Article

Dynamic Wear Modeling and Experimental Verification of Guide

Cone in Passive Compliant Connectors Based on the Archard Model
Yuanping He 1 , Bowen Wang 1,2, *, Feifei Zhao 1, *, Xingfu Hong 1, *, Liang Fang 1 , Weihao Xu 3,4 , Ming Liao 1
and Fujing Tian 1

1 High Speed Aerodynamics Institute, China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center,
Mianyang 621000, China; [email protected] (Y.H.); [email protected] (L.F.);
[email protected] (M.L.); [email protected] (F.T.)
2 School of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology,
Wuhan 430074, China
3 College of Mechanical and Carrier Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China;
[email protected]
4 Chongqing Jiangheng Technology Co., Ltd., Chongqing 400030, China
* Correspondence: [email protected] (B.W.); [email protected] (F.Z.); [email protected] (X.H.)

Abstract
To address the wear life prediction challenge of Guide Cones in passive compliant con-
nectors under dynamic loads within specialized equipment, this study proposes a dy-
namic wear modeling and life assessment method based on the improved Archard model.
Through integrated theoretical modeling, finite element simulation, and experimental
validation, we establish a bidirectional coupling framework analyzing dynamic contact me-
chanics and wear evolution. By developing phased contact state identification criteria and
geometric constraints, a transient load calculation model is established, revealing dynamic
load characteristics with peak contact forces reaching 206.34 N. A dynamic contact stress
integration algorithm is proposed by combining Archard’s theory with ABAQUS finite
element simulation and ALE adaptive meshing technology, enabling real-time iterative
updates of wear morphology and contact stress. This approach constructs an exponential
model correlating cumulative wear depth with docking cycles (R2 = 0.997). Prototype
Academic Editor: Vlasis Mavrantzas experiments demonstrate a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) of 14.6% between
Received: 14 June 2025
simulated and measured wear depths, confirming model validity. With a critical wear
Revised: 25 July 2025 threshold of 0.8 mm, the predicted service life reaches 45,270 cycles, meeting 50-year opera-
Accepted: 27 July 2025 tional requirements (safety margin: 50.9%). This research provides theoretical frameworks
Published: 30 July 2025 and engineering guidelines for wear-resistant design, material selection, and life evaluation
Citation: He, Y.; Wang, B.; Zhao, F.; in high-reliability automatic docking systems.
Hong, X.; Fang, L.; Xu, W.; Liao, M.;
Tian, F. Dynamic Wear Modeling and Keywords: passive compliant connector; automatic docking system; guide cone wear;
Experimental Verification of Guide
Archard model; finite element simulation; life prediction
Cone in Passive Compliant Connectors
Based on the Archard Model. Polymers
2025, 17, 2091. https://doi.org/
10.3390/polym17152091
1. Introduction
Copyright: © 2025 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
In specialized equipment experiments, unmanned automatic docking of electrical
This article is an open access article circuits, pneumatic lines, optical fibers, and other pipelines for model transport vehi-
distributed under the terms and cles presents significant technical demands. Dynamic wear control in automatic docking
conditions of the Creative Commons systems has become a critical challenge to ensure operational safety and long-term reliabil-
Attribution (CC BY) license
ity [1,2], particularly given the accelerated degradation of conventional metallic guide com-
(https://creativecommons.org/
ponents under frequent docking cycles. Current docking technologies are predominantly
licenses/by/4.0/).

Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 https://doi.org/10.3390/polym17152091

Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 2 of 20

categorized into active compliance systems and passive compliance mechanisms [3–6].
Active compliance systems utilize multi-degree-of-freedom servo motor coordination to
achieve high positioning accuracy (0.1 mm), but their implementation requires complex
control architectures involving over 12 synchronized sensors, resulting in substantial
costs [7]. Conversely, passive compliance mechanisms employ elastic elements and multi-
degree-of-freedom (multi-DOF) platforms yet face inherent limitations: intricate stiffness
design requirements and accelerated Guide Cone wear induced by residual preload forces,
which degrade docking precision and reliability [8]. To address these challenges, this
study develops a novel passive compliant connector docking system featuring an adaptive
correction mechanism between the guide rod (supply side) and Guide Cone (receiving
side). This design minimizes hardware costs and simplifies control architecture while
prioritizing the resolution of wear life issues caused by frequent plug-in/extraction cy-
cles. Material innovation—specifically advanced polymer composites—represents an
essential pathway to overcome these tribological constraints while maintaining passive
compliance advantages.
Recent advancements in wear prediction models follow three convergent trajectories:
mechanistic refinement, numerical pragmatism, and data-driven integration [9–14]. Ar-
chard’s adhesive wear theory remains foundational, establishing wear volume proportion-
ality to load and sliding distance, and inverse proportionality to material hardness [15–18].
Subsequent developments include Suh’s delamination theory, which incorporates strain
accumulation effects to elucidate subsurface crack propagation mechanisms [19], and Jacob-
son’s multi-abrasive statistical model, which quantifies surface roughness impacts on wear
rates [20]. Numerical simulations have progressed through Kapoor’s integration of load,
roughness, and elastoplastic material behavior for wear depth calculations [21]; Flašker’s fa-
tigue wear model based on fracture mechanics [22]; and Franklin’s microstructure-sensitive
predictions using crystal plasticity finite element methods [23]. Significantly, Harnafi
et al. recently developed a semi-analytical 3D model specifically for plain bearings in
aero-engine variable stator vane (VSV) systems, addressing combined oscillatory loads
(±1◦ , 100 Hz) and large-angle rotations (±30◦ ) [17]. These advances provide critical
foundations for implementing polymer composites in docking systems—a high-potential
solution space currently underexplored in the literature on connector wear. While notable
progress has been achieved in wear modeling for mechanical components under typical
conditions [24–28]—exemplified by Saad Mukras’ iterative Archard-based wear prediction
for crank-slider mechanisms [24]—existing models assume steady-state contact conditions.
This limitation renders them inadequate for analyzing transient load characteristics during
guide rod/cone docking processes, where dynamic material responses under time-varying
contact stresses remain unaddressed.
To resolve wear issues in passive connector docking systems caused by frequent plug-
in/extraction cycles, with particular emphasis on material-driven solutions, this study
employs a multidisciplinary approach to address three key challenges in dynamic wear
modeling: (1) analytical derivation of time-varying contact forces through dynamic me-
chanical analysis during Guide Cone insertion/extraction; (2) development of a dynamic
contact stress integration strategy based on Archard theory, enabling bidirectional coupling
simulation of surface morphology and contact stress evolution; and (3) prototype validation
demonstrating high prediction accuracy while establishing quantitative benchmarks for
future polymer implementations. The proposed methodology establishes a theoretical
framework for optimizing high-reliability automatic docking systems, prioritizing mate-
rial innovation through polymer composites to advance the intelligent development of
specialized equipment.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 3 of 20

