Personal Impressions of the Status of Tribology in the Former Soviet Union* Irwin Singer Introduction The New Materials and Technologies in Tribology Conference in Minsk and laboratory visits in Moscow, Minsk, Gomel, Kiev and St Petersburg provided a significant overview of tribological research in the former Soviet Union (FSU). I gained a good perspective of the status of tribology and the style of scientific reporting of tribologists, and I was able to compare the scientific approaches, equipment sophistication, directions of materials research, and potential technologies used in the FSU with those in the West (including Japan). My specialty is surface analysis and surface modification, with a bent toward scientific aspects of friction and friction films, and I report primarily on these topics. I have tried to reference examples of work reported at the conference or during visits. The conference proceedings (containing many of the papers) will be published in a future edition of Trenie i Iznos, the Soviet Journal of Friction and Wear. However, the conference abstracts do not list the scientists' institutions, so I simply refer to the authors and their cities. General observations First, a few general observations are in order. To say that tribology is alive and well in the FSU may be an understatement. I have the distinct impression that there are more scientists and engineers interested in tribology in the FSU than perhaps in all the West! Also, tribologists are important people in the FSU. The heads of Surface Chemistry Branch, Chemistry Div- ision, Naval Research Laboratory, Wash- ington, DC, USA. *Originally published in the ESN Information Bulletin 93-03. TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL several institutes that we visited are tribologists (Valdimir Bulatov, director of the Research Institute for Reliability of Machines and Constructions in St Petersburg, and Rector Pavel Vasiljevich Nazarenko, Institute of Civil Aviation Engineers in Kiev) and three of Nazarenko's predecessors were tribologists. The conference had many PhD students presenting their thesis work, so it appears that the production of tribologists goes on, despite the (fairly recent) cut in state support for science and engineering. The style of scientific reporting by tribologists matched what I have seen by FSU physicists. Analytical formulations of tribological processes were presented, even where neither the basis nor the application was clear. There were several good critical assessments (experimental) of prevailing models. For example, V. G. Kuznetsov, Minsk, presented a critical assessment (and ultimately a rejection) of the 'accepted' Garkunov-Kragelsky anodic dissolution model for the basis of non-wear mode of Cu versus steel in glycerine. Few talks, however, made general comparison with tests performed by other workers under related conditions (allowing the audience to generalize the results). Moreover, only a small percentage of FSU authors referred to work in the West. (However, the reverse is also true; Western authors often ignore work from the FSU). I would say that FSU tribologists have less advanced equipment than Western scientists and engineers. I was somewhat surprised, however to see many microcomputers (IBM-compatible 286, 386, and 486s and Macintoshes) at FSU laboratories. While I doubt that the scientists have as easy access to microcomputers as we do in the West, those that need them apparently are able to get them. I saw or heard of their use: • To control and acquire data from tribometers, scanning electron microscopes (SEMs), scanning tunnelling microscopes (STMs), and other mechanical microprobes; and • For computerized intelligent tribology systems that purport to predict machine service life. All the laboratories visited had conventional analytical equipment, such as SEMs and X-ray diffractometers. We did not see any ultra-high-vacuum (UHV) surface analytical equipment, such as Auger electron spectroscopy (AES), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS or ESCA), or secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS); however, their use was reported in many studies. Also, some groups in the FSU have STMs and atomic force microscopes (AFMs). We also saw some unique apparatus for investigating tribological properties of surfaces: • An electron work function monitor (technically, with surface capacitance measurements) that appears to 'follow' the macroscopic friction behaviour. However, the basis for this behaviour is not established (A. Zharin et al., Byelorussian Powder Metallurgy Association, Minsk). • The 'MICRON', a computerized sclerometer and continuous indenter with a scanning system that gives topographical and mechanical (hardness, elastic, creep) properties (hardness) of thin layers (Institute of Civil Aviation Engineers, Kiev). This device combines friction measurements and profilometry with a mechanical microprobe. 0301-679X/94/020123-03 © 1994 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd 123