0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

A Method for Determining the Asperity Distribution of Contacting Rough Surfaces

[+] Author and Article Information
Reese E. Jones, David A. Zeigler

Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA 94551-0969, U.S.A.

J. Tribol 127(1), 24-29 (Feb 07, 2005) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1828077 History: Received February 03, 2004; Revised June 23, 2004; Online February 07, 2005
Copyright © 2005 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Greenwood,  J. A., and Williamson,  J. B. P., 1966, “Contact of Nominally Flat Surfaces,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 295, pp. 300–319.
Zhuravlev,  V. A., 1940, “On the Physical Basis of the Amontons-Coulomb Law of Friction,” Zh. Tekh. Fiz., 10, pp. 1447–1452.
Archard,  J. F., 1957, “Elastic Deformation and the Laws of Friction,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 243, pp. 190–205.
Chang,  W. R., Etsion,  I., and Bogy,  D. B., 1987, “An Elastic-Plastic Model for the Contact of Rough Surfaces,” J. Tribol., 109, pp. 257–263.
Mikic,  B., 1971, “Analytical Studies of Contact of Nominally Flat Surfaces; Effect of Previous Loading,” J. Lubr. Technol., 96, pp. 451–456.
Golden,  J. M., 1976, “The Evolution of Asperity Height Distributions of a Surface Subjected to Wear,” Wear, 39, pp. 25–44.
Hollander,  A. E., and Lancaster,  J. K., 1973, “An Application of Topographical Analysis to the Wear of Polymers,” Wear, 25, 155–170.
Linz, P., 1985, Analytical and Numerical Methods for Volterra Equations, SIAM, Philadelphia.
Lacey,  C., and Talke,  F. E., 1992, “Measurement and Simulation of Partial Contact at the Head/Tape Interface,” J. Tribol., 114, pp. 646–652.
Wu,  Y., and Talke,  F. E., 1996, “The Effect of Surface Roughness on the Head–Tape Interface,” J. Tribol., 118, pp. 376–381.
Wang,  E. L., Wu,  Y., and Talke,  F. E., 1996, “Tape Asperity Compliance Measurement using a Pneumatic Method,” IEEE Trans. Magn., 32, pp. 3732–3734.
Tan,  S., Baugh,  E., and Talke,  F. E., 1998, “Measurement of Nonelastic Asperity Compliance of Magnetic Tapes,” IEEE Trans. Magn., 34, pp. 1726–1728.
Johnson, K. L., 1985, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Abramowitz, M., and Stegun, I. A., 1964, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, National Bureau of Standards.
Tabor., D. 1951, The Hardness of Metals, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Sanchez, D. A., 1972, Ordinary Differential Equations and Stability Theory, Dover, New York.
Atkinson, K. E., 1997, The Numerical Solution of Integral Equations of the Second Kind, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of the surface height distribution values. The original values are derived from a Gaussian distribution function with μ=0 and σ=1.
Grahic Jump Location
Approximation of the nondimensionalized TBT data with a least-squares norm fit using inverse power law functions. The topmost line corresponds to the initial loading, the middle line corresponds to the initial unloading, and the bottom-most line represents the second loading.
Grahic Jump Location
Approximate asperity height distribution calculated from TBT data corresponding to asperities with elastic response behavior. The loading acts to flatten the higher asperities. As a result, the distribution shifts toward the mean plane as the surfaces come in contact.
Grahic Jump Location
Close-up of the approximate asperity height distribution calculated from TBT data corresponding to asperities with elastic response behavior. Notice that the line corresponding to the initial load crosses the other lines. This is consistent with the physical model where taller asperities are flattened as a result of the contact.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of the surface height distribution values. The original values are derived from a Gaussian distribution function with μ=0,σ=0.75, and scaled to have maximal height 1/2π.
Grahic Jump Location
Approximate asperity height distribution calculated from TBT data corresponding to asperities with elastic–plastic response behavior. The loading acts to flatten the higher asperities. As a result, the distribution shifts toward the mean plane as the surfaces come in contact.
Grahic Jump Location
Close-up of the approximate asperity height distribution calculated from TBT data corresponding to asperities with elastic–plastic response behavior. Notice that the line corresponding to the initial load crosses the other lines. This is consistent with the physical model where taller asperities are flattened as a result of the contact.

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In