YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Tribology
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Tribology
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Discussion of “Contact Unloading Behaviors of Elastic-Power-Law Strain Hardening Material Considering Indenter Elasticity Effect” (Chen, C., Wang, Q., Wang, H., Ding, H., Hu, W., Xie, W., Weng, P., Jiang, L., and Yin, X., 2022, ASME J. Tribol., 144(12), p

    Source: Journal of Tribology:;2022:;volume( 145 ):;issue: 003::page 35501-1
    Author:
    Green, Itzhak
    DOI: 10.1115/1.4056192
    Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    Abstract: The readers ought to be aware of some claims based on unfounded theories in the subject paper [1], which could possibly distort results and hinder future research and development. To start, Eq. (3) in the subject paper is stated to be taken from Ref. [70] (Johnson’s classical textbook). However, said Eq. (3) is imprecise because it uses a constant coefficient θy = 1.1, as claimed. That coefficient does not account for the variability in compressibility of the materials in contact, i.e., the Poisson’s ratios of the materials. The general range of Poisson’s ratios, ν, for crystalline and engineering materials is between -1 and 0.5. For example, ν = 0.2 for cast iron, ν = 0.18 for glass, or ν = 0.44 for gold. There are many materials and crystallines that have negative Poisson ratios (some are even time-dependent). Thus, limiting analyses and discussions to narrow subsets of Poisson ratios, say around 0.3, would likewise be narrow. That dependence upon Poisson’s ratio is addressed not only in Ref. [70], but also in other dated work, such as by the Chang et al. (CEB) model [2]. The CEB derivation, however, has other flaws—see discussions in Refs. [3] and [4].
    • Download: (112.7Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Discussion of “Contact Unloading Behaviors of Elastic-Power-Law Strain Hardening Material Considering Indenter Elasticity Effect” (Chen, C., Wang, Q., Wang, H., Ding, H., Hu, W., Xie, W., Weng, P., Jiang, L., and Yin, X., 2022, ASME J. Tribol., 144(12), p

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4291328
    Collections
    • Journal of Tribology

    Show full item record

    contributor authorGreen, Itzhak
    date accessioned2023-08-16T18:03:41Z
    date available2023-08-16T18:03:41Z
    date copyright11/23/2022 12:00:00 AM
    date issued2022
    identifier issn0742-4787
    identifier othertrib_145_3_035501.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4291328
    description abstractThe readers ought to be aware of some claims based on unfounded theories in the subject paper [1], which could possibly distort results and hinder future research and development. To start, Eq. (3) in the subject paper is stated to be taken from Ref. [70] (Johnson’s classical textbook). However, said Eq. (3) is imprecise because it uses a constant coefficient θy = 1.1, as claimed. That coefficient does not account for the variability in compressibility of the materials in contact, i.e., the Poisson’s ratios of the materials. The general range of Poisson’s ratios, ν, for crystalline and engineering materials is between -1 and 0.5. For example, ν = 0.2 for cast iron, ν = 0.18 for glass, or ν = 0.44 for gold. There are many materials and crystallines that have negative Poisson ratios (some are even time-dependent). Thus, limiting analyses and discussions to narrow subsets of Poisson ratios, say around 0.3, would likewise be narrow. That dependence upon Poisson’s ratio is addressed not only in Ref. [70], but also in other dated work, such as by the Chang et al. (CEB) model [2]. The CEB derivation, however, has other flaws—see discussions in Refs. [3] and [4].
    publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    titleDiscussion of “Contact Unloading Behaviors of Elastic-Power-Law Strain Hardening Material Considering Indenter Elasticity Effect” (Chen, C., Wang, Q., Wang, H., Ding, H., Hu, W., Xie, W., Weng, P., Jiang, L., and Yin, X., 2022, ASME J. Tribol., 144(12), p
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume145
    journal issue3
    journal titleJournal of Tribology
    identifier doi10.1115/1.4056192
    journal fristpage35501-1
    journal lastpage35501-2
    page2
    treeJournal of Tribology:;2022:;volume( 145 ):;issue: 003
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian