Particle Dynamics with Micro-scale Forces Feasibility of Motion

Abstract: The dynamics of micro sized particle has been modeled considering all the dominant forces. At macro scale, gravity and inertia are the dominant forces. Friction coefficient is considered as constant. On micro scale there are additional forces need to be considered. Magnitude of electrostatic force of attraction by contact-electrification and Van der Waals force is also comparable to that of the earlier mentioned ones. Friction coefficient, at micro scale is no longer a constant but is a function of applied normal load. Surface forces of attraction being the dominant one at micro scale, the friction factor becomes a strong function of surface forces at static condition. Moreover, surface forces are a function of surface roughness. So friction factor is indirectly a function of surface roughness. This manuscript is an attempt to accommodate these dominant forces while modeling the particle dynamics. Its an initial attempt to pave the way towards controlled micro-part handling on a flexible surface. 1. Introduction: Motion analysis of macro sized components needs consideration of body forces and applied loads but the motion analysis for micro scale particle requires additional consideration. Surface forces start becoming prominent once the part size starts becoming small and weight becomes negligible [8, 23]. Modeling the dynamics of small particles requires one to accommodate this shift of dominance from body to surface forces. Van Der Waals and Casimir surface forces have a strong dependency on the distance from the surface. The effective distance from the surface is a function of the surface roughness thus making surface roughness one of the parameters that affects the magnitude of the surface forces. There have been a number of attempts to mathematically model the dependence of these forces on the surface roughness. The Casimir force has been modeled as the distance derivative of difference of total black energy within the space between two surfaces and the energy in the outer space assuming the only modes of electromagnetic fluctuations having wavelength smaller than the distance between the two surfaces can exist [9, 10]. Others looked at it as distance derivative of the difference of surface energy of in contact surfaces and the surfaces separate from each other as the source of surface force of attraction and tried to develop contact models for pre-assumed shapes in contact. Models proposed by Johnson et. al. (JKR) and Derjaguin et. al. (DMT), which are modifications of Hertz Contact model, are adhesive-contact models to accommodate force of attraction between a sphere and a flat plate [11] [12]. The JKR model is suitable for softer material having compliant contacts while the DMT model is suitable for stiffer materials. The surface roughness models used to generate a numerical equivalent surface of a given pair of surfaces [13,14], along with JKR and DMT contact models, are employed to accommodate the surface attraction force. These solutions were extended to calculate static friction force. The coefficient of friction calculated from these extensions is dependent strongly on the applied net normal force which includes the force of attraction as well which is the case at micro scale.

A mathematical model was proposed by W. R. Cheng, I. Etsion and D. B. Bogy (CEB model) to calculate real area of contact, force of attraction and friction force between rough surfaces[2, 3, 4]. The CEB model is the extension of the GW surface roughness model by Greenwood and Williamson [13]. The GW model assumes that one of the surfaces is covered with hemispheres of known radius, pressed against another flat surface and these peaks are arranged with some predefined probability density function (PDF). The GW model calculates contact pressure and area of contact assuming Hertz contacts. However, Hertz contact theory is an elastic contact theory and it neither assumes any surface force of attraction nor any plastic deformation [28]. To estimate the force of attraction, CEB model uses the solution of a sphere against a flat surface by Muller et al [1983 reference] for non-contacting asperities, where for contacting asperities, the deformation profile of a compressed sphere against a flat is calculated and force of attraction is the integral of the force contributed by each non contacting point calculated by Lennard-Jones potential [Muller]. The limit for the initiation of plastic deformation developed by Bush and Gibson is used to accommodate plasticity of contact points [31]. The CEB model augmented with this additional pull force and plasticity estimates a different actual area of contact when compared with GW model. Once the actual area of contact is known, with the assumption that tangential force can be supported only by the areas which are under elastic contact, the friction force is estimated. The CEB model assumed that asperities are either at an elastic or fully plastic state. The transition region between the two states confirmed by Johnson [reference] was not accommodated in the CEB model. Zhao et al. modified the CEB model to include the discontinuity in contact load between the elastic and plastic limits and modeled the transition region between elastic and fully plastic deformation [32]. Kogut and Etsion modified the CEB model on the basis of FEA results of compression of a sphere with a flat surface and proposed the KE friction model by curve fitting the FEA data [18, 19, 20]. The CEB model assumption that tangential force is only supported by the elastically deformed material was modified. In KE model, the shear load is not only supported by elastically deformed asperities but some of the asperities in the elastic-plastic transition region also contribute to the net frictional load. Surface profile of deformed asperities is also modified on the basis of FEA results [19,21,25, 16]. The KE model was extended to calculate dynamic friction between lubricated surfaces [27]. Sliding contact and dynamic friction coefficient between rough surfaces is considered, however these models neglect the surface force of attraction and cannot be employed for micro scale [33, 34, 36]. The static friction force is often an upper bound of friction force because the strength of junction of the contacting points increases as the time of stationary contact increases [36]. If the static friction coefficient is used, the results will be conservative. Also, as noted by Matrinz et al. Contrary to general opinion, no distinction can be made between static and kinetic coefficient of friction and experimental observation of the difference between static and kinetic friction coefficient are not necessarily intrinsic properties of dry contact. Dynamic properties of experimental apparatus and external perturbations may lead to this difference [33, 36].