2. Design and Dynamic Contact Mechanics of Passive Compliant

Connector System
2.1. Structural Configuration of Passive Compliant Connector
2.1.1. Supply/Receiving Side Components
As illustrated in Figure 1, the connector automatic docking system comprises three
subsystems: the supply side, receiving side, and control system. The supply side integrates
a propulsion mechanism, homing mechanism, adaptive mechanism, and docking female
panel. The receiving side consists of a docking male panel fixed to the model transport
equipment. Multifunctional interface modules—including power, communication, control,
and pneumatic connectors—are embedded in both male and female panels, achieving
physical–functional integrated interconnection through monolithic board-level docking
design. The control system employs a dual-motor cooperative drive architecture: a primary
drive motor enables active positioning along a unidirectional axis, while a guide rod–cone
kinematic pair provides passive five-degree-of-freedom correction.

Figure 1. Passive compliant connector automatic docking system: (a) overall system, (b) connector
female panel, and (c) receiving side.

2.1.2. Hybrid Control Strategy

This configuration establishes a hybrid “active drive + passive correction” control
strategy, as detailed in Figure 2. The docking process consists of two critical phases, as
depicted in Figure 2b,c:
(1) The Pre-Alignment Phase: During this stage (Figure 2b), the adaptive mechanism
locks the female panel to ensure precise insertion of the guide rod into the conical
surface of the Guide Cone.
(2) The Compliant Adjustment Phase: Following guide pair engagement (Figure 2c), the
female panel constraints are released, enabling the system to switch to compliant
mode for pose adaptive correction. A dynamic force monitoring module continuously
acquires contact force signals to prevent overload damage. The complete docking
sequence is detailed in Figure 3.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 4 of 20

Figure 2. Adaptive mechanism: (a) overall structure, (b) fixed state of adaptive plate, and (c) anti
loosening state of adaptive plate.

Figure 3. Single docking process of automatic docking system.

The dual-motor cooperative control system executes distinct functions:

(1) The primary drive motor achieves positioning accuracy along the docking axis.
(2) The adaptive mechanism regulates homing cone displacement through motorized lead
screw actuation, enabling female panel fixation/release state transitions (Figure 2a).
During guide pair coupling, the system autonomously compensates for initial pose
deviations via geometric constraints, ensuring reliable connector engagement under
low contact forces. This design synergizes multi-DOF cooperative control with mod-
ular interface integration, enhancing positioning reliability in complex operational
scenarios compared to conventional systems.

2.2. Phased Contact State Analysis

The wear depth of Guide Cones ultimately determines the docking functionality and
precision of connectors [10]. To analyze the wear life of Guide Cones, a systematic investi-
gation of their load distribution is a prerequisite. Based on the relative positioning between
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 5 of 20

guide rods and cones, the docking process is categorized into four sequential phases, the
First Fillet Phase, Second Fillet Phase, Single-Point Contact Phase, and Two-Point Contact
Phase [8], as illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Different stages of docking system: (a) First Fillet Phase, (b) Second Fillet Phase, (c) Single
Point Contact Phase, (d) Two-Point Contact Phase.

2.2.1. Geometric Discrimination Criteria

The phase terminates when stable contact is established between the cylindrical surface
of the guide rod and the inner bore surface of the Guide Cone following sliding along the
conical surface. A contact state identification criterion must be established to determine the
coupling relationships within the guide pair (rod–cone system), as detailed in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Judgment of contact state: (a) single-point contact; (b) two-point contact.

Under gravitational effects, the lower guide rod initially makes contact with the lower
cone (Figure 5a). Three critical points are defined: contact point A (lower cone), potential
contact point B (upper cone front), and theoretical contact point C. Geometric analysis
reveals that
1
l BC = l AC − l AB = l AD ( − 1) (1)
cos θ
When lBC > 0 holds for all θ ∈ (0, π/2), the system maintains single-point contact with
exclusive load bearing by the lower guide pair.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 6 of 20

Transition to the Two-Point Contact Phase occurs when the lower rod’s upper surface
contacts the cone’s inner surface (Figure 5b). In this configuration, contact point E on the
lower guide pair and potential contact points F/G on the upper pair satisfy

lGF = lGH − l FH = lGH (1 − cos θ ) (2)

This geometric constraint (lGF > 0) ensures exclusive load bearing by the lower guide
pair during two-point contact states.

2.2.2. Four-Phase Dynamic Force Modeling

(1) First Fillet Phase
During the initial docking phase, the propulsion mechanism drives the female panel
through a 5 mm displacement, triggering homing cone retraction. Subsequent release of
adaptive plate constraints allows gravitational deflection until the first fillet of the guide rod
establishes contact with the conical surface of the Guide Cone, achieving static equilibrium,
as shown in Figure 4a.
Given negligible higher-order nonlinear effects from connector gravity and plug-
in/extraction forces on panel tilt moments, a quasi-static model is developed. Defin-
ing initial conditions (t = t0 = 0 s), the static equilibrium equations for the guide pair
are formulated:


 N1 − N2 − f 3 cos γ − N2 sin γ = 0

 f 1 + f 2 + N3 cos γ − f 2 sin γ − mg = 0



 N1 sin θl1x + N3 cos(γ − θ )l3x = N1 cos θl1z + N2 sin θl2x + N2 cos θl2z



+ N3 sin(γ − θ )l3z + f 1 cos θl1x + f 1 sin θl1z + f 3 sin(γ − θ )l3x + f 3 cos(γ − θ )l3z (3)




 f 1 = µ1 N1
 f 2 = µ1 N2




f 3 = µ2 N3


where the Guide Cone bore chamfer angle γ = 15◦ ; angular displacement θ = 2.84◦ ; system
mass m = 12.2 kg; gravitational acceleration, g = 9.8 m/s2 ; friction coefficients are µ1 = 0.17
and µ2 = 0.15; and geometric dimensions are l1x = 90 mm, l1z = l2z = 101 mm, l2x = 70 mm,
l3x = 130.76 mm, and l3z = 94.94 mm.
(2) Second Fillet Phase
To simplify computational complexity, the transition between the first and second
fillet phases is assumed to be instantaneous. As shown in Figure 4b, the force equilibrium
equations remain identical to Equation (3), but with modified support force coordinates:
l3x = 110.2 + 25sin(γ − θ); l3z = 72.5 + 25cos(γ + θ).
(3) Single-Point Contact Phase
The force analysis diagram (Figure 4c) yields the following equilibrium equations:


