1 Erratum to: Tribol Lett DOI 10.1007/s11249-009-9433-7

While performing additional investigations, we have discovered some minor errors in Eqs. (2), (3), (11), and (12) in the original article. The corrected equations are as follows:

$$ h_{c} = 1.899\alpha^{0.53} \frac{{\left( {u\eta_{G} } \right)^{0.67} R^{\prime 0.464} }}{{E^{\prime 0.073} W^{0.067} }} $$
(2)
$$ h_{\min } = 1.791\alpha^{0.49} \frac{{\left( {u\eta_{G} } \right)^{0.68} R^{\prime 0.466} }}{{E^{\prime 0.117} W^{0.073} }} $$
(3)
$$ K_{1} = 1.899\alpha^{0.53} \frac{{\eta_{G}^{0.67} R^{\prime 0.464} }}{{E^{\prime 0.073} W^{0.067} }} $$
(11)
$$ K_{2} = 1.791\alpha^{0.49} \frac{{\eta_{G}^{0.68} R^{\prime 0.466} }}{{E^{\prime 0.117} W^{0.073} }} $$
(12)

In this case, the values in Fig. 10 decrease slightly. However, these errors do not affect the conclusion that at a same entering velocity, the central film thickness under deceleration is higher than that under acceleration. The corrected Fig. 10 is as follows:

Fig. 10
figure 10

Comparison of the film thickness profiles and film thickness values under different accelerations (a > 0, a < 0, and a = 0)