by Sara McCaslin, PhD Sara McCaslin, PhD No Comments

Maintenance-Free Polymer Bearings: PV Limits Are the Start, Not the Spec

Maintenance-free polymer bearings live or die by four factors that PV just does not capture. PV limits are often treated as the defining metric for polymer bearings, and while PV is an excellent quick screening tool during the early stages of the design process, there is more involved. In fact, there is a disconnect between betweeb the published PV ratings and real-world performance.  And that is the topic of this blog post.

What Maintenance-Free Polymer Bearings

One of the common reasons that polymer bearings made from materials like PTFE are used for bearings is their maintenance-free aspects. PTFE leaves a transfer layer on the counterface materials that serves as a dry lubricant. However, maintenance-free does not mean that the bearing has an infinite life, experiences zero wear, or is immune to environmental contaminants. 

The Limits of PV Limits in Maintenance-Free Polymer Bearings

The PV limit is a thermal ceiling for bearings, representing the maximum combination of load and speed a material can withstand before it is destroyed by friction and heat. The PV limits for materials are determined using test rigs in highly controlled operating conditions that usually do not represent actual working conditions. In addition, PV values represent average conditions and do not capture material reactions to transient or local events.

Counterface Material for Maintenance-Free Polymer Bearings

A key aspect of maintenance-free polymer bearing performance is the counterface material, including its hardness, roughness, and metallurgy. For example, the counterface metallurgy and hardness must be sufficient to resist corrosion and scratching. Additionally, surface roughness must fall within a specific range. A shaft that is too rough acts like a file, while one that is too smooth generates excessive heat and friction because the polymer is not able to achieve a transfer film on the counterface.

Before going into the details of which counterface material will be used with the polymer bearings, the general material category must be determined. Note that a polymer bearing may meet PV limits on one shaft material and fail early on another. PV ratings are almost always derived using a polished, hardened carbon steel shaft, and if you change the shaft material, then you change how the system will handle beat and abrasion. This means that a bearing that works on steel might not work well on stainless steel, even when the pressure and speed are the same. Because of this, counterface selection should be treated as part of the bearing specification.

Edge Loading and Real Geometry Effects

In the real world, assemblies will rarely achieve a perfect load distribution, and that makes edge loading an issue. Edge loading leads to localized pressure spikes that exceed the normal PV, even though the average PV might look acceptable. Edge loading can be caused by several factors, including shaft deflection, housing tolerances, thermal distortion, and misalignment. One solution is to use shorter bearings to reduce the risk of edge loading, but that is not always possible. Other strategies can focus on geometry mitigation efforts, such as chamfers, lead-ins, and housing geometry.

Thermal Path: The Hidden Limiter

If there is any sliding contact, frictional heat will be generated. One difference between metals and polymers is polymers’ insulating nature. This means that polymer bearings depend on surrounding hardware to remove the heat that is generated. This problem can lead to accelerated creep, wear, and loss of dimensional stability. For that reason, it might be wise to compare metal housings to polymer housings in terms of thermal performance. Again, PV ratings assume ideal conditions with adequate heat dissipation, which may not occur in service.

Contaminants: The Variable That Breaks Assumptions

Bearings of all types can be compromised by physical contamination, and this can be especially true for maintenance-free polymer bearings. Common contaminants include dust, grit, process debris, and even fibers. And such contaminants can lead to serious abrasive damage if measures are not taken to prevent them — and PV testing rarely reflects contaminated environments. Fortunately, there are numerous measures that can be taken to mitigate the ingress of contamination, including shielding and seals.

Conclusion

PV limits are an entry condition, not a design guarantee. They must be designed as part of a system, with consideration given to load distribution, thermal effects, and the operating environment. Maintenance-free polymers must be designed with the counterface material, edge loading effects, geometric effects, thermal issues, and contamination all accounted for to truly take advantage of the host of benefits that maintenance-free polymer bearings provide. 

If you are working on a design that can benefit from the use of maintenance-free polymer bearings, contact the experts at Advanced EMC today

by Sara McCaslin, PhD Sara McCaslin, PhD No Comments

Startup and Running Friction in Polymer Bearings

Startup and running friction can vary based on several different factors, and in this article we focus on what they are, why their values differ, and typical coefficients, as well as a detailed look at why these differences occur. It ends with a discussion of what impact startup and running friction have on bearing design.

Startup and Running Friction

Polymer bearings tend to exhibit higher breakaway (startup) friction than steady-state running friction due to factors such as static adhesion, microasperity interlocking, and transfer-film formation dynamics. 