 N1 − N2 − f 3 cos θ − N3 sin θ = 0

 f + f + N cos θ − f sin θ − mg = 0
1 2 3 3
(4)

 N 1 sin θl 1x + N l
3 3x + f 2 sin θl2x = N1 cos θl1z + N2 sin θl2x + N2 cos θl2z

+ f 1 cos θl1x + f 1 sin θl1z + f 2 cos θl2z + f 3 l3z


The geometric parameters are defined as l1x = 90 mm, l1z = l2z = 101 mm, l2x = 70 mm,
l3x = (110.2 − v0 (t − 7.25)/cosθ) mm, and l3z = 97.5 mm.
(4) Two-Point Contact Phase
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 7 of 20

As depicted in Figure 4d, the force equilibrium equations for this phase are derived as


 N1 − f 3 cos θ − N3 sin θ − f 4 = 0

 f + N cos θ − f sin θ − mg − N = 0
1 3 3 4
(5)

 N l
3 3x + N 1 sin θl 1x + f 4 sin θl 4x + f 1 cos θl1x + f 1 sin θl1z =

N4 cos θl4x + N4 sin θl4z + f 4 cos θl4z + f 3 l3z


The geometric parameters are specified as l1x = 90 mm, l1z = 101 mm,
l3x = (80.4-v0 (t − 12.445)/cosθ) mm, l3z = 97.5 mm, l4x = 110.2 mm, and l4z = 72.5 mm.
Figure 6a illustrates the positional relationship between the guide rod and cone at
the terminal moment of the single-point contact phase, coinciding with two-point contact
initiation. Figure 6b depicts the displaced configuration after supply-side movement
duration, t, where the guide rod exhibits a deflection angle θ 0 of 2.84◦ .

Figure 6. Schematic of guide rod insertion length vs. angular displacement: (a) pre-displacement
configuration of female panel; (b) post-displacement state.

The functional relationship between the guide rod insertion depth and angular dis-
placement at arbitrary time instants is formulated as
(
ly sin θ0 + lx cos θ0 − ly sin θ − lxt cos θ = v0 (t − 12.445)
(6)
(lx − lxt + 24.75) sin θ + D1 cos θ = D2

where lx = 179.4 mm, ly = 198.5 mm, D1 = 25 mm, and D2 = 26 mm.

A systematic four-phase contact analysis of the guide pair kinematics quantifies the
contact force distribution along the guide rod. Figure 7 demonstrates the temporal evolution
of pressure at each contact point.

0 ≤ t < 3.75


 67.22 
 21.75 0 ≤ t < 3.75
 61.16 3.75 ≤ t < 7.25
 
3.75 ≤ t < 7.25
 
  14.72

N1 = 351.6t − 12534
7.25 ≤ t < 12.55 N2 =  351.6t − 9059.1 7.25 ≤ t < 12.55

 t − 175.2  t − 175.2
 364.9

 

12.55 ≤ t ≤ 25 0 12.55 ≤ t ≤ 25
 
 t − 3.64 (7)

 112.64 0 ≤ t < 3.75
115.05 3.75 ≤ t < 7.25

 (


17429 0 0 ≤ t < 12.55
N3 = 7.25 ≤ t < 12.55 N4 = 2 − 13.37t + 210.5 12.55 ≤ t ≤ 25

 175.2 − t 0.2t
3989


12.55 ≤ t ≤ 25


t + 6.887
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 8 of 20

Figure 7. Temporal evolution of positive pressure at characteristic positions.

As shown in Figure 7, the calculated peak contact force of 206.34 N represents a system-
specific value derived from dynamic load analysis during the docking process. This peak
force originates from the inherent transient geometric constraints of the system, including
the total system mass (12.2 kg), initial tilt angle (θ = 2.84◦ ), friction coefficients (µ1 = 0.17 and
µ2 = 0.15), and key dimensional parameters. It is important to note that the peak contact
force value of 206.34 N is not universally generalizable. The force thresholds observed in
practical connectors are highly dependent on specific design and material properties.

3. Dynamic Wear Threshold and Modified Archard Theory

3.1. Functional Failure Criteria
The asymmetric surface contact characteristics of the guide pair (rod–cone system)
render explicit correlations between wear volume and docking cycles inherently challeng-
ing. This study adopts axial wear depth as the principal wear metric. Through geometric
constraint analysis and tolerance requirement resolution, the maximum permissible wear
depth W hmax of the Guide Cone is determined.
The angular adaptive mechanism within the guide pair progressively corrects pose
deviations at connector interfaces. As docking progresses, the progressive angular conver-
gence between the guide rod and cone reduces pose misalignment between connector pins
and sockets. Prior to docking engagement, the system must satisfy spatial pose constraints:
∆Z ≤ ±1 mm and ∆Y ≤ ±1 mm. As illustrated in Figure 8, when the wear depth reaches
the critical threshold (W h ≥ W hmax ), the pose correction capability degrades below design
tolerance thresholds.
Accumulated docking cycles induce monotonic growth in Guide Cone wear depth
W h , accompanied by progressive degradation of pose correction capability. Upon reaching
the critical threshold (W hmax ), the system loses docking functionality. The determination
of W hmax requires solving the Z-axis positional deviation (∆Z) between pin and socket
front edges, while X-axis deviations can be actively compensated by the substrate. The
governing geometric relationship is formulated as

∆Z = l DEz = lEAz − l DAz = (l FA − lEF sin α) − (lCD sin θ + lCB cos θ − l BA sin θ )
(8)
l FA = 15 + 0.5D2 + Whmax
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 9 of 20

where lDEz : the Z-axis distance between points D and E; lEAz : the Z-axis distance between
points E and A; lDAz : the Z-axis distance between points D and A; the pin extension length
from male panel lEF = 52 mm; the pin depression angle α = 1.7◦ ; the socket extension
length from female panel lCD = 17 mm; the interface span between connector components
lBA = 56 mm; and the Z-axis clearance between the connector and guide rod lCB = 15 mm.

