The average flow model presented by Patir and Cheng [1] is evaluated. First, it is shown that the choice of grid used in the average flow model influences the results. The results presented are different from those given by Patir and Cheng. Second, it is shown that the introduction of two-dimensional flow greatly reduces the effect of roughness on flow. Results based on one-dimensional flow cannot be relied upon for two-dimensional problems. Finally, some average flow factors are given for truncated rough surfaces. These can be applied to partially worn surfaces. The most important conclusion reached is that an even closer examination of the average flow concept is needed before the results can be applied with confidence to lubrication problems.
