February 1959.

15 Denny, D. F. Time effects in the static friction oflubricated rubber. Wear, 1959, 2(4), 264272.

16 Denny, D. F. Leakage characteristics of rubber sealsfitted to reciprocating shafts. In Proceedings of theIMechE Symposium on Oil hydraulic power transmis-sion and control, London, England, 1961, pp. 259268.

17 Cheyney, L. E.,Mueller,W.J.,and Duval,R. E. Frictionalcharacteristics of O-rings with a typical hydraulic fluid.Trans. ASME, 1950, 72(4), 291297.

18 Morrison, J. B. O-rings and interference seals for staticapplications. Mach. Des., 1957, 29(3), 9194.

19 Hopp, H. Untersuchungen ber den reibungswert vondichtelementen fr hubbewegungen. Hydraulik undPneumatik Technik, 1957, 1, Heft 2.

20 Lang, C. M. Untersuchungen an berhrungsdichtungenfr hydraulishe arbeitszylinder. Dissertation, TechnisheHochschule Stuttgart, Germany, 1960.

21 Dowson, D. and Higginson, G. R. A numerical solutionto the elastohydrodynamic problem. J. Mech. Eng. Sci.,1959, 1(1), 615.

22 Mller, H. K. Leakage and friction of flexible packingsat reciprocating motion with special consideration ofhydrodynamic film formation. In Proceedings of the2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964,pp. 1328 (BHRA).

23 Lawrie, J. M. and ODonoghue, J. P. The mechanismof lubrication in a reciprocating seal. In Proceedingsof the 2nd International Conference on Fluid sealing,1964, pp. 6980 (BHRA).

24 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. An experimental studyof reciprocating rubber seals. In Proceedings of theIMechE Symposium on Elastohydrodynamic Lubrica-tion, Leeds, England, 1972, pp. 2936.

25 Dowson, D. and Swales, P. D. The development of elas-tohydrodynamic conditions in a reciprocating seal. InProceedings of the 4th International Conference onFluid sealing, 1969, pp. 210 (BHRA).



18/23

18 G K Nikas

26 Kaneta, M., Todoroki, H., Nishikawa, H., Kanzaki,Y., and Kawahara, Y. Tribology of flexible seals forreciprocating motion. ASME J. Tribol., 2000, 122(4),787795.

27 Hirano,F. and Kaneta,M.Experimentalinvestigationof

friction and sealing characteristics of flexible seals forreciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 5th Inter-national 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 onFluid sealing, 1971, pp. 8196 (BHRA).

29 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. The effects of design param-eters on the lubrication of reciprocating rubber seals.In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference onFluid sealing, 1975, pp. 113 (BHRA).

30 Dowson, D. and Swales, P. D. An elastohydrodynamicapproach to the problem of the reciprocating seal. InProceedings of the 3rd International Conference onFluid sealing, 1967, pp. 3344 (BHRA).

31 Field,G. J. and Nau,B. S.A theoretical study of the elas-tohydrodynamic lubrication of reciprocating rubberseals. ASLE Trans., 1975, 18(1), 4854.

32 Hooke, C. J., Lines, D. J., and ODonoghue, J. P.A theoretical study of the lubrication of reciprocat-ing O-ring seals. In Proceedings of the 3rd Interna-tional Conference on Fluid sealing, 1967, pp. 4556(BHRA).

33 Johannesson, H. L. Oil leakage and friction forcesof reciprocating O-ring seals considering cavitation.ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 1983, 105(2), 288296.

34 Johannesson, H. Calculation of the pressure distribu-

tion in an O-ring seal contact. In Proceedings of the5th LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology, 1978, pp.379387.

35 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamics of rubber seals forreciprocating motion, lubricating film thickness, andout-leakage of O-seals. Ind. Eng. Che. Prod. Res. Dev.,1987, 26(11), 21802185.

36 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Theoretical investigation offriction and sealing characteristics of flexible seals forreciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the 5th Inter-national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1971, pp. 1732(BHRA).

