Two-Dimensional Adaptive-Surface Elasto-Plastic Asperity Contact Model

[+] Author and Article Information
Tianxiang Liu, Qin Xie

School of Mechatronic Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, 710072, P. R. C.

Geng Liu

School of Mechatronic Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, 710072, P. R. C.npuliug@nwpu.edu.cn

Q. Jane Wang

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208

J. Tribol 128(4), 898-903 (Jun 01, 2006) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2345418 History: Received January 08, 2006; Revised June 01, 2006

When contact problems are solved by numerical approaches, a surface profile is usually described by a series of discrete nodes with the same intervals along a coordinate axis. Contact computation based on roughness datum mesh may be time consuming. An adaptive-surface elasto-plastic asperity contact model is presented in this paper. Such a model is developed in order to reduce the computing time by removing the surface nodes that have little influence on the contact behavior of rough surfaces. The nodes to be removed are determined by a prescribed threshold. The adaptive-surface asperity contact model is solved by means of the element-free Galerkin-finite element coupling method because of its flexibility in domain discretization and versatility in node arrangements. The effects of different thresholds on contact pressure distribution, real contact area, and elasto-plastic stress fields in contacting bodies are investigated and discussed. The results show that this model can help reduce about 48% computational time when the relative errors are about 5%.

Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Adaptive surface profile description

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Adaptive process of a discrete surface profile

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Original rough surface profile and the calculation region of two different lengths

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Relative errors of the roughness of the adaptive rough surface. (a)L=0.128mm, (b)L=0.256mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Non-dimensional contact pressures with different thresholds compared to those from the non-adaptive calculation. Nominal pressure, q=390.625MPa. (a)δ¯=0.0406, NPA=65; (b)δ¯=0.025; NPA=74; (c)δ¯=0.0166; NPA=85; (d)δ¯=0.0106, NPA=96; and (e)δ¯=0.0047, NPA=109.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Relative errors of the maximum contact pressures, location of the maximum pressures, average gaps, and contact areas. (a) Maximum contact pressures, (b) location of the maximum contact pressures, and (c) average gaps and real areas of contact.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Von Mises stress contours in the meshless region with different thresholds. (a)δ¯=0.0406, NPA=65; (b)δ¯=0.025, NPA=74; (c)δ¯=0.0166, NPA=85; (d)δ¯=0.0106, NPA=96; (e)δ¯=0.0047, NPA=109; and (f) Nonadaptive, NP=129.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Non-dimensional average gap and non-dimensional nominal pressure versus relative errors. (a) Non-dimensional average gap versus relative error of nominal pressure, (b) non-dimensional nominal pressure versus relative error of contact area.



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