Indian Journal of Fibre & Textile Research

Vol. 23, December 1998, pp. 201-208

Theory of stick-slip effect in friction

R P Nachane, G F S Hussain & K R Krishna Iyer
Central Institute for Research on Cotton Technology, Adenwala Road, Matunga, Mumbai 400019, India
Received 6 October 1997; accepted 12 December 1997

Friction in textile materials exhibits stick-slip effect in a pronounced way. Theoretical relationships
have been derived to explain this stick-slip effect. These relationships give the velocity of the fibre pad
holder, its displacement and the frictional force, measured as functions of time. The relationships clearly
show that the extent of stick-slip effect depends on the difference between the static and dynamic
frictional forces, and on the experimental parameters. The results also indicate why and when the
phenomenon of stick-slip effect is observed/not observed. The experimental results have been found to
agree well with those obtained by calculations based on the relationships derived.

Keywords: Dynamic friction, Frictional force, Static friction, Stick-slip effect

1 Introduction The friction curve represents cyclic increase and

Friction between the surfaces of solids is a very decrease in frictional force, the decrease being
complex phenomenon. It depends not only on the almost instantaneous. Morton and Hearle24 have
physical and chemical properties of the materials presented a simple model to explain the occurrence
involved but also on the mechanical finish of the of stick-slip effect.
contacting surfaces. No theory can, therefore, be Bowden and Taborl derived an equation of
formulated to explain the frictional behaviour quite motion for a surface which is sliding or slipping
satisfactorily. For this reason, the study of friction under the elastic constraint on the surface of a test
has always been based on the experimental specimen. The constraint in their experiment was a
evidence. From the available data, the general laws torsion wire. The equation put forward by them is :
of empirical nature can be stated. This was first
d2S
done by Amonton I. It has been observed that the M--+KS=F
relative motion between the sliding metallic objects dt2
is very complex and jerky' though it appears to be where S is the displacement of the measuring
smooth. The relative motion consists of momentary surface (i.e. slider) from its equilibrium position;
pauses between the positions of rapid slip. M, the mass of the sliding system; K, the spring
In the case of textile materials, it becomes even constant of the elastic constraining mechanism; and
more difficult to explain the frictional behaviour'r", F, the frictional force at the surface on which the
This is mainly due to high variability among the mass is sliding. This equation is based on the
specimens in their surface characteristics. Also, assumption that the kinetic friction between the
their mechanical properties are complex due to the two surfaces is Coulombic, i.e. the frictional force
viscoelastic nature of the material. The static remains constant during the sliding. Lyons and
charges generated on the specimen surface add to Scheier" modified this equation by assuming that
difficulties in obtaining consistent experimental the resistance to the motion of the slider during the
results. slip phase has Coulombic as well as viscous
Several researchers have studied the frictional component. The viscous resistance decreases in
properties or different types of fibres, yams and direct proportion as the velocity of slipping. The
fabrics3-27. Some of these researchers have total frictional resistance then becomes [F-
observed that the frictional behaviour between G(dS/dt)] instead of F in the above equation. Here,
certain materials is of the stick-slip type9,17,18,23,24,27. G is a constant. The modified equation is :
202 INDIAN J. FIBRE TEXT. RES., DECEMBER 1998

2
phase and a constant frictional resistance for the
Md S +GdS +KS=F slip deceleration phase.
dt2 dt Except for Lyons and Scheier", all other
Derjaguin et al.29 considered a sudden drop of researchers have studied the theory of stick-slip
static friction to a lower kinetic friction at the start phenomenon in metal-on-metal. The type of kinetic
of slip, followed by a constant kinetic friction. friction assumed by them is highly complicated,
Hunt et al.30 proposed that friction depends on but at the same time not based on any physical
acceleration as well as velocity. But Brockley et explanation as to why the friction should behave in
al" demonstrated that the error involved in the way they have assumed. We feel that the
computing slider amplitude with respect to driver observation by Brockley et at.3! that "the error
velocity, by assuming constant kinetic friction involved in computing slider amplitude with
instead of a velocity dependent friction, is quite respect to driver velocity, by assuming constant
negligible. Banerjee" assumed a steady state kinetic friction instead of a velocity-dependent
nonlinear velocity-dependent function to calculate friction, is quite negligible" should be given more
critical velocity. Critical velocity means velocity of weightage than assuming highly complicated
the driven surface at which stick-slip motion kinetic frictional force.
changes to smooth sliding. Banerjee assumed It is an accepted fact that friction depends on
kinetic frictional force of the type: many variables like the substances in contact, the

