Analysis and comparison of mechanical and laser texturing

Demófilo Maldonado Cortés, Laura Peña-Parás, Martha Rodriguez-Villalobos, Roberto Schroeder-Sol, Manuel Balderas-De-la-rosa, Rodolfo Lara-Cuevas, Daniel Quintanilla-Correa

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Many have been the efforts to improve the tribocharacteristics in surfaces under load, contact and relative movement. There are well-documented technologies such as heat treatments, new materials, improved lubricants, and more recently surface texturing which can be applied to surfaces by different methods such as micro-machining, laser or mechanical deformation in order to improve tribo characteristics. The objective of this work is to compare the tribological performance (Coefficient of friction (COF) and wear) at the laboratory level of mechanical texturing (MT) and surface laser texturing (LST); for this a statistical comparison between a determined mechanical texture (MT) and laser texture (LST) patterns are analysed in this project, as well as the development of a mechanic (not electric) (machine specifically designed and manufactured for this project) that can create the mechanical texturing (MT). The objective fi this research is to determine if mechanically texturizing in aluminium disc results in better wear and coefficient of friction (COF) reductions (tribo characteristics), compared to a laser textured pattern (LST) with the same characteristics. First a tuning process was developed at the tribotester in order to determine the best specifications of the laser texturing (LST) that could replicate, with a difference of at most 10%, the volume of a single micro-cavity. An Alicona surface analyser was used for the 3d measurements of the texturized patterns. A pin-on-disk (T-11 tribotester) with a load of 1.5 kg, 7 mm of turning radius on the disk, and 0.05 ml of PAO-IV lubricant applied at the beginning of the test were used in three tests of 7200 seconds each to determine the wear and COF of the 3 different textures: mechanical texturing (MT), laser texturing (LST), and no texturing. 3 replications were done for each of the textures. COF was found to be optimal at no texturing, due to aluminium oxide appearing in the test, which reduces the friction between surfaces, decreasing proportionally as the face-to-face contact area increases. Wear along the track was found to be best in the mechanical texturing, with a decrease of 34.7% compared to laser texturing (LST). Some conclusions and recommendations for the use of the mechanical texturing (MT) are also shown in this paper.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)35-44
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Journal of Modern Manufacturing Technologies
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, ModTech Publishing House. All rights reserved.

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering


Dive into the research topics of 'Analysis and comparison of mechanical and laser texturing'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this