Figure 8. A schematic diagram of the position of the connector pin and socket end during the
pre-docking stage.

At t = 16 s, the angular displacement reduces to θ = 1.65◦ . Based on connector

tolerance requirements (∆Z ≤ 1 mm), Equation (8) yields the theoretical maximum wear
depth W hmax = 0.91 mm. Incorporating a safety factor and machining tolerances, the design
threshold is conservatively set at W hmax = 0.8 mm.

3.2. Wear Depth Model Based on Archard Model

Under actual operating conditions, the pronounced time-varying characteristics of
contact loads render the classical Archard model inadequate for direct characterization. To
address this limitation, a modified Archard wear rate equation is formulated:

dV N (t)
= Km (9)
dL H
where the wear-related sliding distance is denoted as L (mm); the material Brinell hardness
is denoted as H(HB); the time-varying normal load is denoted as N(t)(N); and the dimen-
sionless wear coefficient is denoted as Km , experimentally determined through tribological
characterization of surface topography, friction regime, and lubrication conditions.
The axial wear depth dh is adopted as the evaluation metric, with its geometric
relationship to wear volume formulated as

dV
dh = (10)
A

where A represents the effective contact area (mm2 ) between the guide rod and cone.
The Guide Cone contact zone experiences time-dependent contact loads character-
ized by transient normal forces N(t). Consequently, the incremental wear depth can be
expressed as
vσ (t)
dh = Km dt (11)
H
Given the angular θ between the mechanism’s motion direction and the guide rod’s
actual sliding velocity vector, the effective sliding velocity is determined as v = v0 /cosθ. The
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 10 of 20

derived wear depth dh represents the orthogonal component relative to the sliding direction.
For practical measurement alignment with the Guide Cone’s end face orientation, this
depth is converted through the transformation dh0 = dhcosθ. Consequently, the modified
wear depth equation becomes

v0 σ ( t )
dh0 = dh cos θ = Km dt (12)
H
where v0 denotes the nominal sliding velocity along the mechanism’s primary motion axis.
Given the constant wear coefficient Km , Brinell hardness H, and nominal sliding
velocity v0 , the cumulative wear depth of the Guide Cone is derived by integrating over
the time domain [0, t]:
v0 t
Z
∆h(t) = Km σ (t)dt (13)
H 0
A discrete numerical method is implemented for iterative wear depth computation.
Each docking cycle is discretized into multiple incremental steps with the time step size ∆t,
where the contact stress σ is assumed constant within each step. The wear depth at the j-th
time step during the i-th docking cycle is formulated as

v0
∆h j,i = Km σ ∆t (14)
H j,i
where σj,i are the stress values at the jth time step after i wear cycles.
To simplify calculations, equivalent contact forces during insertion/extraction are
assumed. The total wear depth per complete docking cycle becomes

n
∆hi = 2 ∑ ∆h j,i (15)
j =1

The cumulative wear depth after m cycles is calculated as

m
2Km v0 ∆t m n
h(m) = ∑ ∆hi = H ∑ ∑ σj,i (16)
i =1 i =1 j

The wear coefficient Km = 3.3 × 10−5 is adopted based on experimental data from
prior studies [29].

4. Finite Element Simulation Methodology Based on ABAQUS

4.1. Material Properties and Boundary Conditions
As summarized in Table 1, the constitutive parameters define the material behavior.
Based on these properties, the Guide Cone is discretized with C3D8R hexahedral elements
with a global maximum mesh size of 1 mm. A multi-tiered meshing strategy was imple-
mented with localized refinement to 0.2 mm in critical contact zones. Mesh sensitivity
analysis confirmed convergence at this configuration, demonstrating <5% variation in peak
contact stress when the element size decreased below 0.2 mm while maintaining optimal
computational efficiency. In ABAQUS, contact pairs are defined with the Guide Cone
surface as the slave and the guide rod surface as the master, adhering to the principle of
assigning higher-stiffness components as master surfaces. Contact parameters include a
friction coefficient of 0.17, an augmented Lagrangian formulation, and a normal contact
stiffness factor of 0.1. During iterative wear simulation, ALE adaptive meshing dynamically
preserved element quality through nodal redistribution to accommodate surface morphol-
ogy changes, preventing mesh distortion while ensuring solution integrity. Boundary
conditions are configured as follows:
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 11 of 20

(1) Normal loads are applied along the guide rod’s contact point extension line, derived
from prior contact force calculations.
(2) Guide rod motion is constrained in X/Z directions (Ux = Uz = 0) with all rotational
degrees of freedom fixed (URx = URy = URz = 0).
(3) The Guide Cone is fully constrained at its base to simulate fixation on the male
panel, eliminating rigid body displacements while preserving Y-axis mobility for
docking simulation.

4.2. Computational Framework Implementation

This study establishes a multiphysics-coupled finite element model to quantitatively
analyze the mapping relationship between the Guide Cone wear depth (∆h) and docking
cycles (m), with the workflow detailed in Figure 9. The methodology involved several
principal phases: (1) construction of a three-dimensional model of the guide pair (rod-cone
system), incorporating material constitutive relationships and hexahedral meshing with a
maximum element size of 1 mm; (2) multi-step load application to extract nodal stress dis-
tributions at contact interfaces using ABAQUS/Standard; (3) implementation of Arbitrary
Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) adaptive meshing across the Guide Cone domain, where nodal
displacements induced by wear are governed by a custom Fortran subroutine (UMESHMO-
TION); and (4) iterative recalculation of contact stress fields following incremental mesh
updates until wear depth convergence. This bidirectional coupling framework enables
precise simulation of progressive wear morphology evolution through cyclic stress–wear
interactions. The feedback loop between surface morphology evolution and transient
contact mechanics is implemented through this UMESHMOTION subroutine, extending
beyond ABAQUS’ default unidirectional wear simulation capabilities.

Figure 9. Flow chart of finite element simulation of Guide Cone wear depth.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 12 of 20

Table 1. Material constitutive parameters of guiding pair.