F.
dx (dx)2
-a.-+~ -
surface asperities, the relative velocity between the
surfaces, the normal reaction between them, the
o dt dt localised fusion that might be taking place at the
where x is the displacement of the slider with point of contact between the two surfaces, etc. In
respect to a fixed frame of reference; and Fo, a and viscoelastic materials like textile fibres, the time
B, the constants for the particular experimental set- for which the substances are in contact would also
up. Driving mechanism is a spring and a dashpot as matter as the asperities in contact would get
shown in Fig.I. The equation of motion obtained distorted more and more with time. It seems that
by him is: the task of predicting the precise nature of friction
is almost impossible.
d1x
m-+c
[fix
--v
]
+k(x-J-1-xo)+Fo-a-
fix
The stick-slip motion observed in textile fibres
df ~ ~
has very high amplitude. To study it theoretically,
+ p(:J =0
it is therefore assumed in this work that there are
two distinct frictional forces between the fibre
where k is the spring constant; xo, the initial masses. One is the static frictional force when there
position of the mass m at rest; v, the driver is no relative motion between the fibre pads and the
velocity; and c, the coefficient of damping. He other is the dynamic frictional force when the pads
showed that at high damping levels, as the driver move relative to each other. This assumption is in
velocity is increased, the slider velocity approaches line with that made by Bowden and Tabor',
the driver velocity and beyond a certain driver Derjaguin'", and some other workers". For
velocity there is no stick-slip motion. simplicity, we have assumed that the dynamic
Cockerham and Symmons" assumed a frictional force is constant and does not change
discontinuous friction model which consists of a with velocity of the moving fibre pad. This simple
negative damping action for the slip acceleration assumption . is good enough to explain the
experimental results not only qualitatively but also
quantitatively.

2 Theory
>' ;> Consider a specimen holder of mass m (with
specimen on its lower face) placed on a surface
Fig.1 - Driving mechanism consisting of a spring and a
also lined with another specimen (may be of the
dash pot [m - mass of the slider, v- constant drive velocity,
k - stiffness of the spring, c - coefficient of damping of the same material). Let a string be attached to the
damper and x - displacement of the slider from a fixed point] specimen holder, as shown in Fig.2. The other end
, NACHANE et al.: THEORY OF STICK-SLIP EFFECT IN FRICTION 203

of the string is attached to a strain gauge which

senses tension in the string. Let the strain gauge be N
moving with a constant velocity v. This is normally
the experimental set-up in a friction test.
Initially, the tension in the string is zero. As the T

strain gauge starts moving, t1K string gets F

extended. This causes the development of tension T

in the string. But due to the normal reaction mg (g
is acceleration due to gravity) at the lower surface
on the specimen holder, a frictional force F
develops between the two contact surfaces. This
force just balances the tension in the string which Fig.2 - Forces acting on a fibre holder. The top of the lower
surface is some textile material. The bottom of the movable
extends at a constant rate v. Let K be the string
fibre holder is a pad of parallelised fibres held firmly at the
constant, i.e. the force required for unit extension leading end. [Mg - weight of the specimen holder,
of the string. This tension would increase at a N - normal reaction acting on the specimen holder,
constant rate Kv if it is assumed that the T - tension in the string and F - frictional force between the
load-extension curve for the string is linear. two surfaces in contact]

