Human skin tribology involves the study of friction behaviour of skin, with other materials in contact. Numerous studies have been conducted based both on the simulations and experimentations for the tribological investigations. Present study reports key experimental findings post year 2000 in which human skin (in vivo) is taken as test specimen. This review study highlights the latest technologies and trends that is in practice for tribological investigations on the human skin. For the selection of articles, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) technique is adapted. Articles were screened out using various inclusion and exclusion criteria. Classifications were made based on the site of investigations viz. fingertip (22%), finger pad (36%), volar forearm (32%), and other regions (10%) as the anatomical regions. Study concludes that the maximum investigations have been performed on fabric/ textile followed by polymers, metals, plastics, and many others. Shearing has come up as the prominent factor for the erosion of soft surfaces. Study concludes the stick- slip friction to be the foremost contributor to the adhesion friction.
MaurelWWuYThalmannNM. Biomechanical models for soft tissue simulation. ESPRIT Basic Research Series. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1998.
5.
RobertsonDCookD. Unrealistic statistics: how average constitutive coefficients can produce non-physical results. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2014; 40: 234–239.
6.
ShahRGDeVoreDSilverFH. Biomechanical analysis of decellularized dermis and skin: initial in vivo observations using optical cohesion tomography and vibrational analysis. J Biomed Mater Res2018; 106: 1421–1427.
7.
TangWLiuSZhuH, et al. Microtribological and micromechanical properties of the skin stratum corneum. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology2012; 226: 880–886.
8.
Pailler-MattéiCZahouaniH. Study of adhesion forces and mechanical properties of human skin in vivo. J Adhes Sci Technol2004; 18: 1739–1758.
9.
Pailler-MattéiCZahouaniH. Analysis of adhesive behaviour of human skin in vivo by an indentation test. Tribol Int2006; 39: 12–21.
10.
JachowiczJMcMullenRPrettypaulD. Indentometric analysis of in vivo skin and comparison with artificial skin models. Skin Res Technol2007; 13: 299–309.
11.
IsazaJALacroixDRamírezJ. Influence of indentation test factors on the mechanical response of the skin. Univ Sci2019; 24: 49–72.
12.
DelalleauAJosseGLagardeJM, et al. A nonlinear elastic behavior to identify the mechanical parameters of human skin in vivo. Skin Res Technol2008; 14: 152–164.
13.
LiCGuanGReifR, et al. Determining elastic properties of skin by measuring surface waves from an impulse mechanical stimulus using phase-sensitive optical coherence tomography. J R Soc Interface2012; 9: 831–841.
14.
RamírezJFPavónJJToroA. Experimental assessment of friction coefficient between polypropylene and human skin using instrumented sclerometer. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology2015; 229: 259–265.
15.
HenaoSCCuartas-EscobarSRamírezJ. Coefficient of friction measurements on transfemoral amputees. Biotribology2020; 22: 100126.
16.
LyuJÖzgünNKondzielaDJ, et al. Role of hair coverage and sweating for textile friction on the forearm. Tribol Lett2020; 68: 1–9.
17.
van KuilenburgJMasenMAGroenendijkMNW, et al. An experimental study on the relation between surface texture and tactile friction. Tribol Int2012; 48: 15–21.
18.
VilhenaLMRamalhoA. Friction behavior of human skin rubbing against different textured polymeric materials obtained by a 3D printing microfabrication technique. Tribol. Trans2019; 62: 324–336.
19.
ChimataGPSchwartzCJ. Tactile discrimination of randomly textured surfaces: effect of friction and surface parameters. Biotribology2017; 11: 102–109.
20.
KlaassenMSchipperDJMasenMA. Influence of the relative humidity and the temperature on the in-vivo friction behaviour of human skin. Biotribology2016; 6: 21–28.
21.
VeijgenNKMasenMAvan der HeideE. Variables influencing the frictional behaviour of in vivo human skin. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2013; 28: 448–461.
22.
KlaassenMde VriesEGMasenMA. The static friction response of non-glabrous skin as a function of surface energy and environmental conditions. Biotribology2017; 11: 124–131.
23.
GerhardtLCLenzASpencerND, et al. Skin–textile friction and skin elasticity in young and aged persons. Skin Res Technol2009; 15: 288–298.
