28.12.2013 Views

Chapter 2 Review of Forces and Moments - Brown University

Chapter 2 Review of Forces and Moments - Brown University

Chapter 2 Review of Forces and Moments - Brown University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

(1) All surfaces are rough;<br />

(2) All surfaces are covered with a thin film <strong>of</strong> oxide, an adsorbed layer <strong>of</strong> water, or an<br />

organic film.<br />

Surface roughness can be controlled to some extent – a cast<br />

surface is usually very rough; if the surface is machined the<br />

roughness is somewhat less; roughness can be reduced further<br />

by grinding, lapping or polishing the surfaces. But you can’t get<br />

rid <strong>of</strong> it altogether. Many surfaces can be thought <strong>of</strong> as having a<br />

fractal geometry. This means that the roughness is statistically<br />

self-similar with length scale – as you zoom in on the surface, it<br />

always looks (statistically) the same (more precisely the<br />

surfaces are self-affine. When you zoom in, it looks like the<br />

surface got stretched vertically – surfaces are rougher at short<br />

wavelengths than at long ones).<br />

Of course no surface can be truly fractal: roughness can’t be<br />

smaller than the size <strong>of</strong> an atom <strong>and</strong> can’t be larger than the<br />

component; but most surfaces look fractal over quite a large range <strong>of</strong> lengths. Various statistical<br />

measures are used to quantify surface roughness, but a discussion <strong>of</strong> these parameters is beyond the scope<br />

<strong>of</strong> this course.<br />

Now, visualize what the contact between two rough surfaces looks like. The surfaces will only touch at<br />

high spots (these are known in the trade as `asperities’) on the two surfaces. Experiments suggest that<br />

there are huge numbers <strong>of</strong> these contacts (nobody has really been able to determine with certainty how<br />

many there actually are). The asperity tips are squashed flat where they contact, so that there is a finite<br />

total area <strong>of</strong> contact between the two surfaces. However, the true contact area (at asperity tips) is much<br />

smaller than the nominal contact area.<br />

N<br />

Nominal contact area A nom<br />

True contact<br />

area A true<br />

The true contact area can be estimated by measuring the surface roughness, <strong>and</strong> then calculating how the<br />

surfaces deform when brought into contact. At present there is some uncertainty as to how this should be<br />

done – this is arguably the most important unsolved problem in the field. The best estimates we have<br />

today all agree that:<br />

The true area <strong>of</strong> contact between two rough surfaces is proportional to the normal force pressing them<br />

together.<br />

Atrue<br />

= CN

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!