As this built-up tension in the string gets d2x.K Kvt F.-Fd

balanced by the frictional force, there is no net --+-x = --+--=---=- ... (3)
dt? m m m
force on the specimen holder. Therefore, it remains
stationary. A stage is later reached when the string Solution of this differential equation would give
tension becomes equal to the maximum frictional x as a function of I. Substituting this value of x in
force that can develop between the two surfaces. Eq.(2) one would be able to get tension T as a
This force is called as static frictional force F; The function of time. T is what is actually sensed by the
moment the tension T becomes greater than F; strain gauge. To evaluate the constants of
there is a net force acting on the holder which starts integration, the following initial conditions were
moving. And once the motion begins, the friction used:
drops to Fd called the dynamic frictional force. The dx
net force F acting on the holder is given by : x == 0 when I = 0; and - = 0 when I = 0
dl
F=T-Fd (J) The solution of the differential equation gives the
following relationship:
To determine the tension in the string at any F-Fd ~" I
instant after the holder has started moving, let us x=- sK cos[v'(Klm)tj]'-v(mIK)
start 'counting the time from the moment the holder F-F
begins to move. Tension in the string at t=0 would, vsin[~(Klm)t]+ d+vt s ... (4)
K
therefore, be equal to F" the static frictional force The velocity of the specimen holder (u) is given by
between 'the two surfaces in contact. There would the following relationship:
already be some extension m the string
dx [[;7.(F-' '] F, -Fd . ctrr:
corresponding to the tension F; In time I, the strain !/"-=I'-VCOS v\l\./m)( +-r=== sm[v(Klm)t}
dt .J(mK) ... (5)
gauge would have traversed a distance vt. In the
mean time, the holder would have moved by some Once the holder starts moving, it will continue
distance, say x. The additional extension (e) of the to move with the velocity u given by Eq.(5). As can
string during this interval will be e = VI - x. Thus, be seen from the equation, II is a function of time
tension in the string at any time I after the motion and of the experimental constants for a given
has started would be : particular case. If u becomes zero at any time I=/:; O.
the object comes to rest at that instant. It cannot
T=K (vt - xy+F; ... (2) start moving again till tension in the string becomes
equal to Fs, the static frictional force at this new
Substituting the above value of T in Eq.( 1) and plane of contact.
rearranging the terms, the equation of motion for Let us find out the condition. required for the
the specimen holder can be written as : object to come to rest and the time =t, at which the
204 INDIAN 1. FIBRE TEXT. RES., DECEMBER 1998

object comes to rest. Substituting u=O in Eq.(5), the where tmax is the time when the velocity u is
following condition is obtained: increasing; and tmin, the time when the velocity u is

tan [~(K / m) ts J = _ F.- Fd ... (6)

decreasing. To find out the relationship between
time tmax and tmin at which u=v, the following
• 2 ~(mK)v
relationship was used:
This condition is satisfied only for time t, such that tan[~(K I m )tmaJ = tan [11" + ~(K I m ) tmax 1
~(K / m)~ > 2: i.e.rc-n ~(m/ K) Therefore,
2 2 tmin - tmax = 11" ~(m I K) ... (9)
Thus, for t s 1[ ~(m / K), the holder cannot Velocity u changes cyclically with a period
come to rest. To find out ts> the following 21[~(m I K). It becomes equal to the crosshead
relationship was taken: speed v at time Imax corresponding to maximum
~(K I m)~=!!.- + 0 tension. At time tmin, the velocity of the object is
2 2 again equal to v when u is decreasing, i.e. tmin
This gives corresponds to the minimum tension. After
C\
~=tan
.Jl---
v ~(niK)]
... (7)
reaching the minimum tension the holder comes to
rest in time tmax.
F.-~ Let us now consider the variation in the string
As the specimen holder starts moving and gains tension with respect to time t. On substituting the
in velocity, the rate of extension of the string gets value of x in Eq.(2) from Eq.(4) and simplifying
reduced. But it is still extending and rising in and rearranging the terms, we get
tension. When the velocity of the holder equals v, T = Fd + (F, - Fd)COS[~(K I m)t]
there is no net increase in extension and tension of
the string. For a velocity greater than the cross head +Y~(mK)sin[~(Klm)t] ... (10)
speed, the string extension and tension are To arrive at the maximum tension (Tmax), substitute
diminished. At some time, the string tension t by tmax• Thus, Eq.(10) becomes
becomes equal to Fd• This corresponds to the Tmax = Fd +(F, - Fd)COS[~(K Im)tmaxl
maximum velocity of the holder. The holder moves
+ Y~(mK)sin[~(K I m)tmax]
further with this velocity, reducing the string
tension still further. Tension T is now less than Fd• Substituting for cas [~(K I m) tm.J and sin [~(K i m) tmaxl
Thus, there is a net retardation force that tends to
from Eq.(8), we get
reduce the velocity of the specimen holder. A stage
Tmax = Fd + [(F, - Fd)2 + y2mKf5 ... (11)
comes when the velocity of the holder becomes
equal to the crosshead speed. Here, the reduction in Similarly, to find the minimum tension (Tmin)'
extension of the string stops. Tension at this time substitute t by tmin and use the value of tmin from
corresponds to the minimum tension observed in Eq.(9). On simplifying, we get
the string. As the velocity reduces still further, Tmin = Fd -[(F, - Fd)2 + y2mKf5 ... (12)
extension in the string starts giving rise to increase
in tension. Ultimately the holder comes to rest and 3 Materials and Methods
the string tension starts following its load-extension In two specially designed clamps, the fibre tufts
curve till the tension equals F; Thus, the peaks and prepared from a cotton sample were held as shown
troughs observed in the frictional test exhibiting in Fig. 3. One clamp was placed' over the other in
stick-slip effect correspond to the times when the such a way that the fibre beards pointed in opposite
velocity of the holder (u) is equal to the crosshead directions. The lower clamp was held stationary
speed v. and the upper clamp was attached to the load cell
Now let us find out the time when u=v. of the Instron tensile tester by a string going round
Substituting v for u in Eq.(5), we get a frictionless pulley. As the Instron crosshead
tan [~(K / m) tmax] = tan [ ~(K/m) tmin] moved up, tension developed in the string. This
tension was recorded with respect to time. A string
= v.J{mK) made of nylon filaments was used in the study .
. . . (8)
F. -Fd Different crosshead speeds were employed.
 NACHANE et al.: THEORY OF STICK-SLIP EFFECT IN FRICTION 205