24.
LiWZhaiZHPangQ, et al. Influence of exfoliating facial cleanser on the bio-tribological properties of human skin. Wear2013; 301: 353–361.
25.
CottendenAWongWCottendenD, et al. Development and validation of a new method for measuring friction between skin and nonwoven materials. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2008; 222: 791–803.
26.
TangWGeSRZhuH, et al. The influence of normal load and sliding speed on frictional properties of skin. J Bionic Eng2008; 5: 33–38.
27.
FortesCVersionDFortesC. Finger pad friction and tactile perception of laser treated, stamped and cold rolled micro-structured stainless steel sheet surfaces. Friction2017; 5: 207–218.
28.
MasenMA. A systems based experimental approach to tactile friction. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2011; 4: 1620–1626.
29.
SergachevDAMatthewsDTAvan der HeideE. An empirical approach for the determination of skin elasticity: finger pad friction against textured surfaces. Biotribology2019; 18: 100097.
30.
DerlerSRotaruGM. Stick–slip phenomena in the friction of human skin. Wear2013; 301: 324–329.
31.
MessaoudWBBuenoMALemaire-SemailB. Relation between human perceived friction and finger friction characteristics. Tribol Int2016; 98: 261–269.
32.
ZhouXMoJLLiYY, et al. Correlation between tactile perception and tribological and dynamical properties for human finger under different sliding speeds. Tribol Int2018; 123: 286–295.
33.
SkedungLDanerlövKOlofssonU, et al. Tactile perception: finger friction, surface roughness and perceived coarseness. Tribol Int2011; 44: 505–512.
34.
ZahouaniHFlamentFVargioluR, et al. “Acoustic Tribology of Human Skin.” Proceedings of the World Tribology Congress III - 2005, 2005, pp. 699–700
35.
DerlerSGerhardtLC. Tribology of skin: review and analysis of experimental results for the friction coefficient of human skin. Tribol Lett2012; 45(1): 1–27.
36.
GitisNSivamaniR. Tribometrology of skin. Tribol Trans2004; 47: 461–469.
37.
DąbrowskaAKRotaruGMDerlerS, et al. Materials used to simulate physical properties of human skin. Skin Res Technol2016; 22: 3–14.
38.
ZhangSZengXMatthewsDTA, et al. Selection of micro-fabrication techniques on stainless steel sheet for skin friction. Friction2016; 4: 89–104.
39.
VakisAIYastrebovVAScheibertJ, et al. Modeling and simulation in tribology across scales: an overview. Tribol Int2018; 125: 169–199.
40.
MengYXuJJinZ, et al. A review of recent advances in tribology. Friction2020; 8: 221–300.
41.
CuaABWilhelmKPMaibachHI. Elastic properties of human skin: relation to age, sex, and anatomical region. Arch Dermatol Res1990; 282: 283–288.
42.
KimMSKimIYParkYK, et al. The friction measurement between finger skin and material surfaces. Wear2013; 301: 338–342.
43.
ChimataGPSchwartzCJ. Investigation of the role of diminishing surface area on friction-based tactile discrimination of textures. Biotribology2018; 15: 1–8.
44.
VeijgenNKMasenMAvan der HeideE. Relating friction on the human skin to the hydration and temperature of the skin. Tribol Lett2013; 49: 251–262.
45.
HendriksCPFranklinSE. Influence of surface roughness, material and climate conditions on the friction of human skin. Tribol Lett2010; 37: 361–373.
46.
ZhongWXingMMPanN, et al. Textiles and human skin, microclimate, cutaneous reactions: an overview. Cutan Ocul Toxicol2006; 25: 23–39.
47.
GerhardtLCSträssleVLenzA, et al. Influence of epidermal hydration on the friction of human skin against textiles. J R Soc Interface2008; 5: 1317–1328.
48.
RotaruGMPilleDLehmeierFK, et al. Friction between human skin and medical textiles for decubitus prevention. Tribol Int2013; 65: 91–96.
49.
MeredithLBrownJClarkeE. Relationship between skin abrasion injuries and clothing material characteristics in motorcycle crashes. Biotribology2015; 3: 20–26.
50.