The startup friction coefficient µₛ is measured at the onset of motion and represents static friction. The term “startup” does not refer solely to time zero, however. It represents the peak friction force or torque required to break the bearing free after a period of rest. Startup friction is actually the regime of dry contact when the polymer surface is still unconditioned. Unconditioned  means that the transfer film on the counterface is incomplete or patchy

The running friction coefficient µₖ represents a kinetic or dynamic measure of friction. It takes place when steady sliding motion is established and is represented by. Running friction relates to the frictional resistance that exists when two surfaces are in motion, steadily sliding against each other. 

Running friction applies after the initial breakaway event has occurred and the system has moved past issues such as static adhesion and micro-locking. As a result, the coefficient of running friction is typically lower and more stable than startup friction, especially for materials such as PTFE and UHMW-PE.

Why Startup and Running Friction Can Differ in a Polymer

There are some key factors that differentiate startup friction from running friction in polymers. For example, at rest, there is adhesion and junction growth. Polymer chains can increase the real contact load at under load rest (creep/relaxation), thereby increasing µₛ.In addition, at startup, there will be surface roughness and plowing. The roughness increases issues with mechanical interlocking and plowing. These two effects also raise the starting friction value.

In running friction conditions, materials like PTFE form a transfer film that reduces the effect of asperities and surface roughness, which reduces running friction. There is, however, a risk of stick-slip. This phenomenon is more likely to occur when the stiffness of the system is low, the speed is low, and the µₛ / µₖ ratio is high.

Typical Coefficients of Friction

The values below represent commonly used engineering polymers and are typical dry sliding vs steel values. These values can vary with pressure, speed, temperature, finish, fillers, and test method.

  • PTFE (virgin)
    • Startup friction (µₛ): ~0.05–0.10, often nearly identical to running friction
    • Running friction (µₖ): ~0.05–0.10
    • Minimal difference between startup and running friction
  • PEEK (unfilled)
    • Startup friction (µₛ): ~0.20
    • Running friction (µₖ): ~0.25
    • Exhibits a noticeable increase from startup to running friction
  • UHMW-PE
    • Startup friction (µₛ): ~0.15–0.20
    • Running friction (µₖ): ~0.10–0.20
    • Running friction can be equal to or lower than startup friction
  • Nylon 66 (PA66)
    • Startup friction (µₛ): ~0.20 (against steel)
    • Running friction (µₖ): ~0.15–0.25 (typical)
    • Moderate variability depending on surface finish and condition

What Is Behind the Difference Between Startup and Running Friction

Several factors account for the difference between startup and running friction. Pressure and dwell time, for example, mean that higher loads and long dwell times increase the real contact area and have the potential to raise µₛ. For speed, higher speeds can actually reduce friction after the polymer transfer film stabilizes, but can also raise heat generation. 

Temperatures are known to impact polymer modulus and creep, which can shift both µₛ and µₖ and alter the risk of stick-slip. In addition, the counterface material and hardness will affect the adhesion and transfer film, which is why it is important that the frictional coefficient used in design calculations represents the friction against the counterface material (e.g., PTFE vs steel, PEEK vs aluminum).

Note that PTFE-filled PEEK, MoS₂-filled nylon, and glass/bronze-filled PTFE shift friction and wear differently, often lowering friction but sometimes increasing counterface wear.

Surface finish also has a significant impact. If the surface finish is too rough, plowing will occur, increasing both friction and wear. On the other hand, if the surface finish is too smooth it can increase adhesion issues.

Impact on Bearing Design

Startup and running friction impact material selection, clearance, and surface finish in bearing design. Startup friction is dominated by static friction and adhesion at rest. This fact significantly impacts breakaway torque and can be a limiting factor in low-speed, intermittent, or precision motion systems. In such systems, stick-slip, noise, and control instability are unacceptable. 

Running friction, on the other hand, is governed by dynamic friction. Once motion is established, it controls steady-state heat generation, wear rate, and long-term dimensional stability. It directly influences PV limits and service life. 

Because many polymers exhibit higher startup friction than running friction, engineers need to balance low breakaway forces with acceptable operating temperatures and wear. This is usually accomplished through the use of self-lubricating materials, fillers, or surface texturing to manage both regimes. A successful polymer bearing design accounts for the full friction lifecycle, ensuring reliable motion at startup without sacrificing durability during continuous operation.

Conclusion

Startup and running friction have a significant impact on bearing design, as well as factors such as material fillers, pressure, temperature, and counterface material. If you are looking for a polymer bearing solution, contact the experts at Advanced EMC. Our team of bearing specialists can help you find the best bearing material for your design and can help you select the optimal material from our range of bearing-grade polymers.