4 Results and Discussion while for crosshead speed below 1 mm/min, the
It may be seen from a representative stick-slip friction at the pulley transforming the vertical pull
curve (Fig. 4) that the time interval during which into horizontal tension in the nylon string rendered
the actual slippage of the sliding specimen holder the measurement of string tension somewhat
takes place is of the order of a tenth of a second. It inaccurate. Therefore, the crosshead speeds ranging
was, therefore, not possible to determine from 1 mm/min to 100 mm/min only were used in
experimentally the exact time period over which the present study.
anyone single slippage occurred for any crosshead Tension in the string with reference to time was
speed. Between the two slips, however, there was recorded for a period corresponding to the total
no movement of the holder for a long interval of displacement of the holder by 8 mm. The holder
time depending on the crosshead speed and the was of mass 30 g. During the stick period when the
average difference between the static and dynamic string extended at the rate of crosshead speed, it
frictional forces. was observed that for the period just after the slip
Table 1 shows the experimentally observed completed and the holder had come to rest, the rate
values of Fs-Fd, total time for one period of slip of increase in the tension was faster but it slowed
and stick together and the distance travelled per down as time passed. This effect was prominent for
slip by the holder. For crosshead speed greater than slower crosshead speed as compared to faster ones.
100 mm/min, no stick-slip effect was observed, Also, for more drop in tension during a slip, this
non-linearity in the change in string tension was
observed to be more. This is due to the occurrencf
of inverse relaxation in the nylon string when there
is drop in its tension34,3s. String constant K of the
string was 40,000 dynes/em (400 mN/cm).

~8o..------------------...,

~ 140
z
\oj
••120

100

.800~-----~12----2~4---~~---~~~-~60

(0 ) ( b) TIME, S

Fig.3 - Fibre holder with cotton fibres held in it: (a) side Fig.4 - A typical curve showing stick-slip effect (crosshead
view, and (b) top view speed=lOmmlmin)

Table I- Comparison of theoretical and experimental values for nylon string

Crosshead
speed
mm/min Experimental Calculated
Experimental Total time for Av.distance Time per slip Distance
value ofF. - Fd one slip+stick, s travelled per s travelled per
dynes slip, em slip, cm