AkgunM. Investigation of the tribological behaviors of upholstery woven fabrics after abrasion. Autex Res J2020; 20: 110–120.
51.
WhittonJTEverallJD. The thickness of the epidermis. Br J Dermatol1973; 89: 467–476.
52.
de WertLABaderDLOomensCWJ, et al. A new method to evaluate the effects of shear on the skin. Wound Repair Regen2015; 23: 885–890.
53.
GrayRWorsleyPVoegeliD, et al. Monitoring contractile dermal lymphatic activity following uniaxial mechanical loading. Med Eng Phys2016; 38: 895–903.
54.
Scheel-SailerAFrotzlerAMuellerG, et al. Biophysical skin properties of grade 1 pressure ulcers and unaffected skin in spinal cord injured and able-bodied persons in the unloaded sacral region. J Tissue Viability2017; 26: 89–94.
55.
YusufSOkuwaMShigetaY, et al. Microclimate and development of pressure ulcers and superficial skin changes. Int Wound J2015; 12: 40–46.
56.
SoetensJFJWorsleyPRHernimanJM, et al. The expression of anaerobic metabolites in sweat and sebum from human skin subjected to intermittent and continuous mechanical loading. J Tissue Viability2019; 28: 186–193.
57.
LaszczakPMcGrathMTangJ, et al. A pressure and shear sensor system for stress measurement at lower limb residuum/socket interface. Med Eng Phys2016; 38: 695–700.
58.
CavacoADurãesLPaisS, et al. Friction of prosthetic interfaces used by transtibial amputees. Biotribology2016; 6: 36–41.
59.
WorsleyPRSmithGSchoonhovenL, et al. Characteristics of patients who are admitted with or acquire pressure ulcers in a district general hospital; a 3 year retrospective analysis. Nurs Open2016; 3: 152–158.
60.
WoodhouseMWorsleyPRVoegeliD, et al. How consistent and effective are current repositioning strategies for pressure ulcer prevention?Appl Nurs Res2019; 48: 58–62.
61.
CarréMJTanSKMylonPT, et al. Influence of medical gloves on fingerpad friction and feel. Wear2017; 376-377: 324–328.
62.
FernandesMDa SilvaLMarquesA. Skin mechanobiology and biomechanics: from homeostasis to wound healing. In: DoweidarMH (ed.) Advances in Biomechanics and Tissue Regeneration. Elsevier, pp. 343-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816390-0.00017-0.
63.
TroynikovOAshayeriEFussFK. Tribological evaluation of sportswear with negative fit worn next to skin. Proc IMechE, Part J: J Engineering Tribology2012; 226: 588–597.
64.
KwonJChoiJ. Clothing insulation and temperature, layer and mass of clothing under comfortable environmental conditions. J Physiol Anthropol2013; 32: 1–8.
65.
GuanMAnnaheimSCamenzindM, et al. Moisture transfer of the clothing–human body system during continuous sweating under radiant heat. Text Res J2019; 89: 4537–4553.
66.
JoshiAPsikutaABuenoMA, et al. Analytical clothing model for sensible heat transfer considering spatial heterogeneity. Int J Therm Sci2019; 145: 105949.
GueorguievDBochereauSMourauxA, et al. Touch uses frictional cues to discriminate flat materials. Sci Rep2016; 6(1): 7.
69.
AbdouniADjaghloulMThieulinC, et al. Biophysical properties of the human finger for touch comprehension: influences of ageing and gender. R Soc Open Sci2017; 4: 170321.
70.
AbdouniAVargioluRZahouaniH. Impact of finger biophysical properties on touch gestures and tactile perception: aging and gender effects. Sci. Rep2018; 8(1): 13.
71.
AyyildizMScaraggiMSirinO, et al. Contact mechanics between the human finger and a touchscreen under electroadhesion. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2018; 115: 12668–12673.
72.
BoyleCJCarpanenDPandelaniT, et al. Lateral pressure equalisation as a principle for designing support surfaces to prevent deep tissue pressure ulcers. PLoS One2019; 15: e0227064.
73.
BasdoganCGiraudFLevesqueV, et al. A review of surface haptics: enabling tactile effects on touch surfaces. IEEE Trans Haptics2020; 13: 450–470.
74.
