Show simple item record

contributor authorCiavarella, M.
date accessioned2017-11-25T07:19:33Z
date available2017-11-25T07:19:33Z
date copyright2016/27/10
date issued2017
identifier issn0742-4787
identifier othertrib_139_02_021402.pdf
identifier urihttp://138.201.223.254:8080/yetl1/handle/yetl/4235859
description abstractRecently, it has been shown that while asperity models show correctly qualitative features of rough contact problems (linearity in area–load, negative exponential dependence of load on separation which means also linearity of stiffness with load), the exact value of the coefficients are not precise for the idealized case of Gaussian distribution of heights. This is due to the intrinsic simplifications, neglecting asperity coalescence, and interaction effects. However, the issue of Gaussianity has not been proved or experimentally verified in many cases, and here, we show that, for example, assuming a Weibull distribution of asperity heights, the area–load linear coefficient is not much affected, while the relationships load–separation and, therefore, also stiffness–load do change largely, particularly when considering bounded distributions of asperity heights. It is suggested that Gaussianity of surfaces should be further tested in the experiments, before applying the most sophisticated rough contact models based on the Gaussian assumption.
publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
titleOn the Significance of Asperity Models Predictions of Rough Contact With Respect to Recent Alternative Theories
typeJournal Paper
journal volume139
journal issue2
journal titleJournal of Tribology
identifier doi10.1115/1.4034245
journal fristpage21402
journal lastpage021402-4
treeJournal of Tribology:;2017:;volume( 139 ):;issue: 002
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record