37 Ruskell, L. E. C. Reynolds equation and elastohydrody-namic lubrication in metal seals. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A,1976, 349(1658), 383396.

38 Hirano, F. and Kaneta, M. Dynamic behaviour of flex-ible seals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings ofthe 4th International Conference on Fluid sealing,1969,pp. 1120 (BHRA).

39 Theyse, F. H. The inverse hydrodynamic theory and itsapplication in the design of controlled leakage sealsbetween moving parts. In Proceedings of the 3rd Inter-national 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. Elastohydrody-

namic lubrication in elastomeric reciprocating seals.

In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference onFluid sealing, 1981, pp. 5571 (BHRA).

43 Hooke, C. J., Lines, D. J., and ODonoghue, J. P. Elas-tohydrodynamic lubrication of O-ring seals. Proc. Instn Q4Mech. Engrs, 19661967, 181(Part 1, No. 9), 205210.

44 Johannesson, H. L. Optimum pressure distributions ofhydraulic cylinder seals.In Proceedings of the 9th Inter-national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1981, pp. 87102(BHRA).

45 Chivers,T. C. and Hunt, R. P. The achievement of mini-mum leakage from elastomeric seals. In Proceedings ofthe 8th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1978,pp. 3140 (BHRA).

46 Ruskell, L. E. C. A rapidly converging theoretical solu-tion of the elastohydrodynamic problem for rectangu-lar rubber seals. Proc. IMechE, Part C: J. MechanicalEngineering Science, 1980, 22(1), 916.

47 Nau,B. S. The state of the art of rubber-seal technology.Rubber Chem. Technol., 1987, 60(3), 381416.

48 Nau, B. S. An historical review of studies of poly-meric seals in reciprocating hydraulic systems. Proc.IMechE, Part J: J. Engineering Tribology, 1999, 213(J3),215226.

49 Field, G. J. and Nau, B. S. Film thickness and frictionmeasurements during reciprocation of a rectangularsectionrubber seal ring. In Proceedings of the 6th Inter-national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1973, pp. 4556(BHRA).

50 Flitney, R. K. Reciprocating seals. Tribol. Int., 1982,15(4), 219226.

51 Ramsdell,R.G.A primer on fluid power sealing. Funda-mentals of reciprocating seals. Hydraul. Pneum., 1986,

39(11), 6365.52 Kanters, A. F. C. On the calculation of leakage and

friction of reciprocating elastomeric seals. PhD Thesis,Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands,1990.

53 Visscher, M. and Kanters, A. F. C. Literature reviewand discussion on measurements of leakage, lubricantfilm thickness and friction of reciprocating elastomericseals. STLE Lubr. Eng., 1990, 46(12), 785791.

54 Bisztray-Balku, S. Tribology of elastomeric and com-posite and reciprocating hydraulic seals. Period. Poly-tech. Ser. Mech. Eng., 1999, 43(1), 6380.

55 Bisztray-Balku, S. Design development and tribologyof reciprocating hydraulic seals. Period. Polytech. Ser.Mech. Eng., 2004, 47(1), 163178.

56 Kaneta, M., Yamagata, Y., Nishikawa, H., Kanzaki, Y.,Ono, S., and Kawahara, Y. Stribeck curve of flexibleseals for reciprocating motion. In Proceedings of the17th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 2003,pp. 203216 (BHRA).

57 Kaneta, M., Takeshima, T., Togami, S., Nishikawa, H.,and Kanzaki, Y. Stribeck curve in reciprocating seals.In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference onFluid sealing, 2005, pp. 333347 (BHRA).

58 Cnops, R. F. The friction of elastomer seals. In Pro-ceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fluidsealing, 1964, pp. 8191 (BHRA).

59 Aston, M. W., Fletcher, W., and Morrell, S. H. Sealingforce of rubber seals and its measurement. In Pro-ceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fluidsealing, 1969, pp. 6475 (BHRA).



19/23


60 Chadwick, P. Thermo-mechanics of rubberlike mate-rials. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1974, 276(1260),371403.