Pailler-MatteiCPavanSVargioluR, et al. Contribution of stratum corneum in determining bio-tribological properties of the human skin. Wear2007; 263: 1038–1043.
75.
ZahouaniHPailler-MatteiCSohmB, et al. Characterization of the mechanical properties of a dermal equivalent compared with human skin in vivo by indentation and static friction tests. Skin Res Technol2009; 15: 68–76.
76.
AdamsMJBriscoeBJJohnsonSA. Friction and lubrication of human skin. Tribol Lett2007; 26: 239–253.
77.
SivamaniRWuGGitisNV, et al. Tribological testing of skin products: gender, age, and ethnicity on the volar forearm. Skin Res Technol2003; 9: 299–305.
78.
GeeMGTomlinsPCalverA, et al. A new friction measurement system for the frictional component of touch. Wear2005; 259: 1437–1442.
79.
DerlerSSchradeUGerhardtLC. Tribology of human skin and mechanical skin equivalents in contact with textiles. Wear2007; 263: 1112–1116.
80.
TomlinsonSELewisRCarréMJ. The effect of normal force and roughness on friction in human finger contact. Wear2009; 267: 1311–1318.
81.
DardenMASchwartzCJ. Investigation of skin tribology and its effects on the tactile attributes of polymer fabrics. Wear2009; 267: 1289–1294.
82.
AndréTLefèvrePThonnardJL. A continuous measure of fingertip friction during precision grip. J Neurosci Methods2009; 179: 224–229.
83.
Dacleu NdengueJCesiniIFaucheuJ, et al. Tactile perception and friction-induced vibrations: discrimination of similarly patterned wood-like surfaces. IEEE Trans Haptics2017; 10: 409–417.
84.
BarreaABulensDCLefevreP, et al. Simple and reliable method to estimate the fingertip static coefficient of friction in precision grip. IEEE Trans Haptics2016; 9: 492–498.
85.
ChenSGeS. Experimental research on the tactile perception from fingertip skin friction. Wear2017; 376-377: 305–314.
ShultzCPeshkinMColgateJE, et al. The application of tactile, audible, and ultrasonic forces to human fingertips using broadband electroadhesion. IEEE Trans Haptics2018; 11: 279–290.
88.
JankoMWiertlewskiMVisellY. Contact geometry and mechanics predict friction forces during tactile surface exploration. Sci Rep2018; 8(1): 10.
89.
LewisRMenardiCYoxallA, et al. Finger friction: grip and opening packaging. Wear2007; 263: 1124–1132.
90.
DerlerSGerhardtLCLenzA, et al. Friction of human skin against smooth and rough glass as a function of the contact pressure. Tribol Int2009; 42: 1565–1574.
91.
ZahouaniHMezghaniSVargioluR, et al. Effect of roughness on vibration of human finger during a friction test. Wear2013; 301: 343–352.
92.
DerlerSSüessJRaoA, et al. Influence of variations in the pressure distribution on the friction of the finger pad. Tribol Int2013; 63: 14–20.
93.
DerlerSPreiswerkMRotaruGM, et al. Friction mechanisms and abrasion of the human finger pad in contact with rough surfaces. Tribol Int2015; 89: 119–127.
94.
DardenMASchwartzCJ. Skin tribology phenomena associated with reading braille print: the influence of cell patterns and skin behavior on coefficient of friction. Wear2015; 332–333: 734–741.
95.
SkedungLBuraczewska-NorinIDawoodN, et al. Tactile friction of topical formulations. Skin Res Technol2016; 22: 46–54.
96.
ArvidssonMRingstadLSkedungL, et al. Feeling fine - the effect of topography and friction on perceived roughness and slipperiness. Biotribology2017; 11: 92–101.
97.
DzidekBMAdamsMJAndrewsJW, et al. Contact mechanics of the human finger pad under compressive loads. J R Soc Interface2017; 14: 20160935.
98.
LiuXCarréMJZhangQ, et al. Measuring contact area in a sliding human finger-pad contact. Skin Res Technol2018; 24: 31–44.
99.
BochereauSDzidekBAdamsM, et al. Characterizing and imaging gross and real finger contacts under dynamic loading. IEEE Trans Haptics2017; 10: 456–465.
100.
