0
Journal of Tribology | Volume 128 | Issue 2 | Research Paper
RESEARCH PAPERS

Elastic-Plastic Contact Behavior Considering Asperity Interactions for Surfaces With Various Height Distributions

[+] Author and Article Information
Yeau-Ren Jeng

Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Chung Cheng University, 168, University Rd., Ming-Hsiung, Chia-Yi, Taiwan 621imeyrj@ccu.edu.tw

Shin-Rung Peng

Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Chung Cheng University, 168, University Rd., Ming-Hsiung, Chia-Yi, Taiwan 621

J. Tribol 128(2), 245-251 (Oct 12, 2005) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2162557 History: Received January 17, 2005; Revised October 12, 2005
Article
References
Figures
Tables
Citing Articles

This study investigates the effects of asperity interactions on the mean surface separation and the real contact area for rough surfaces with non-Gaussian height distributions. The effects of the asperity interactions on the local deformation behavior of a given microcontact are modeled using the Saint Venant principle and Love’s formula. The non-Gaussian rough surfaces are described by the Johnson translatory system. The results indicate that asperity interactions can significantly affect the mean separation of surfaces with non-Gaussian height distributions. The findings also reveal that the contact load and the real contact area of surfaces with non-Gaussian height distributions are significantly different from those of surfaces with Gaussian height distributions. This study uncovers that skewed surfaces tend to deform more elastically, which provides underlying physics for the long-time conventional wisdom and recent experimental data [Y. R. Jeng, 1996, Tribol. Trans., 39, 354–361;Y. R. Jeng, Z. W. Lin, and S. H. Shyo, 2004, ASME J. Tribol., 126, 620–625] that running-in surfaces have better wear resistance.
FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Greenwood, J. A., and Williamson, J. B. P., 1966, “Contact of Nominally Flat Surfaces,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 295 (1442), pp. 300–319.
2
Timoshenko, S., and Goodier, J. N., 1951, "Theory of Elasticity", McGraw-Hill, New York.
3
Greenwood, J. A., and Tripp, J. H., 1967, “The Elastic Contact of Rough Spheres,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 34 , pp. 153–159.
4
Chang, W. R., Etsion, I., and Bogy, D. B., 1987, “An Elastic-Plastic Model for the Contact of Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol., 109 , pp. 257–263.
5
Zhao, Y., Maietta, D. M., and Chang, L., 2000, “An Asperity Micro-Contact Model Incorporating the Transition From Elastic Deformation to Fully Plastic Flow,” ASME J. Tribol., 107 , pp. 86–93.
6
Hisakado, T., 1974, “Effects of Surface Roughness on Contact Between Solid Surfaces,” Wear  [CrossRef], 28 , pp. 217–234.
7
Bush, A. W., Gibson, R. D., and Thomas, T. R., 1975, “The Elastic Contact of a Rough Surface,” Wear  [CrossRef], 35 , pp. 87–111.
8
Bush, A. W., Gibson, R. D., and Keogh, G. P., 1979, “Strong Anisotropic Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol., 101 , pp. 15–20.
9
Jeng, Y. R., and Wang, P. Y., 2003, “An Elliptical Microcontact Model Considering Elastic, Elastoplastic, and Plastic Deformation,” ASME J. Tribol.  [CrossRef], 125 , pp. 232–240.
10
Johnson, K. L., Greenwood, J. A., and Higginson, J. G., 1985, “The Contact of Elastic Regular Wavy Surfaces,” Int. J. Mech. Sci.  [CrossRef], 27 (6), pp. 383–396.
11
Lai, W. T., and Cheng, H. S., 1985, “Computer Simulation of Elastic Rough Contacts,” ASLE Trans., 28 (2), pp. 172–180.
12
Ju, Y., and Zheng, L., 1992, “A Full Numerical Solution for the Elastic Contact of Three-Dimensional Real Rough Surfaces,” Wear  [CrossRef], 157 , pp. 151–161.
13
Leng, Y., Yang, G., Yan, H., and Zheng, L., 1996, “The Characteristics of Elastically Contacting Ideal Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol., 118 , pp. 90–97.
14
Komvopoulos, K., and Choi, D.-H., 1992, “Elastic Finite Element Analysis of Multi-Asperity Contacts,” ASME J. Tribol., 114 , pp. 823–831.
15
Zhao, Y., and Chang, L., 2001, “A Model of Asperity Interactions in Elastic-Plastic Contact of Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol.  [CrossRef], 123 , pp. 857–864.
16
Love, A. E. H., 1929, “Stress Produced in a Semi-Infinite Solid by Pressure on Part of the Boundary,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, A228 , pp. 377–420.
17
Jeng, Y. R., 1998, “Characterization of Surface Height Distributions,” J. Chin. Soc. Mech. Eng., 19 (4), pp. 417–423.
18
Whitehouse, D. J., 1978, “Beta Functions for Surface Topologie?” CIRP Ann., 27 (1), pp. 491–497.
19
Peters, J., Vanherck, P., and Sastrodinoto, M., 1978, “Assessment of Surface Topology Analysis Techniques,” CIRP Ann., 28 (2), pp. 539–554.
20
Spedding, T. A., King, T. G., Watson, W., and Stout, K. J., 1980, “The Pearson System of Distribution: Its Application to Non-Gaussian Surface Metrology and a Simple Wear Model,” ASME J. Lubr. Technol., 102 , pp. 495–500.
21
Murthy, T. S., and Reddy, G. C., 1983, “Different Functions and Computations for Surface Topography,” Wear  [CrossRef], 83 , pp. 203–214.
22
Johnson, N. L., 1949, “System of Frequency Curves Generated by Methods of Translation,” Biometrika, 36 , pp. 149–176.
23
Jeng, Y. R., and Gao, C. C., 1998, “Running-in Wear Simulations for Surfaces From Different Manufacturing Processes,” J. Chin. Soc. Mech. Eng., 19 , pp. 425–431.
24
Jeng, Y. R., and Gao, C. C., 2000, “Changes of Surface Topography During Wear for Surfaces With Different Height Distributions,” Tribol. Trans., 43 , pp. 749–757.
25
Jeng, Y. R., Lin, Z. W., and Shyu, S. H., 2004, “Changes of Surface Topography During Running-in Process,” ASME J. Tribol.  [CrossRef], 126 (3), pp. 620–625.
26
Jeng, Y. R., Lin, Z. W., and Shyu, D. H., 2002, “A Microscopic Wear Measurement Method for General Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol.  [CrossRef], 124 (4), pp. 829–833.
27
Kotwal, C. A., and Bhushan, B., 1996, “Contact Analysis of Non-Gaussian Surfaces for Minimum Static and Kinetic Friction and Wear,” Tribol. Trans., 39 , pp. 890–898.
28
McCool, J. I., 2000, “Extending the Capability of the Greenwood Williamson Microcontact Model,” ASME J. Tribol.  [CrossRef], 122 , pp. 496–502.
29
McCool, J. I., 1992, “Non-Gaussian Effects in Microcontact,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf.  [CrossRef], 32 (1), pp. 115–123.
30
Yu, N., and Polycarpou, A. A., 2002, “Contact of Rough Surfaces With Asymmetric Distribution of Asperity Heights,” ASME J. Tribol.  [CrossRef], 124 , pp. 367–376.
31
Nuri, K. A., and Halling, J., 1975, “The Normal Approach Between Rough Flat Surfaces in Contact,” Wear  [CrossRef], 32 , pp. 81–93.
32
Tabor, D., 1951, "The Hardness of Metals", Oxford University Press, London.
33
Kapoor, A., Williams, J. A., and Johnson, K. L., 1994, “The Steady State Sliding of Rough Surfaces,” Wear  [CrossRef], 175 , pp. 81–92.
34
Jeng, Y. R., 1996, “Impact of Plateaued Surfaces on Tribological Performance,” STLE Tribol. Trans., 39 (1), pp. 354–361.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
+Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various skewness (ψ=0.7)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various skewness (ψ=0.7)
Figure 1

Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various skewness (ψ=0.7)

Grahic Jump Location
+Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=0.7)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=0.7)
Figure 2

Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=0.7)

Grahic Jump Location
+Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various skewness (ψ=2.5)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various skewness (ψ=2.5)
Figure 3

Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various skewness (ψ=2.5)

Grahic Jump Location
+Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=2.5)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=2.5)
Figure 4

Mean separation of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=2.5)

Grahic Jump Location
+Real area of contact of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=0.7)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Real area of contact of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=0.7)
Figure 5

Real area of contact of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=0.7)

Grahic Jump Location
+Real area of contact of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=2.5)
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Real area of contact of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=2.5)
Figure 6

Real area of contact of surfaces as function of contact load for various kurtosis (ψ=2.5)

Grahic Jump Location
+Effects of non-Gaussian height distributions on critical contact load of surfaces with Ane∕At=0.02
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Effects of non-Gaussian height distributions on critical contact load of surfaces with Ane∕At=0.02
Figure 7

Effects of non-Gaussian height distributions on critical contact load of surfaces with Ane∕At=0.02

Grahic Jump Location
+Effects of non-Gaussian height distributions on critical real area of contact of surfaces with Ane∕At=0.02
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Effects of non-Gaussian height distributions on critical real area of contact of surfaces with Ane∕At=0.02
Figure 8

Effects of non-Gaussian height distributions on critical real area of contact of surfaces with Ane∕At=0.02

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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.

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