Elastic Modulus E Vickers Hardness Brinell Hardness

Material Poisson’s Ratio v
(GPa) HV HB
Guide rod 40Cr 211 0.3
Guide cone ZQSn5-2 103 0.3 213.77 ± 3.26 202.77 ± 3.26

5. Experimental Validation
The prototype (Figure 10) integrates a high-precision motion control system (±0.1 mm/s
velocity accuracy) and force monitoring. Four Guide Cone specimens are tested: Specimens
1–3 (ZQSn5-2, HV 213.77 ± 3.26) and Specimen 4 (QSn6-6-3, HV 242.8 ± 2.15).

Figure 10. Connector automatic docking system: (a) prototype, (b) guide rod, and (c) guide cone.

The experimental procedure comprises four key phases:

(1) Baseline Parameter Measurement: A digital micrometer (1 µm resolution) is used to
perform quintuple axial measurements at predetermined wear zones of the Guide
Cone, with triplicate circumferential sampling (120◦ intervals) per axial position;
3σ-filtered mean values establish baseline inner diameters.
(2) Laser displacement sensors calibrate the receiver pose to meet spatial constraints:
∆Y ≤ 3 mm; ∆Z ≤ 3 mm. Gravity-induced constant contact between guide compo-
nents ensures wear consistency across initial pose variations.
(3) Cyclic Docking Test: Each specimen undergoes 1500 standardized docking cycles
(1.2 mm/s speed). Wear depth is quantified every 100 cycles through replicated
baseline measurement protocols.
(4) Wear Mechanism Investigation: Post-test specimens are sectioned via wire EDM and
analyzed using metallurgical microscopy (VHX6000, KEYENCE, Osaka, Japan) for
wear morphology characterization.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 13 of 20

6. Results and Discussion

6.1. Finite Element Simulation Results of Guide Cone Wear
The ABAQUS/Standard solver iteratively computes contact stress fields. Figure 11
displays contact stress nephograms at various docking cycles, revealing characteristic
elliptical stress distributions with peak attenuation as cycles (m) increase.

Figure 11. Stress nephograms of Guide Cone after (a) 1, (b) 5, (c) 10, (d) 500, (e) 1500, and (f) 7000 cycles.

Wear depths are calculated via Equation (14) and implemented through the UMESH-
MOTION subroutine, driving ALE mesh adaptation. Figure 12 visualizes progressive wear
accumulation, showing semi-elliptical patterns transitioning from point to area contact.

Figure 12. Simulated wear profiles after (a) 1, (b) 500, (c) 1000, (d) 1500, (e) 2000, and (f) 7000 cycles.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 14 of 20

Table 2 quantifies the cumulative wear depth Wh (m), which follows an exponential law:

Wh (m) = 0.01372 × m0.3813 − 0.01774(R2 = 0.997) (17)

Table 2. Guide pin cumulative wear depth and docking cycles.

Docking Cumulative Wear Docking Cumulative Wear

Cycles Depth (mm) Cycles Depth (mm)
1 4.08 × 10−4 1000 0.173
50 3.29 × 10−2 2000 0.226
100 5.32 × 10−2 3000 0.267
200 8.37 × 10−2 4000 0.303
300 0.11 5000 0.335
400 0.128 6000 0.362
500 0.137 7000 0.388

6.2. Wear Mechanism Interpretation

As shown in Figure 13, significant copper alloy debris accumulation is observed at
guide rod contact zones. This phenomenon originates from cyclic shear regeneration of
adhesive junctions: plastic flow at contact interfaces generates micro-welds that undergo
periodic shear failure during guide pair sliding, followed by debris re-attachment.

Figure 13. Post-wear morphology of guide rods.

Following 1500 docking cycles, Specimens 1–3 (ZQSn5-2) exhibited comparable wear
zones, while Specimen 4 demonstrated reduced wear severity. Cross-sectional analysis
(Figure 14a) reveals asymmetric wear profiles:
Upper semicircle: This involves elongated gradient wear bands exhibiting left-side
dominance. This asymmetry correlates with time-varying contact forces, characterized by
higher left-side loads progressively decreasing toward the right.
Lower semicircle: This involves semi-elliptical wear contours matching simulated
morphology (Figure 11).
Metallographic microscopy (Figure 14b) identified parallel plowing grooves and
adhesive craters along the sliding direction. According to the Chinese national standard
GB/T 12444-2006 [30], these morphological characteristics confirm adhesive wear as the
dominant mechanism.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 15 of 20

Figure 14. Post-wear analysis of Guide Cones: (a) sectioned Guide Cone, (b) metallographic char-
acterization of worn surface morphology, and (c) cumulative wear depth vs. docking cycles for
experimental specimens.

6.3. Model Accuracy Assessment

The inner diameters of Guide Cones were measured using an internal micrometer,
with detailed data presented in Table 3. Figure 14c illustrates the cumulative wear depth
versus docking cycles, where the simulation results (purple solid line) exhibit consistent
trends with experimental data from No. 1–3. The cumulative wear depth of the Guide
Cone demonstrates a monotonic increase with docking cycles, exhibiting progressive rate
attenuation—an initial rapid wear phase transitions to stabilized progression. This behavior
arises from evolving contact mechanics: elevated local stresses caused by limited initial
contact areas gradually diminish as wear-induced contact area expansion reduces interfacial
stress concentrations, resulting in corresponding wear rate decay.
Comparative wear tests reveal a 42.99% reduction in wear rates for QSn6-6-3 (HV 242.8)
compared to ZQSn5-2 (HV 213.77), establishing a direct proportionality between material
hardness and wear resistance. Prototype validation confirms effective parameter matching
(material properties, docking velocity, and peak contact force) between experimental and
operational systems, maintaining the simulation-to-test mean absolute percentage error
of 14.6% (maximum 18.8%). The prediction accuracy of the proposed dynamic wear
model, characterized by a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) of 14.6% (max 18.8%)
for wear depth, aligns with or marginally improves upon established benchmarks in
comparable wear life studies. For instance, advanced tribological models integrating
thermal–electrical–mechanical coupling for electrical connectors demonstrate qualitative
validation but lack explicit error quantification, instead emphasizing trends like wear
profile evolution. While supervised deep learning models for remaining useful life (RUL)
prediction in industrial settings achieve higher accuracy, they require extensive labeled
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 16 of 20

failure data [31]. This performance is considered acceptable in engineering contexts, as

evidenced by wear life models for prostheses (e.g., knee replacements) that prioritize
parametric sensitivity trends over absolute error metrics [32]. This work advances the field
by providing the first experimentally validated transient connector docking wear model
(14.6% MAPE) with quantitatively verified life prediction.

