No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Effect of 3D fractal dimension on contact area and asperity interactions in elastoplastic contact
13.S. Mezghani, A. Jourani, and H. Zahouani, WIT Trans. Built. Environ. 85, 369 (2006).
16.B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature (W H Freeman, New York, 1982).
29.H. Hertz, J. Reine Angew. Math. 92, 156 (1881).
30.D. Tabor, The Hardness of Metals (Oxford University, Oxford, UK, 1951).
31.K. L. Johnson, Contact Mechanics (Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK, 1985).
48.A. Jourani, A. Dellaleau, M. Dursapt, H. Hamdi, F. Sidoroff, and H. Zahouani, Rev. Eur. Elem. 14(2–3), 271 (2005).
49.A. Jourani, Indian. J. Eng. Mater. S. 22(6), 611 (2015).
Article metrics loading...
Few models are devoted to investigate the effect of 3D fractal dimension Ds on contact area and asperity interactions. These models used statistical approaches or two-dimensional deterministic simulations without considering the asperity interactions and elastic–plastic transition regime. In this study, a complete 3D deterministic model is adopted to simulate the contact between fractalsurfaces which are generated using a modified two-variable Weierstrass–Mandelbrot function. This model incorporates the asperity interactions and considers the different deformation modes of surface asperities which range from entirely elastic through elastic-plastic to entirely plastic contact. The simulations reveal that the elastoplastic model is more appropriate to calculate the contact area ratio and pressure field. It is also shown that the influence of the asperity interactions cannot be neglected, especially at lower fractal dimension Ds and higher load.
Full text loading...
Most read this month