0
Technical Briefs

Comparative Contact Analysis Study of Finite Element Method Based Deterministic, Simplified Multi-Asperity and Modified Statistical Contact Models

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Megalingam

 Department of Mechanical Engineering,Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600 036, India

M. M. Mayuram1

 Department of Mechanical Engineering,Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600 036, Indiamayuram@iitm.ac.in

1

Corresponding author.

J. Tribol 134(1), 014503 (Feb 24, 2012) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005649 History: Received October 19, 2010; Revised December 22, 2011; Published February 10, 2012; Online February 24, 2012

The study of the contact stresses generated when two surfaces are in contact plays a significant role in understanding the tribology of contact pairs. Most of the present contact models are based on the statistical treatment of the single asperity contact model. For a clear understanding about the elastic-plastic behavior of two rough surfaces in contact, comparative study involving the deterministic contact model, simplified multi-asperity contact model, and modified statistical model are undertaken. In deterministic contact model analysis, a three dimensional deformable rough surface pressed against a rigid flat surface is carried out using the finite element method in steps. A simplified multi-asperity contact model is developed using actual summit radii deduced from the rough surface, applying single asperity contact model results. The resultant contact parameters like contact load, contact area, and contact pressure are compared. The asperity interaction noticed in the deterministic contact model analysis leads to wide disparity in the results. Observing the elastic-plastic transition of the summits and the sharing of contact load and contact area among the summits, modifications are employed in single asperity statistical contact model approaches in the form of a correction factor arising from asperity interaction to reduce the variations. Consequently, the modified statistical contact model and simplified multi-asperity contact model based on actual summit radius results show improved agreement with the deterministic contact model results.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Deterministic model: a close view

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic diagram of developed models. (a) Deterministic model. (b) Simplified multi-asperity contact model based on actual summit radius.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

von Mises stress (10−6 N/μ m2 ) plot showing asperity interactions at different dimensionless interferences for 24 μ m × 24 μ m deterministic rough surface model. (a) h/σ of 1.28. (b) h/σ of 1.87. (c) h/σ of 3.10.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

(a), (b), and (c) Contact parameter results of simplified multi-asperity contact models (

deterministic model, JG model, KE model, SM model, Zhao model)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

(a) and (c) Contact parameter results of statistical contact models, and (b) and (d) contact parameter results of modified statistical contact models (

deterministic model, JG model, KE model, SM model, Zhao model)

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.

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