61 Flitney, R. K. and Nau, B. S. Performance variation inreciprocating rubber seals for fluid power applications.

STLE Lubr. Eng., 1988, 44(12), 9931000.62 Rana,A.S.A tribological study of elastomeric reciprocat-

ing seals for hydraulic actuators. PhD Thesis, ImperialCollege London, Mechanical Engineering Department,2005.

63 May, E. M. Pressure drop across a packing. Appl. Hyd.,Q51957, 10(5), 110114.

64 Olssen, E. Friction forces and oil leakage of O-rings onaxially moving shafts. PhD Thesis, Chalmers Universityof Technology, Sweden, 1972.

65 Molari, P. G. Stresses in O-ring gaskets. In Proceedingsof the 6th International Conference on Fluid sealing,1973, pp. 1531 (BHRA).

66 Austin, R. M., Flitney, R. K.,and

Nau, B. S.Con-

tact stress, friction and the lubricant film of hydrauliccylinder seals. In Proceedings of the 8th InternationalConference on Fluid sealing, 1978, pp. 1120 (BHRA).

67 Kawahara, Y., Ohtake,Y., and Hirabayashi, H. Oil filmformation of oil seals for reciprocating motion. In Pro-ceedings of the 9th International Conference on Fluidsealing, 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 aidedhydraulic cylinder seal design. In Proceedings of the11th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987,

pp. 314329 (BHRA).70 Lindgren, H. Pressure distribution in scraper ring con-

tacts. Wear, 1987, 115(12), 3140.71 Field, G. J. The elastohydrodynamic lubrication of rect-

angular section rubber seals under conditions of recip-rocating motion. PhD Thesis, City University London,England, 1973.

72 Prati, E. and Strozzi, A. A study on the elastohydrody-namic problem in rectangular, elastomeric seals.ASMEJ. Tribol., 1984, 106(4), 505512.

73 Wernecke, P. W. Analysis of the reciprocating seal-ing process. In Proceedings of the 11th Interna-tional Conference on Fluid sealing, 1987, pp. 249277(BHRA).

74 Blok,H. and Koens,H. J. The breathing film between aflexible seal and a reciprocating rod. Proc. IMechE, PartQ6B: J. Engineering Manufacture, 1965/66, 180(part 3B),221223.

75 Krauter, A. I. Measurement of film thickness for appli-cation to elastomeric Stirling engine rod seals. ASME J.Lubr. Technol., 1982, 104(4), 455459.

76 Kassfeldt, E. Analysis and design of hydraulic cylinderseals. PhD Thesis, 1987 Lule University of Technology,Sweden, 1987.

77 Reddyhoff,T. and Dwyer-Joyce,R. Ultrasonic measure-ment of film thickness in mechanical seals. SealingTechnol., 2006, 2006(7), 711.

78 Visscher, M. The measurement of the film thicknessand roughness deformation of lubricated elastomers.PhD Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, TheNetherlands, 1992.

79 Iwanami, S. and Tikamori, N. Oil leakage from anO-ring packing. In Proceedings of the 1st Interna- Q3tional Conference on Fluid sealing, 1961, paper B2(BHRA).

80 Kaneta,M. Sealing characteristicsof double reciprocat-

ing 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 Inter-national Conference on Fluid sealing, 1964, pp. 2940(BHRA).

82 Lindgren, H. Scraper ring properties and behaviour inhydraulic cylinders. MScThesis, Chalmers University ofTechnology, Sweden, 1986.

83 Karaszkiewicz, A. Hydrodynamic lubrication of rubberseals for reciprocating motion; leakage of seals with anO-ring. Tribol. Int., 1988, 21(6), 361367.

84 Reddy, D. and Nau, B. S. The static and dynamicextrusion of elastomer seals into large clearances. InProceedings of the 10th International Conference onFluid sealing, 1984, pp. 189196 (BHRA).

85 Roberts, A. D. and Tabor, D. Fluid film lubrication ofrubber an interferometric study. Wear, 1968, 11(2),163166.

86 Kanzaki, Y., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, M. Opticalinterferometric observations of oil film behaviour inreciprocating rubber seals. Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng.C, 1996, 62(600), 32293236.

