0
Research Papers: Contact Mechanics

Stratified Revised Asperity Contact Model for Worn Surfaces

[+] Author and Article Information
Songtao Hu

State Key Laboratory of Tribology,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100084, China
e-mail: HSTTAOTAO@163.com

Noel Brunetiere

Institut Pprime,
CNRS-Universite de Poitiers-ENSMA,
Futuroscope Chasseneuil Cedex 86962, France
e-mail: noel.brunetiere@univ-poitiers.fr

Weifeng Huang

State Key Laboratory of Tribology,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100084, China
e-mail: huangwf@tsinghua.edu.cn

Xiangfeng Liu

State Key Laboratory of Tribology,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100084, China
e-mail: liuxf@tsinghua.edu.cn

Yuming Wang

State Key Laboratory of Tribology,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100084, China
e-mail: yumingwang@tsinghua.edu.cn

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received March 28, 2016; final manuscript received August 8, 2016; published online January 10, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Mircea Teodorescu.

J. Tribol 139(2), 021403 (Jan 10, 2017) (12 pages) Paper No: TRIB-16-1099; doi: 10.1115/1.4034531 History: Received March 28, 2016; Revised August 08, 2016

Segmented bi-Gaussian stratified elastic asperity contact model of Leefe (1998, “‘Bi-Gaussian’ Representation of Worn Surface Topography in Elastic Contact Problems,” Tribol. Ser., 34, pp. 281–290), which suits for worn surfaces, has been improved. It still exhibits two drawbacks: (1) the arbitrary assumption of the probability density function (PDF) consisting of two component PDFs intersecting at a knee-point, violating the unity-area demand and (2) the preference for large roughness-scale part of the surface, leading to an error on the characterization of small roughness-scale part. A continuous bi-Gaussian stratified elastic asperity contact model is proposed based on a surface combination theory and a continuous separation method. The two stratified contact models are applied to a simulated pure bi-Gaussian surface and four real worn surfaces. The results show that the modified segmented and the continuous stratified contact models are both validated by a deterministic model with better accuracy for the continuous one.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 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, A, 295(1442), pp. 300–319. [CrossRef]
Chang, W. R. , Etsion, I. , and Bogy, D. B. , 1987, “ An Elastic-Plastic Model for the Contact of Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol., 109(2), pp. 257–263. [CrossRef]
Sayles, R. S. , and Thomas, T. R. , 1978, “ Surface Topography as a Nonstationary Random Process,” Nature, 271(5644), pp. 431–434. [CrossRef]
Bhushan, B. , Wyant, J. C. , and Meiling, J. , 1988, “ A New Three-Dimensional Non-Contact Digital Optical Profiler,” Wear, 122(3), pp. 301–312. [CrossRef]
Majumdar, A. , and Bhushan, B. , 1991, “ Fractal Model of Elastic-Plastic Contact Between Rough Surfaces,” ASME J. Tribol., 113(1), pp. 1–11. [CrossRef]
Komvopoulos, K. , and Yan, W. , 1998, “ Contact Analysis of Elastic-Plastic Fractal Surfaces,” J. Appl. Phys., 84, pp. 3617–3624. [CrossRef]
Morag, Y. , and Etsion, I. , 2007, “ Resolving the Contradiction of Asperities Plastic to Elastic Mode Transition in Current Contact Models of Fractal Rough Surfaces,” Wear, 262, pp. 624–629. [CrossRef]
Peklenik, J. , 1967, “ New Developments in Surface Characterization and Measurements by Means of Random Process Analysis,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 182(11), pp. 108–126. [CrossRef]
Abbot, E. J. , and Firestone, F. A. , 1933, “ Specifying Surface Quality,” Mech. Eng., 55, pp. 569–572.
DIN, 1990, “ Measurement of Surface Roughness; Parameters Rk, Rpk, Rvk, Mr1, Mr2 for the Description of the Material Portion (Profile Bearing Length Ratio) in the Roughness Profile; Measuring Conditions and Evaluation Procedures,” Deutsches Institit fur Normung E. V., Berlin, Standard No. DIN 4776.
Zipin, R. B. , 1990, “ Analysis of the Rk Surface Roughness Parameter Proposals,” Precis. Eng., 12(2), pp. 106–108. [CrossRef]
Williamson, J. P. B. , 1985, “ Microtopography of Surfaces,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., 182, pp. 21–30.
Whitehouse, D. J. , 1985, “ Assessment of Surface Finish Profiles Produced by Multi-Process Manufacture,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part B, 199(42), pp. 263–270. [CrossRef]