HauserSCGerlingGJ. Imaging the 3-D deformation of the finger pad when interacting with compliant materials. IEEE Haptics Symp2018; 2018: 7–13.
101.
CamillieriBBuenoMAFabreM, et al. From finger friction and induced vibrations to brain activation: tactile comparison between real and virtual textile fabrics. Tribol Int2018; 126: 283–296.
102.
AbdouniAMoreauGVargioluR, et al. Static and active tactile perception and touch anisotropy: aging and gender effect. Sci Rep2018; 8(1): 11.
103.
NatsumeMTanakaYKappersAML. Individual differences in cognitive processing for roughness rating of fine and coarse textures. PLoS One2019; 14: e0211407–e0211416.
104.
InoueKOkamotoSAkiyamaY, et al. Effect of material hardness on friction between a bare finger and dry and lubricated artificial skin. IEEE Trans. Haptics2020; 13: 123–129.
105.
NachmanMFranklinSE. Artificial skin model simulating dry and moist in vivo human skin friction and deformation behaviour. Tribol. Int2016; 97: 431–439.
106.
ChenJYangHLiJ, et al. The development of an artificial skin model and its frictional interaction with wound dressings. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2019; 94: 308–316.
107.
KlaassenMDe VriesEGMasenMA. Interpersonal differences in the friction response of skin relate to FTIR measures for skin lipids and hydration. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces2020; 189: 110883.
108.
LiWKongMLiuXD, et al. Tribological behavior of scar skin and prosthetic skin in vivo. Tribol Int2008; 41: 640–647.
109.
LiWLiuXDCaiZB, et al. Effect of prosthetic socks on the frictional properties of residual limb skin. Wear2011; 271: 2804–2811.
110.
RamalhoASzekeresPFernandesE. Friction and tactile perception of textile fabrics. Tribol Int2013; 63: 29–33.
111.
CârlescuVOprişanCMIanuşG, et al. Evaluation of friction behaviour on human finger skin considering precision grip task. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng2020; 997: 012007.
112.
LimaKCDABorgesLDSHatanakaE, et al. Grip force control and hand dexterity are impaired in individuals with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Neurosci Lett2017; 659: 54–59.
113.
LimaKCASantosGOCDonatoSSV, et al. Grip and load force control and coordination in individuals with diabetes in different manipulation tasks. Hum Mov Sci2021; 77: 102793.
114.
AktarTChenJEttelaieR, et al. Human roughness perception and possible factors effecting roughness sensation. J Texture Stud2017; 48: 181–192.
115.
DingSPanYTongM, et al. Tactile perception of roughness and hardness to discriminate materials by friction-induced vibration. Sensors2017; 17: 2748.
116.
SergachevDAMatthewsDTAvan der HeideE. Normalising tactile friction. Tribol Int2021; 161: 107052.
117.
KeninsP. Influence of fiber type and moisture on measured fabric-to-skin friction. Text Res J1994; 64(12): 722–728.
118.
JayawardanaKOvendenNCCottendenA. Quantifying the frictional forces between skin and nonwoven fabrics. Front Physiol2017; 8: 107.
119.
FalloonSSAsimakopoulosVCottendenAM. An experimental study of friction between volar forearm skin and nonwoven fabrics used in disposable absorbent products for incontinence. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine2019; 233: 35–47.
120.
WoodhouseMWorsleyPRVoegeliD, et al. The physiological response of soft tissue to periodic repositioning as a strategy for pressure ulcer prevention. Clin Biomech2015; 30: 166–174.
121.
YapKKMuraliMTanZ, et al. Wax-oil lubricants to reduce the shear between skin and PPE. Sci Rep2021; 11(1): 10.
122.
Rubio-AliagaAGarcía-CascalesMSSánchez-LozanoJM, et al. MCDM-based multidimensional approach for selection of optimal groundwater pumping systems: Design and case example. Renew Energy2021; 163: 213–224.
123.
ChristensenMNachtSPackmanE. Facial oiliness and dryness: correlation between instrumental measurements and self-assessment. J Soc Cosmet Chem1983; 34: 241–253.
124.
BrillA-KPickersgillRMoghalM, et al. Mask pressure effects on the nasal bridge during short-term noninvasive ventilation. ERJ Open Res2018; 4: 168–2017.