Table 3. Wear depth of Guide Cone.

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

Docking Inside Cumulative Inside Cumulative Inside Cumulative Inside Cumulative
Cycles Diameter Wear Depth Diameter Wear Depth Diameter Wear Depth Diameter Wear Depth
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
0 26.031 0 26.018 0 26.034 0 26.030 0
100 26.061 0.030 26.051 0.033 26.085 0.051 26.050 0.020
200 26.081 0.050 26.082 0.064 26.11 0.076 26.065 0.035
300 26.111 0.080 26.101 0.083 26.132 0.098 26.076 0.046
400 26.133 0.102 26.119 0.101 26.147 0.113 26.084 0.054
500 26.151 0.120 26.136 0.118 26.165 0.131 26.094 0.064
600 26.161 0.131 26.155 0.137 26.184 0.150 26.103 0.073
700 26.175 0.144 26.175 0.157 26.195 0.161 26.112 0.082
800 26.181 0.150 26.183 0.165 26.203 0.169 26.119 0.089
900 26.185 0.154 26.186 0.168 26.211 0.177 26.127 0.097
1000 26.193 0.162 26.193 0.175 26.219 0.185 26.134 0.104
1100 26.198 0.167 26.201 0.183 26.228 0.194 26.141 0.111
1200 26.207 0.176 26.210 0.192 26.236 0.202 26.146 0.116
1300 26.212 0.181 26.217 0.199 26.246 0.212 26.154 0.124
1400 26.220 0.189 26.224 0.206 26.252 0.218 26.159 0.129
1500 26.225 0.194 26.229 0.211 26.258 0.224 26.164 0.134

7. Model Validation and Life Prediction

7.1. Life Verification
The wear life assessment of Guide Cones employs the critical wear depth thresh-
old W hmax of 0.8 mm as the failure criterion. Substituting this value into Equation (17)
yields a theoretical service life of 45,270 cycles. Considering engineering requirements of
300 operational days per year with two daily docking operations over a 50-year lifespan,
and the total design demand equates to 30,000 cycles. This configuration achieves a safety
margin of 50.9%, validating the system’s reliability under extended service conditions. In
the current study, environmental conditions were deliberately controlled (25 ◦ C ± 2 ◦ C,
45% ± 5% RH, dry contact) to isolate mechanical wear mechanisms, with simulations
assuming isothermal material properties. This standardized approach ensures baseline
validity but limits applicability to environments where temperature fluctuations (>50 ◦ C)
reduce material hardness through thermal softening; elevated humidity (>80% RH) induces
corrosive wear via oxide formation; and lubricant absence neglects protective film forma-
tion that reduces friction coefficients and contact stresses. These exclusions conservatively
bias our 45,270-cycle life prediction as real-world deployments typically operate below
threshold environmental severity.

7.2. Model Limitations and Enhancement Methodologies

7.2.1. Constraints in Theoretical Framework
The present dynamic wear model, while validated for the studied passive compliant
connectors, exhibits four primary constraints requiring critical acknowledgment. First,
the quasi-static assumption inherently neglects inertial effects and transient dynamics
during phase transitions (e.g., rod-cone impact at velocities > 1.2 mm/s), potentially
underestimating peak contact stresses under high-docking-speed scenarios (>5 mm/s).
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 17 of 20

This simplification arises from the force equilibrium equations (Equations (3)–(5)) exclud-
ing acceleration terms, limiting model generalizability to systems with rapid engagement
kinetics. Second, friction coefficient homogenization assumes a constant value (µ = 0.17)
despite experimental evidence of pressure- and velocity-dependent variations. This limi-
tation obscures tribological nuances in boundary lubrication regimes, where friction may
decrease nonlinearly with sliding velocity. Third, the material homogeneity postulate
ignores subsurface microstructure gradients—particularly in tin–bronze alloys (ZQSn5-2)
where interdendritic Sn segregation creates hardness variations. Consequently, the model
cannot resolve wear mechanisms like delamination or fatigue spalling. Fourth, the syner-
gistic interaction between material fatigue and wear constitutes a critical yet unaddressed
factor, where cyclic contact stresses (peaking at 206.34 N) simultaneously drive subsur-
face fatigue damage and surface wear. Notwithstanding these limitations, the framework
provides a foundational methodology for wear prediction in standard operating condi-
tions (v0 ≤ 1.2 mm/s, T < 50 ◦ C), with quantified error bounds enabling conservative
life estimates.

7.2.2. Pathways to Extended Docking System Service Life

To further extend the operational lifespan of docking systems beyond 45,270 cy-
cles, four strategies can be implemented: First, material optimization through adoption
of higher-hardness alloys (e.g., QSn6-6-3, HV 242.8) demonstrates a 42.99% lifespan in-
crease. Second, tribological pair screening via standardized testing identifies material
combinations with minimized wear rates. Third, a lubricant utilizing optimized formula-
tions reduces peak contact forces, directly lowering interfacial shear stresses. Fourth,
advanced polymer composites—particularly carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK and PTFE
systems—offer transformative potential through their superior tribomechanical proper-
ties, namely low friction coefficients (µ = 0.10–0.25), exceptional wear resistance (specific
wear rates ~10−6 mm3 /(N·m) [33–36]), and weight reduction (40–65%), while maintain-
ing structural integrity via enhanced fatigue resistance, dimensional stability, and creep
resistance. These composites achieve performance through controlled crystallinity and an
optimized filler content (15–20 wt% carbon fibers [34,35], 15–30 wt% PTFE/MoS2 ), with
net-shape manufacturability via injection molding enabling complex geometries unattain-
able with metals [34]. Accelerated wear testing confirms significantly lower volumetric
loss versus bronze under equivalent contact pressures [36]. Polymer composites could
extend service life by 200% compared to metallic Guide Cones: conservative wear mod-
eling extrapolating PEEK/40Cr pairs would achieve 90,540 cycles at equivalent loading
conditions. This enhancement stems from their order-of-magnitude lower specific wear
rates (approximately 10−7 –10−6 mm3 /(N·m) [37]) versus ZQSn5-2/40Cr (approximately
10−5 mm3 /(N·m) [38]). Key implementation challenges include temperature-dependent
crystallinity effects and anisotropic wear sensitivity to fiber orientation, necessitating future
topology-optimized designs. For critical wear zones, hybrid designs incorporating metallic
substrates with polymer composite inserts further extend service life while preserving
structural stiffness [34].