Malburg, M. C. , Raja, J. , and Whitehouse, D. J. , 1993, “ Characterization of Surface Texture Generated by Plateau Honing Process,” CIRP Ann. - Manuf. Technol., 42(1), pp. 637–639. [CrossRef]
Sannareddy, H. , Raja, J. , and Chen, K. , 1998, “ Characterization of Surface Texture Generated by Multi-Process Manufacture,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 38, pp. 529–536. [CrossRef]
Pawlus, P. , and Grabon, W. , 2008, “ The Method of Truncation Parameters Measurement From Material Ratio Curve,” Precis. Eng., 32(4), pp. 342–347. [CrossRef]
Pawlus, P. , 2008, “ Simulation of Stratified Surface Topographies,” Wear, 264, pp. 457–463. [CrossRef]
Leefe, S. E. , 1998, “ ‘Bi-Gaussian' Representation of Worn Surface Topography in Elastic Contact Problems,” Tribol. Ser., 34, pp. 281–290.
Minet, C. , Brunetiere, N. , Tournerie, B. , and Fribourg, D. , 2010, “ Analysis and Modeling of the Topography of Mechanical Seal Faces,” Tribol. Trans., 53(6), pp. 799–815. [CrossRef]
Staufert, G. , 1979, “ Characterization of Random Roughness Profiles—A Comparison of AR-Modeling Technique and Profile Description by Means of Commonly Used Parameters,” Ann. CIRP, 28, pp. 431–435.
DeVries, W. R. , 1979, “ Autoregressive Time Series Models for Surface Profile Characterization,” Ann. CIRP, 28, pp. 437–440.
Whitehouse, D. J. , 1983, “ The Generation of Two Dimensional Random Surfaces Having a Specified Function,” Ann. CIRP, 32(1), pp. 495–498. [CrossRef]
Patir, N. , 1978, “ A Numerical Procedure for Random Generation of Rough Surfaces,” Wear, 47(2), pp. 263–277. [CrossRef]
Bakolas, V. , 2004, “ Numerical Generation of Arbitrarily Oriented Non-Gaussian Three-Dimensional Rough Surfaces,” Wear, 254, pp. 546–554. [CrossRef]
Hu, Y. Z. , and Tonder, K. , 1992, “ Simulation of 3-D Random Rough Surface by 2-D Digital Filter and Fourier Analysis,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 32, pp. 83–90. [CrossRef]
Majumdar, A. , and Tien, C. , 1990, “ Fractal Characterization and Simulation of Rough Surfaces,” Wear, 136(2), pp. 313–327. [CrossRef]
Wu, J. , 2000, “ Simulation of Rough Surfaces With FFT,” Tribol. Int., 33(1), pp. 47–58. [CrossRef]
Wu, J. , 2004, “ Simulation of Non-Gaussian Surfaces With FFT,” Tribol. Int., 37(4), pp. 339–346. [CrossRef]
Johnson, N. L. , 1949, “ Systems of Frequency Curves Generated by Method of Translation,” Biometrika, 36, pp. 149–176. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Watson, W. , and Spedding, T. A. , 1982, “ The Time Series Modelling of Non-Gaussian Engineering Processes,” Wear, 83(2), pp. 215–231. [CrossRef]
Hill, I. D. , Hill, R. , and Holder, R. L. , 1976, “ Fitting Johnson Curves by Moments,” Appl. Stat., 25(2), pp. 180–189. [CrossRef]
Hu, S. , Brunetiere, N. , Huang, W. , Liu, X. , and Wang, Y. , 2016, “ Continuous Separating Method for Characterizing and Reconstructing Bi-Gaussian Stratified Surfaces,” Tribol. Int., 102, pp. 454–462. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Characterization of a two-process or worn surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Modified segmented bi-Gaussian stratified asperity contact model between a bi-Gaussian rough surface and a smooth plane

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Surface combination theory

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Monospring face seal

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Visualization of the simulated bi-Gaussian and the real worn surfaces: (a) simulated bi-Gaussian, (b) SiC, (c) TC, (d) RiC, and (e) MiC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Probability material ratio curves of the simulated bi-Gaussian and the real worn surfaces for asperity height and summit height: (a) simulated bi-Gaussian, (b) SiC, (c) TC, (d) RiC, and (e) MiC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Results of component separation for asperity height and summit height using the segmented and the continuous separation methods: (a) simulated bi-Gaussian, (b) SiC, (c) TC, (d) RiC, and (e) MiC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison between the modified segmented stratified, the continuous stratified, and the deterministic asperity contact models: (a) simulated bi-Gaussian, (b) SiC, (c) TC, (d) RiC, and (e) MiC

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