100 1225 0.374 0.0817 0.0942 0.0773

50 1550 1.060 0.0882 0.0860 0.0789
20 2300 3.375 0.1125 0.0844 0.1114
10 2400 7.250 0.1210 0.0852 0.1181
5 1800 12.100 0.1010 0.0902 0.0991
2 2400 39.000 0.1300 0.0864 0.1210
I 2140 69.800 0.1160 0.0893 0.1154
206 INDIAN 1. FIBRE TEXT. RES., DECEMBER 1998

Using all these experimental values, the velocity Table 2 - Velocity of the object, its displacement and tension
of the holder during slip as a function of time was developed in the string for crosshead velocity 0.1667cm/s
calculated by using Eq.(S). Tables 2-4 give the [Dynamic frictional force (Fd)=17,885 dynes]
change in velocity of the holder for three of the
Time Velocity (u) Displacement (x) Tension (7)
seven crosshead speeds studied, viz. 100 mm/min, s cm/s em dynes
10 mm/min and I mm/min, till the velocity just 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 19110.0
became negative. Physical meaning of the negative 0.0002 0.0082 0.0000 19111.3
velocity is that the holder comes to rest at that time. 0.0020 0.0820 0.0001 19120.0
0.0040 0.1645 0.0003 19123.5
A similar trend is observed at the other crosshead
0.0300 1.0853 0.0176 18610.1
speeds. It is observed from the tables that the time 0.0500 1.2939 0.0423 17757.6
taken by the holder to reach crosshead velocity is 0.0700 0.9300 0.0654 16969.7
less than a thousandth of a second and the total 0.0900 0.1786 0.0769 16646.6
0.0942 0.0057 0.0773 16659.1
time per slip is less than one tenth of a second.
0.0944 -0.0024 0.0773 16660.4
Also, the maximum velocity attained is very high
as compared to the crosshead speed. These Table 3 - Velocity of the object, its displacement and tension
calculations show why it is not possible to developed in the string for crosshead.velocity 0.01667cm/s
[Dynamic frictional force (Fd)=17,220 dynes]
determine the. time per slip experimentally.
Tmax and Tmin values corresponding to maximum Time Velocity (u) Displacement (x) Tension (7)
s cm/s em dynes
tension and minimum tension as calculated by Eqs
(11) and (12) respectively (see Tables) are almost 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 19620.0
0.0002 0.0160 0.0000 19620.1
equal to F; and 2Fd-Fs. Hence, assuming the peak
0.0010 0.0800 0.0000 19619.0
as the static frictional force, and the mean of the 0.0040 0.3190 0.0006 19596.4
peak and trough as the dynamic frictional force in 0.0100 0.7830 0.0040 19463.9
these experiments is quite reasonable. The 0.0300 1.9452 0.0325 18301.2
displacement values in Tables 2-4 were calculated 0.0600 1.7443 0.0943 15779.2
0.0800 0.4164 0.1170 14861.4
by using Eq. (4). The calculated values of total 14820.0
0.0852 0.0026 0.1181
displacement per slip are given in Table 1. These 0.0853 -0.0054 0.1181 14820.1
values are quite in agreement with the values
Table 4 - Velocity of the object, its displacement and tension
determined experimentally.
developed in the string for crosshead velocity 0.001667cm/s
Since cotton is a highly variable material, it is [Dynamic frictional force (Fd)=17,980 dynes]
difficult to say anything about the relation between
Time Velocity (u) Displacement (x) Tension (7)
the rate of dragging and Fs-Fd between the cotton s cm/s em dynes
surfaces. But as a general rule", it is known that the
0.00000 0.0000 0.0000 21120.0
difference between static friction and dynamic 0.00004 0.0029 0.0000 21120.0
friction decreases at higher speeds. Assuming a 0.00400 0.2844 0.0006 21099.1
smaller difference of 300 dynes between F, and Fs. 0.01000 0.6988 0.0035 20989.5
Fd to be 17900 dynes and using m and K 0.03000 1.7651 0.0292 20036.3
corresponding to the present experimental set-up,
0.06000 1.7416 o.oan 17881.3
0.08000 0.6549 0.1123 16954.1
for a crosshead speed of 200 mm/min, variation in 0.08900 0.0248 0.1154 16840.1
tension in the string has been calculated with 0.08934 0.0005 0.1154 16840.0
respect to time by using Eq.( I0). This is shown in 0.08936 -0.0009 0.1154 16840.0
Fig.5. It may be seen from the Fig.5 that one
complete cycle of stick-slip takes place over a average value of tension for such short intervals of
period of less than 0.2 second. Variation in tension time. The tension curve would appear to be smooth
about the mean value is about 2% of the mean and would correspond to the dynamic tension
value. Fig.S(b) shows how slip and stick are almost between the fibres at those specific positions of the
equal, giving rise to a smooth sinusoidal variation specimen holder. Thus, for static and dynamic
in tension of the string. For any strain gauge, frictions of approximately 20000 dynes with a
generally, it is difficult to measure such small difference of about 300 dynes between them, one
variations in tension over such short periods like would observe almost smooth movement of the
0.2 second. Therefore, it would measure only an specimen holder at a crosshead (driver) speed of
 NACHANE et al.: THEORY OF STICK-SLIP EFFECT IN FRICTION 207