87 Kanzaki, Y., Kawahara, Y., and Kaneta, M. Oil filmbehaviour and friction characteristics in reciprocatingrubberseals.Part1: singlecontact.In Proceedingsof the15th International Conference on Fluid sealing, 1997,pp. 7995 (BHRA).

88 Schrader, K. Beitrage zur klaerung des abdichtvor-ganges gummielastischer abdichtungen axial verschieb-barer hydrostatischer bauteile. PhD Thesis, DresdenUniversity of Technology, Germany, 1978.

89 Nikas, G. K. Determination of polymeric sealing prin-ciples for end user high reliability. Technical ReportDOW-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. Anexperimental technique for investigating the sealingprinciples of reciprocating elastomeric seals for use inlinear hydraulic actuator assemblies. In Proceedings of Q3the 2ndWorldTribologyCongress,Vienna, Austria, 2001(on CD-ROM).

91 Rana, A. S. and Sayles, R. S. An experimental studyon the friction behaviour of aircraft hydraulic actuatorelastomeric reciprocating seals. In Proceedings of the Q431st LeedsLyon Symposium on Tribology, 2004.

Q392 Tanoue, H., Ishiwata, H., and Tada, H. Effects of solidparticles in lubricating oil on the wear of oil sealsand shafts. In Proceedings of the 5th InternationalConference 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 hydrauliccylinders. In Proceedings of the 15th InternationalConference on Fluid sealing, 1997, pp. 111131 (BHRA).

94 Nikas, G. K. Fundamentals of sealing and tribologyof hydraulic reciprocating seals. In Proceedings of theIMechE 1-Day Seminar Focus on Reciprocating Seals,London, England, 25 June 2008.



20/23

20 G K Nikas

95 Mller, H. K. and Nau, B. S. Fluid sealing technol-ogy (Mechanical Engineering Series 117), 1998 (MarcelDekker Inc., New York, USA).

96 Nikas, G. K. Research of fundamental sealing mech-anisms needed for zero-leakage high-reliability rotary

vane actuators. Technical Report SMI-10/04, Depart-ment of Mechanical Engineering, Tribology Group,Imperial College London, England, 2004.

97 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Modelling and optimiza-tion 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 ofrectangular elastomeric seals and its effect on elastohy-drodynamicnumerical analysis.Tribol.Int.,2004, 37(8),651660.

99 Nikas, G. K. and Sayles, R. S. Nonlinear elasticity ofrectangular elastomeric seals and its effect on elastohy-drodynamic numerical analysis. Sealing Technol., 2005,2005(3), 611.

100 Zhang, S.-W. Tribology of elastomers (Tribology andInterface Engineering Series 47), 2004 (Elsevier, Lon-don, England).

101 Gibson, I. A., Hooke, C. J., and ODonoghue, J. P.The frictional behaviour of reciprocating O-ring sealsunderstarting conditions. In Proceedings of the IMechESymposiumon Elastohydrodynamic lubrication, Leeds,England, April 1972, paper C13/72.3

102 Mofidi, M., Kassfeldt, E., and Prakash, B. Tribologicalbehaviourofelastomeragedindifferentoils. Tribol.Int.,2008, 41(910), 860866.

103 Treloar,L.R.G. Themechanicsofrubberelasticity. 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. Modified entropic

elasticity of rubberlike materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids,1984, 32(5), 337357.

107 Ogden,R.W. Recent advances in the phenomenologicaltheoryof 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 incom-pressible 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 anniver-sary 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, NewYork, USA).

111 Duffett, G. and Reddy, B. D. The analysis of incom-pressible hyperelastic bodies by the finite elementmethod. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 1983,41(1), 105120.

112 Sussman, T. and Bathe, K.-J. A finite element for-mulation for nonlinear incompressible elastic and

inelastic analysis. Comput. Struct., 19

Documents

001 Eighty years of research on hydraulic reciprocating seals，自1930年以来液压往复式密封综述文章