8. Conclusions
To address the dynamic wear life prediction challenges of Guide Cones in passive
compliant connectors, this study proposes a wear prediction methodology based on the
dynamic Archard theory through systematic theoretical modeling, numerical simulation,
and experimental validation. The principal conclusions are summarized as follows:
(1) The evolutionary patterns of dynamic contact loads on Guide Cones are elucidated
through the establishment of phased contact state criteria and geometric constraints.
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 18 of 20

By analyzing force equilibrium relationships during the four-phase engagement

process, transient load characteristics are quantified with peak contact forces reaching
206.34 N, establishing a mechanical foundation for dynamic wear modeling.
(2) An iterative Archard algorithm incorporating dynamic contact stress integration is
developed, creating a bidirectional wear morphology–stress coupling simulation
framework. Utilizing ABAQUS/Standard with ALE adaptive meshing, discrete wear
depth calculations reveal an exponential decay relationship between cumulative wear
depth and docking cycles, achieving a predicted service life of 45,270 cycles for bronze
alloy cone systems.
(3) Prototype testing demonstrates strong agreement between simulated and measured
wear depths, with a mean absolute percentage error of 14.6%. Metallographic analysis
confirms adhesive wear as the dominant mechanism, showing a 42.99% wear rate
reduction in QSn6-6-3 (HV 242.8) compared to ZQSn5-2 (HV 213.77).
(4) The cumulative wear-based life assessment verifies that 45,270 cycles at the 0.8 mm
critical threshold exceed 50-year requirements (30,000 cycles) with a 50.9% safety
margin, outperforming conventional empirical approaches. Polymer composites
emerge as the highest-potential solution for extending the service life of Guide
Cones: compared to metal, the cyclic life of carbon-fiber-reinforced PEEK systems
has been increased by 200%, achieved through order-of-magnitude lower wear rates
(10−7 –10−6 mm3 /(N·m)). This positions polymer optimization as the pivotal strategy
for next-generation docking systems. Future work will prioritize experimental valida-
tion of polymer composites, with a parallel investigation of multi-factor mechanisms
(temperature-dependent crystallinity and fiber orientation effects) to unlock their full
lifespan potential.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, B.W., F.Z. and X.H.; Data Curation, Y.H., L.F., W.X. and
M.L.; Formal Analysis, Y.H., B.W. and W.X.; Funding Acquisition, X.H., L.F. and F.T.; Investigation,
Y.H., B.W., F.Z., L.F. and W.X.; Methodology, Y.H., L.F. and M.L.; Project Administration, X.H. and
F.T.; Resources, L.F., M.L. and F.T.; Supervision, X.H. and F.T.; Validation, Y.H. and F.Z.; Visualization,
Y.H., F.Z. and M.L.; Writing—Original Draft, Y.H., B.W., F.Z. and W.X.; Writing—Review and Editing,
Y.H., B.W. and F.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: The APC was funded by the China Aerodynamics Research and Development Center.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement: The original contributions presented in this study are included in the
article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest: Author Weihao Xu was employed by the company Chongqing Jiangheng
Technology Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence
of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

ALE Arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian

MAPE Mean Absolute Percentage Error
DOF Degree of Freedom
VSV Variable Stator Vane
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 19 of 20