attempted. However, similar studies can be made

200 by varying the one or more ofthese parameters.
It is not possible to predict the exact frictional
1!50 behaviour even between two metal surfaces.
Friction is a highly complex phenomenon
depending on various factors. It depends on the
100
materials involved, i.e. the adhesive force between
the molecules of the materials. Frictional force
!50 does not depend on the actual area of contact as
z long as the latter is not very small or very large.
E
,. When the surfaces are rough, the pressure over
z 0 0·15 1·0 I· 15 2·0
0
contact spots will be large indeed. Localised fusion
!
... 184
of materials would occur necessitating a higher
force to separate the rough surfaces. On the other
182 hand, when the two surfaces are very smooth, there
would be a large number of molecules in one
180 surface in the vicinity of molecules in the other
surface, thus increasing the total adhesive force. In
118 fact, for highly smooth surfaces, it has been
observed that the frictional force can be as high as
176
ten times the normal reaction.
174~ ~ ~ ~~
Normally, the surfaces of a material are covered
1·36 1·46 1·156 1·66
TIME, S
with adherent oxides and gas molecules including
water molecules. Therefore, the frictional force
Fig.5 - (a) Variation of tension calculated by using Eq.12 for between the surfaces of different materials may not
a crosshead speed of 200 mmlmin, Fd=17,900 dynes and
truely represent the material property. It may
F,-Fd=300dynes. At this fast speed, one cycle of stick-slip
takes place in less than 0.2 s. Normally, no strain gauge is able depend on the level of oxidation and on the amount
to measure this variation in such a short time of adhesive gas or water vapour present on the
(b) Magnification of a portion of the curve surface. In the case of textile materials, oxidation
does not occur at room temperature, but adhesion
200 mmlmin, as the experimental set-up will not be of gas molecules and particularly water molecules
able to show stick-slip effect. What these does affect the friction considerably.
calculations mean is that for small differences in F, In the context of present experiments, it may be
and Fd and high driver velocities, the stick-slip said that the asperities in contact will undergo
effect may not be observed due to the experimental deformation. This deformation is viscoelastic in
limitations, though the actual motion may be jerky, nature. The adhesive force between these surfaces
i.e. consisting of stick and slip parts. in actual contact determines the static frictional
The values of F, and Fd are not constant over the force. Once the relative motion between the
entire length of the surface. However, it was surfaces begins, the deformation of the asperities is
observed that the variation in F, and Fd was small, reduced because the time of contact between
thus making it possible to apply the equations using asperities is reduced. The adhesive force between
their average values. It may be seen from Table I the two surfaces in relative motion is therefore
that the theoretically calculated and experimentally diminished, giving rise to a lower value for
observed values of the distance travelled per slip dynamic friction as compared to the static friction.
agree quite well. When the crosshead velocity is high, the time over
The relationships derived here show that the which the fibre holder remains stationary between
extent of stick-slip effect is dependent not only on the two consecutive slips is quite low. For example,
the difference between the static and dynamic it will be of the order of tenth of a second when the
frictional force but also on other experimental crosshead speed is 200 mm/min. This being too
variables like m, K and v. In the present short an interval, would not permit viscoelastic
experimental study, variation of valone has been deformation to occur and therefore only a small,
208 INDIAN 1. FIBRE TEXT. RES., DECEMBER 1998

