In manual clutch design for passenger vehicles, what is the typical approximate coefficient of friction used for organic clutch facings operating under normal conditions?

Difficulty: Easy

Correct Answer: 0.4

Explanation:


Introduction / Context:

The torque capacity of a friction clutch depends on clamp load, effective radius, number of friction surfaces, and the friction coefficient of the facing material. Designers use representative μ values to size diaphragm springs and select facings that balance engagement quality, wear, and heat resistance.


Given Data / Assumptions:

  • Dry single-plate clutch with organic (resin-impregnated fiber) facings.
  • Operating temperature within normal service range.
  • Clean friction surfaces with no oil contamination.


Concept / Approach:

For common organic facings, the design coefficient of friction typically lies around μ ≈ 0.35–0.45. A round-number value of 0.4 is widely used in preliminary calculations. Sintered metallic facings may have different μ, and actual μ varies with pressure, temperature, and sliding speed (Stribeck-type behavior), but 0.4 remains a standard textbook approximation.


Step-by-Step Solution:

1) Recall clutch torque formula: T = n·μ·W·Re, where n = number of friction interfaces, W = clamp load, Re = effective radius.2) Insert representative μ for organic facings: 0.4.3) Use this value to size springs and plate dimensions for target engine torque with margin.


Verification / Alternative check:

Design handbooks and OEM guidelines quote μ ≈ 0.35–0.45 for organic linings, aligning with the 0.4 selection for classroom problems and early-stage design.


Why Other Options Are Wrong:

  • 0.1: too low; would oversize the clutch unrealistically.
  • 0.8 or 1.2: too high for dry organic facings; such μ may be seen transiently with specialized materials or conditions, not as a design value.
  • 0.25: below typical for healthy organic facings.


Common Pitfalls:

  • Using peak μ instead of a stable design μ; torque capacity must be reliable across temperature and wear.
  • Ignoring fade at elevated temperatures, which reduces effective μ.


Final Answer:

0.4

More Questions from Automobile Engineering

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
Join Discussion