References
1. Lei, X.; Feng, C.; Lv, W.; Zhou, Y.; Xiong, C.; Gao, Y.; Zhu, F. Electrical contact reliability investigation of high-speed electrical
connectors under fretting wear behavior. Microelectron. Reliab. 2024, 162, 115510. [CrossRef]
2. Luo, Y.; Gao, P.; Liang, H.; Sun, Z. Application of Ultrasonic Testing Technology to Fretting Wear Detection of Electrical Connectors.
IEEE Trans. Compon. Packag. Manuf. Technol. 2021, 11, 922–930. [CrossRef]
3. Beltran-Hernandez, C.C.; Petit, D.; Ramirez-Alpizar, I.G.; Nishi, T.; Kikuchi, S.; Matsubara, T.; Harada, K. Learning Force Control
for Contact-Rich Manipulation Tasks With Rigid Position-Controlled Robots. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2020, 5, 5709–5716.
[CrossRef]
4. Chen, Y.; Xie, F.; Liu, X.; Zhou, Y. Error Modeling and Sensitivity Analysis of a Parallel Robot with SCARA(Selective Compliance
Assembly Robot Arm) Motions. Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 2014, 27, 693–702. [CrossRef]
5. Lin, Q.; Zhang, M.; Ren, J.; Hua, Q. Investigation on a new type of latching mechanism on the satellite-rocket docking system and
locking dynamic analysis. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G-J. Aerosp. Eng. 2023, 237, 992–1003. [CrossRef]
6. Sun, Z.C.; Zhang, H.; Shi, J.X.; Song, X.D. Mechanical modeling and parameter analysis of the docking process for probe-drogue
docking mechanisms. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2024, 154, 109536. [CrossRef]
7. Tian, F.; Lv, C.; Li, Z.; Liu, G. Modeling and control of robotic automatic polishing for curved surfaces. CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol.
2016, 14, 55–64. [CrossRef]
8. Jiang, J.; Zhang, X.; Tao, B.; Dong, Q. Design and experiment of remote handling motor replacement device based on passive
compliant mechanism. J. Zhejiang University. Eng. Sci. 2021, 55, 855–865, 886. [CrossRef]
9. Barrionuevo, G.O.; Calvopiña, H.; Debut, A.; Pérez-Salinas, C. Experimental and numerical investigation of sliding wear of
heat-treated 316L stainless steel additively manufactured. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2024, 33, 2692–2703. [CrossRef]
10. Xiao, Y.; Yao, P.; Zhou, H.; Zhang, Z.; Gong, T.; Zhao, L.; Zuo, X.; Deng, M.; Jin, Z. Friction and wear behavior of copper matrix
composite for spacecraft rendezvous and docking under different conditions. Wear 2014, 320, 127–134. [CrossRef]
11. Kalidas, P.; Ramalingam, V.V.; Myilsamy, G.; Kasi, R.K.; Baghad, A. Numerical and experimental validation of tribological
phenomenon in wind turbine brake pads using novel Archard’s wear coefficient. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part J-J. Eng. Tribol. 2024,
238, 1103–1120. [CrossRef]
12. Aydin, F.; Durgut, R.; Mustu, M.; Demir, B. Prediction of wear performance of ZK60/CeO2 composites using machine learning
models. Tribol. Int. 2023, 177, 107945. [CrossRef]
13. Harnafi, M.; Guidault, P.-A.; Boucard, P.-A.; Paleczny, C. A simplified model for the wear prediction of plain bearings in the
variable stator vane system. Tribol. Int. 2024, 196, 109667. [CrossRef]
14. Wang, Z.; Ye, R.; Singh, S.S.; Wu, S.; Zhao, X. Modelling and fatigue reliability investigation on wear prediction of piston/cylinder
pair based on friction fatigue mechanism. Tribol. Int. 2024, 194, 109485. [CrossRef]
15. Archard, J.F. Contact and Rubbing of Flat Surfaces. J. Appl. Phys. 1953, 24, 981–988. [CrossRef]
16. Choudhry, J.; Almqvist, A.; Larsson, R. Improving Archard’s Wear Model: An Energy-Based Approach. Tribol. Lett. 2024, 72, 93.
[CrossRef]
17. Argatov, I.I.; Bae, J.W.; Chai, Y.S. A Simple Model for the Wear Accumulation in Partial Slip Hertzian Contact. Int. J. Appl. Mech.
2020, 12, 2050074. [CrossRef]
18. Liu, Y.F.; Liskiewicz, T.W.; Beake, B. Dynamic changes of mechanical properties induced by friction in the Archard wear model.
Wear 2019, 428, 366–375. [CrossRef]
19. Suh, N.P. An overview of the delamination theory of wear. Wear 1977, 44, 1–16. [CrossRef]
20. Jacobson, S.; Wallén, P.; Hogmark, S. Fundamental aspects of abrasive wear studied by a new numerical simulation model. Wear
1988, 123, 207–223. [CrossRef]
21. Kapoor, A.; Franklin, F.J. Tribological layers and the wear of ductile materials. Wear 2000, 245, 204–215. [CrossRef]
22. Flašker, J.; Fajdiga, G.; Glodež, S.; Hellen, T.K. Numerical simulation of surface pitting due to contact loading. Int. J. Fatigue 2001,
23, 599–605. [CrossRef]
23. Franklin, F.J.; Widiyarta, I.; Kapoor, A. Computer simulation of wear and rolling contact fatigue. Wear 2001, 251, 949–955.
[CrossRef]
24. Mukras, S.; Kim, N.H.; Mauntler, N.A.; Schmitz, T.L.; Sawyer, W.G. Analysis of planar multibody systems with revolute joint
wear. Wear 2010, 268, 643–652. [CrossRef]
25. Hou, Y.; Zhang, M.; Nie, H. Analysis of Sensitive Parameters Affecting Unlocking Force of Finger Lock in Landing Gear. Int. J.
Aerosp. Eng. 2021, 2021, 6652056. [CrossRef]
26. Lu, C.; Yin, J.; Mo, J.; Wang, J. Accumulated wear degradation prediction of railway friction block considering the evolution of
contact status. Wear 2022, 494–495, 204251. [CrossRef]
27. Bao, H.; Zhang, C.; Hou, X.; Lu, F. Wear Characteristics of Different Groove-Shaped Friction Pairs of a Friction Clutch. Appl. Sci.
2021, 11, 284. [CrossRef]
Polymers 2025, 17, 2091 20 of 20

28. Bai, Z.; Ning, Z.; Zhou, J. Study on Wear Characteristics of Revolute Clearance Joints in Mechanical Systems. Micromachines 2022,
13, 1018. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29. Changlin, G. Archard’s Wear Design Calculation Model and Its Application Method. Lubr. Seal. 1990, 1, 14–23.
30. GB/T 12444-2006; Metal Materials—Wear Test Method—Ring-on-Block Sliding Wear Test. Standards Press of China: Beijing,
China, 2006.
31. He, W.; Feng, Y.; Wu, S.; Wu, K.; Ye, J.; Wang, W. Numerical simulation on the effect of current intensity on electrical contact
performance of electrical connectors subject to micro-slip wear. Wear 2024, 542–543, 205270. [CrossRef]
32. Abdelgaied, A.; Brockett, C.L.; Liu, F.; Jennings, L.M.; Jin, Z.; Fisher, J. The effect of insert conformity and material on total knee
replacement wear. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part H-J. Eng. Med. 2014, 228, 98–106. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. He, Y.; Lin, B.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, F.; Ning, G.; Bao, X.; Sui, T. Effect of homologous molecular crosslinking on the tribological
properties of PTFE composites. Polym. Compos. 2023, 44, 5132–5147. [CrossRef]
34. He, Y.; Lin, B.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, F.; Yan, S.; Ning, G.; Bao, X.; Li, H.; Sui, T. Hybrid reinforcing effect of multi-scale short carbon
fibers on the wear resistance of PTFE composites: Self-reconstruction and stress transmission. Tribol. Int. 2024, 194, 109510.
[CrossRef]
35. Zhao, F.; He, Y.; Lin, B.; Wang, Y.; Sui, T.; Lin, W.; Fang, L.; Liao, M. Investigation of Wear Mechanisms in Multi-Scale Short
Carbon Fiber Reinforced PTFE Composites for Blade Rotor Volumetric Pumps in Variable Lubrications. Polym. Compos. 2025,
1–17. [CrossRef]
36. Zhang, K.; Lin, Z.; Ma, S.; Pan, S.; Chen, W.; Wang, D.; Chen, C.; Zhao, X. Silver with tribo-chemistry facilitation synergized with
graphite particles for enhancing the tribo-performance of PEEK composites. Compos. Part A-Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2024, 187, 108456.
[CrossRef]
37. Maslavi, A.; Unal, H.; Olabi, M.N. Determination of “tribological performance working fields” for pure PEEK and PEEK
composites under dry sliding conditions. Wear 2024, 554–555, 205464. [CrossRef]
38. Bharatish, A.; Harish, V.; Bathe, R.N.; Senthilselvan, J.; Soundarapandian, S. Effect of scanning speed and tin content on the
tribological behavior of femtosecond laser textured tin-bronze alloy. Opt. Laser Technol. 2018, 108, 17–25. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.