often undetectable difference could be expected 13 Howell H G, Text ResJ, 23 (1953) 589-591.
between the static and dynamic frictional forces. 14 Roder H L, J Text Inst, 44 (1953) T247-T265.
15 Wood C, J Text Inst, 45 (1954) T794- T802.
5 Conclusions 16 Lord E, J Text Inst, 46 (1955) P41-P58.
The theoretical relationships developed in this 17 Roder H L, J Text Inst, 46 (1955) P84-PI03.
18 Mazur J, J Text Inst, 46 (1955) T712-T714.
study explain the observed frictional behaviour in 19 Nanjundayya C, J Sci Ind Res, 17A (1958) 412-417.
textile materials. The occurrence of stick-slip effect 20 duBois W F, Text Res J, 29 (1959) 451-466.
is explained. Application of the theory to some 21 Howell H G, Meiszkis K W & Tabor D, Friction in
experimental data shows good agreement between textiles, (Butterworths Scientific Publications, London),
1959,263.
the calculated and observed values. Stick-slip
22 Viswanathan A, J Text Inst, 57 (1966) T30-T41.
effect depends on various factors like the 23 Hearle J W S & Hussain A K M M, J Text Inst, 62 (1971)
difference between static and dynamic friction, T83-TJ07.
mass of the fibre pad holder, elastic constant of the 24 Morton W E & Hearle J W S, Physical properties of textile
string used for pulling the specimen holder and the fibres, 2nd edn (The Textile Institute, Manchester), 1975,
660.
velocity with which the string is pulled. 25 Subramaniam V, Sreenivasan K & Pillay K P R, Indian J
Text Res, 6 (1981) 8-15.
References 26 Subrarnaniam V, Sreenivasan K & Pillay K P R, Indian J
1 Bowden F P & Tabor 0, Friction and lubrication of solids, Text Res, 6 (1981) 16-21.
(The University Press, Oxford), 1954, I. 27 Ajayi J 0, Text Res J, 62 (1992) 52-59.
2 Newman F H & Searle V H L, The general properties 0/ 28 Lyons W J & Scheier S C, J App/ Phys, 366 (1965)
matter, 5th edn (Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd), 1962, 2020-2023.
247. 29 Derjaguin B V, Push V E & Tolstoi D M, Proc ..
3 Navkal H & Turner A J, JText Inst, 21 (1930) T511-T523. Conference on lubrication and wear, (Institute of
4 Iyengar R L N, Indian J Agricult Sci, 3 (1933) 320-333. Mechanical Engineering, London,) 1957, 255-268.
5 Sen K R & Ahmad N, J Text Inst, 29 (1938) T258-T279. 30 Hunt J B, Torbe I & Spencer G C, Wear, 8 (1965) 455.
6 Sen K R & Ahmad N, Indian Text J, 49 (1938-39) 239- 31 Brockley C A, Cameron R & Potter A F, Friction induced
240. vibration, Trans ASME, Ser D, J Basic Eng, ASME Paper
7 Mercer E H & Makinson K R, J Text Inst, 38 (1947) No. 65-Lub.5, 1-7.
T227-T240. 32 Banerjee A K, Wear, 12 (1968) 107-116.
8 Lindberg J & Gralen N, Text Res J, 18 (1948) 287-30 I. 33 Cockerham G & Symmons G R, Wear, 40 (1976) 113-120.
9 Olofsson B & Gralen N, Text ResJ, 20 (1950) 467-476. 34 Nachane R P, Hussain G F S, Patel G S & Krishna Iyer K
IO Postle L J & Ingham J, J Text Inst, 43 (1952) T77-T90. R, J Appl Po/ym Sci, 31 (1986) 1101-1110.
11 Wood C, JText Inst, 43 (1952) T338-T349. 35 Nachane R P, Hussain G F S, Patel G S & Krishna Iyer K
12 Hood B G, Text Res J, 23 (1953) 495-505. R, J App/ Po/ym Sci. 38 (1989) 21-27.