Asperity contact theories: Do they predict linearity between contact area and load?

Carbone, Giuseppe; Bottiglione, Francesco

doi:10.1016/j.jmps.2008.03.011

Cited by 221 publications

(190 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(24 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

169

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, if the surface is sufficiently smooth λ s = L/32 we do not observe any dependence of results on the Hurst exponent. The evolution of the real contact area predicted by Greenwood [18] and BGT [5] theories for spectrum bandwidth m 0 m 4 /m 2 2 = 2 (data from [21]) lie in the confidence interval of the results obtained for non-representative surfaces (λ l = L) with high Hurst exponents H 0.5. Asymptotic limit of Persson theory [23,24] lies below all obtained results.…”

Section: Figsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…(1) nor to approach its asymptotic limit. It is also worth noting that in forementioned models the evolution of the real contact area is strictly nonlinear for realistic fractions of contact [21,22]. Moreover, this evolution does not depend on the Hurst roughness exponent H but only on α [21].…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…It is also worth noting that in forementioned models the evolution of the real contact area is strictly nonlinear for realistic fractions of contact [21,22]. Moreover, this evolution does not depend on the Hurst roughness exponent H but only on α [21]. A competing theory was proposed by Persson [23,24], it also predicts a linear contact area evolution for small contact fractions, however, the obtained coefficient of proportionality κ = 8/π is significantly smaller than in the asperity-based models.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…L and 2L. This mechanical representativity can be (2) Asymptotics, BGT [5] Asymptotics, Persson [23] Greenwood [18] BGT [5,21] …”

Section: Representativity Of Rough Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Contact between representative rough surfaces

Yastrebov

Anciaux²,

Molinari³

2012

Phys. Rev. E

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A numerical analysis of mechanical frictionless contact between rough selfaffine elastic manifolds was carried out. It is shown that the lower cutoff wavenumber in surface spectra is a key parameter controlling the representativity of the numerical model. Using this notion we demonstrate that for representative surfaces the evolution of the real contact area with load is universal and independent of the Hurst roughness exponent. By introducing a universal law containing three constants, we extend the study of this evolution beyond the limit of infinitesimal area fractions. IntroductionReal surfaces are self-affine [1,2] and the surface heights are distributed normally [3]. Due to this roughness the real contact area A is often only a * vladislav.yastrebov@mines-paristech.fr †

show abstract

Section: Figsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…L and 2L. This mechanical representativity can be (2) Asymptotics, BGT [5] Asymptotics, Persson [23] Greenwood [18] BGT [5,21] …”

Section: Representativity Of Rough Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Contact between representative rough surfaces

Yastrebov

Anciaux²,

Molinari³

2012

Phys. Rev. E

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The area of true contact is thus generally much smaller than the nominal interfacial contact area between the two surfaces [19,20]. Following pioneering work by Archard [21], it has been shown through analytical models and experimentation that the true contact area at the interface of two self-affine surfaces is linearly proportional to the normal force applied on the two solids [22][23][24][25][26][27]. Frictional force is often considered as linearly proportional to the true contact area [28][29][30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Static friction between rigid fractal surfaces

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using spheropolygon-based simulations and contact slope analysis, we investigate the effects of surface topography and atomic scale friction on the macroscopically observed friction between rigid blocks with fractal surface structures. From our mathematical derivation, the angle of macroscopic friction is the result of the sum of the angle of atomic friction and the slope angle between the contact surfaces. The latter is obtained from the determination of all possible contact slopes between the two surface profiles through an alternative signature function. Our theory is validated through numerical simulations of spheropolygons with fractal Koch surfaces and is applied to the description of frictional properties of Weierstrass-Mandelbrot surfaces. The agreement between simulations and theory suggests that for interpreting macroscopic frictional behavior, the descriptors of surface morphology should be defined from the signature function rather than from the slopes of the contacting surfaces.

show abstract

Recent Advances in Rubber Friction in the Context of Tire Traction

Pan

2013

Polymer Adhesion, Friction, and Lubrication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Asperity contact theories: Do they predict linearity between contact area and load?

Cited by 221 publications

References 24 publications

Contact between representative rough surfaces

Contact between representative rough surfaces

Static friction between rigid fractal surfaces

Recent Advances in Rubber Friction in the Context of Tire Traction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About