Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Volltext verfügbar? / Dokumentlieferung
doi:10.22028/D291-39136
Title: | Meeting the Contact-Mechanics Challenge |
Author(s): | Müser, Martin Dapp, Wolf B. Bugnicourt, Romain Sainsot, Philippe Lesaffre, Nicolas Lubrecht, Ton A. Persson, Bo N. J. Harris, Kathryn Bennett, Alexander Schulze, Kyle Rohde, Sean Ifju, Peter Sawyer, W. Gregory Angelini, Thomas Ashtari Esfahani, Hossein Kadkhodaei, Mahmoud Akbarzadeh, Saleh Wu, Jiunn-Jong Vorlaufer, Georg Vernes, András Solhjoo, Soheil Vakis, Antonis I. Jackson, Robert L. Xu, Yang Streator, Jeffrey Rostami, Amir Dini, Daniele Medina, Simon Carbone, Giuseppe Bottiglione, Francesco Afferrante, Luciano Monti, Joseph Pastewka, Lars Robbins, Mark O. Greenwood, James A. |
Language: | English |
Title: | Tribology letters |
Volume: | 65 |
Issue: | 4 |
Publisher/Platform: | Springer Nature |
Year of Publication: | 2017 |
Free key words: | Contact mechanics Adhesion Modeling Nominally flat surfaces |
DDC notations: | 500 Science |
Publikation type: | Journal Article |
Abstract: | This paper summarizes the submissions to a recently announced contact-mechanics modeling challenge. The task was to solve a typical, albeit mathematically fully defined problem on the adhesion between nominally flat surfaces. The surface topography of the rough, rigid substrate, the elastic properties of the indenter, as well as the short-range adhesion between indenter and substrate, were specified so that diverse quantities of interest, e.g., the distribution of interfacial stresses at a given load or the mean gap as a function of load, could be computed and compared to a reference solution. Many different solution strategies were pursued, ranging from traditional asperity-based models via Persson theory and brute-force computational approaches, to real-laboratory experiments and all-atom molecular dynamics simulations of a model, in which the original assignment was scaled down to the atomistic scale. While each submission contained satisfying answers for at least a subset of the posed questions, efficiency, versatility, and accuracy differed between methods, the more precise methods being, in general, computationally more complex. The aim of this paper is to provide both theorists and experimentalists with benchmarks to decide which method is the most appropriate for a particular application and to gauge the errors associated with each one. |
DOI of the first publication: | 10.1007/s11249-017-0900-2 |
URL of the first publication: | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11249-017-0900-2 |
Link to this record: | urn:nbn:de:bsz:291--ds-391368 hdl:20.500.11880/35286 http://dx.doi.org/10.22028/D291-39136 |
ISSN: | 1573-2711 1023-8883 |
Date of registration: | 23-Feb-2023 |
Faculty: | NT - Naturwissenschaftlich- Technische Fakultät |
Department: | NT - Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik |
Professorship: | NT - Prof. Dr. Martin Müser |
Collections: | SciDok - Der Wissenschaftsserver der Universität des Saarlandes |
Files for this record:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in SciDok are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.