0
Technical Brief

Ultrasonic Measurements of Contact Stiffness Between Rough Surfaces

[+] Author and Article Information
Grzegorz Starzynski

Institute of Fundamental Technological Research,
Polish Academy of Sciences,
Pawinskiego 5B, 02-106 Warsaw, Poland,
e-mail: gstarz@ippt.gov.pl

Ryszard Buczkowski

Division of Computer Methods,
Maritime University of Szczecin,
ul. Poboznego 11, 70-507 Szczecin, Poland,
e-mail: rbuczkowski@ps.pl

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received November 6, 2013; final manuscript received February 18, 2014; published online April 25, 2014. Assoc. Editor: James R. Barber.

J. Tribol 136(3), 034503 (Apr 25, 2014) (5 pages) Paper No: TRIB-13-1225; doi: 10.1115/1.4027132 History: Received November 06, 2013; Revised February 18, 2014; Accepted February 21, 2014

We have used an ultrasonic method to determine the normal and shear stiffness for three different surfaces. The degree of hysteresis for the loading/unloading and stiffness ratio is a function of roughness. Nonlinear contact stiffness characteristics are obtained. The ratio of tangential to normal stiffness KT/KN slowly increases in proportion to normal loading. The novelty of our setup is that at the same time we can measure the reflection coefficient, obtain results for three transducers simultaneously, and measure the approach as a function of load. The presented experimental results of normal contact stiffness measurements have been used for the verification of our theoretical model based on a fractal description of rough surfaces (Buczkowski et al., “Fractal Normal Contact Stiffness of Rough Surfaces,” Arch. Mech. (submitted for publication).

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Contact stiffness ratio KT/KN and linear trends versus loading for all surfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The slopes of the KT/KN trends from Fig. 8 as a function of the roughness amplitude Sa

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Tangential KT and normal KN contact stiffness and stiffness ratio KT/KN versus loading and unloading (EDM, Sa=8.94μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Tangential KT and normal KN contact stiffness and stiffness ratio KT/KN versus loading and unloading (coarse sandblasted, Sa=5.13μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Tangential KT and normal KN contact stiffness and stiffness ratio KT/KN (the right-hand scale in the figure) versus loading and unloading (fine sand- blasted, Sa=0.832μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Tangential RT and longitudinal RL reflection coefficient versus loading and unloading (EDM, Sa=8.94μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Tangential RT and longitudinal RL reflection coefficient versus loading and unloading (coarse sandblasted, Sa=5.13μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Tangential RT and longitudinal RL reflection coefficient versus loading and unloading (fine sandblasted, Sa=0.832μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic experimental setup for the simultaneous measurement of separation a and reflection of ultrasonic waves (RT,RL) as a function of load P

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