2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.triboint.2014.06.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurement of real contact area on thermal print head using a laser microscope with a wide field of view

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar to that in optics [46][47][48], 'field of view' is introduced as an essential and significant parameter for electrostatic OLSs due to the fact that OLSs only detect charge in the field of the sensing zone of a probe. The electrostatic field of view used in Morris's work [11] was defined as the measurable maximum range in space detected by the electrostatic sensor when an inducing charge passes through the sensing zone of the sensor probe.…”
Section: Field Of Viewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similar to that in optics [46][47][48], 'field of view' is introduced as an essential and significant parameter for electrostatic OLSs due to the fact that OLSs only detect charge in the field of the sensing zone of a probe. The electrostatic field of view used in Morris's work [11] was defined as the measurable maximum range in space detected by the electrostatic sensor when an inducing charge passes through the sensing zone of the sensor probe.…”
Section: Field Of Viewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…40 Previously, extensive experimental approaches for the real contact are based on the thermal resistance, electric resistance, ultrasonic reflection and optical measurement, 41 where one surface of contact pair can be transparent and directly monitored 42,43 by constructing self-designed equipment to measure the real contact area. In addition, some experiments lack of resolution cannot display the actual contact behaviors of multi-scale asperities of rough surface, 44,45 such as roughness scale information, thus that also cannot obtain the real contact area accurately. Recently, poor resolution in measuring and observing the contact behaviors between rough surfaces 41 was improved by a test rig with submicron resolution, 46 however a lager cost occurred in equipment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several attempts to experimentally analyse a real contact area with an optical method have been reported [32] to [36]. The vast majority of research has involved the contact between an ideally smooth, rigid flat and a ball, which simulates a single asperity peak [29], [35], [37] and [38].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%