To the best of our knowledge, no mathematical model is available in the open literature to calculate the dynamic friction coefficient between non-lubricated rough surfaces at micro scale. Dynamic friction coefficient is a function of roughness and materials of surfaces in contact and Experimental data in the published literature provides clear evidence that the dynamic friction coefficient value is close to the static one [17, 21]. Therefore, the proposed analysis considers the value of static friction coefficient as a safe initial guess of dynamic coefficient of friction. The KE surface roughness / friction model is can be evaluated according to [22]
Intersecting Peak d hs Asperities with Constant Radius R Mean of surface heights r z Mean of asperity heights z Flat surface a

Asperity in contact with flat surface Figure 1: rough surface in contact with flat surface. Dotted line shows the original asperity profile where as solid red line shows the profile after compression. The compressed asperity has profile Z = f(r)

Gaussian distribution of asperity heights

= = = = 2

with
=

=2
Q =

2 3

+ 1.03
.
.

.
.

+ 1.4
.
.

.
.
.

2 HA K 3

+ 0.98

+ 0.79
0.01I

+ 1.19
0.4I
.

.
.

0.52

+ 0.09I

+ 0.85I

where Jnc, J and I are given by [22]

=

4 3

0.25

2. Dynamic Model of System Our objective in this exercise is to capture the motion of a micro-particle while on a flexible surface. The equations of KE model are used to estimate force of attraction and friction force between the surfaces when the distance between them is known. To capture the particle movements, this set of equations needs to be embedded into the dynamic model of the system and a sequence of solution steps needs to be defined to. The dynamic model to predict the motion of a micro particle is developed considering all the forces acting on the particle while in contact with or close to a deformable surface. To calculate inertial force while the particle is on the surface, following set of assumption is used 1. The acceleration of particle perpendicular to the surface is the same as the acceleration of surface itself in the same direction. 2. Acceleration of particle in the direction parallel to the surface is determined by the relative velocity of particle with surface and magnitude of friction force; details are mentioned in friction logic ahead. The schematic of the particle on the flexible surface is shown in the Figure 1. To simulate the system, two coordinate systems are used simultaneously as shown below. The local system defined at the center of the particle and is dynamically changing relative to the global system such that one of its axes is always tangent to the deformable surface at the contact point. Inertia forces are calculated along local coordinate system.
Y

deforming

X Global Coordinates

yta
Local Coordinates

ytt

yt ytb

-myttb -mytta -mytt

(b)

(a)

Figure 2: Acceleration and velocity of the particle while on flexible surface. Bold line represents the instantaneous position of moving surface with any profile (a) Acceleration and resultant force on the particle (b) velocity decomposed along and perpendicular to the surface

The system dynamic model is based upon following assumptions

Surface Compliance: The actuation is achieved by a controlled deformation of a flexible surface. In the proposed model, the surface is assumed to have infinite localized stiffness through its thickness, i.e. the deformation profile at the top and bottom of the surface are assumed to be the same, thus compliance is not considered. The acceleration and velocity generated by the actuator at the bottom of surface are assumed to be the same on the top of the surface due to no compliance. State of the particle to detach from the surface: The forces acting on micro-part while in contact with a surface are shown in Figure 2.
Micro particle Fext Particle Fapl

Base surface

Mean of Asperities height

Fatt
Fatt = Attraction forces applied by surface Fcont = Repulsion by asperities compression Fapl = Net applied load Fapl = Fcont - Fatt Fext = -Fapl

Fcont

Equivalent Rough Suface

Figure 3: Forces Acting on Micro Particle

When the two surfaces are in contact, the surface attraction force pulls the two surfaces together while the compression of asperities generates a repulsion force between the two surfaces. The net applied load on the particle is the difference of these two forces. When the distance between two surfaces is very small it indicates high compression and the force due to the compression of asperities is larger compared to the force of attraction; this load is balanced by externally applied load to keep the equilibrium. Increasing this distance will decrease the contact load at a larger rate than the rate of decrease of force of attraction as shown in Figure 3 (b/c). Therefore by increasing distance a state reaches when the force of attraction is equal to applied load. This state represents the compression of asperities due to attraction force between the surfaces. Applied load is the difference of attraction force and contact load. Further increasing the distance, the force of attraction is higher in magnitude than force due to the compression of asperities and it Applied Load gets negative. This shows that one requires a pull force to increase the distance beyond this point. The applied load becomes negative beyond a certain distance indicating that the force due to asperity compression is smaller than the surface attraction force. The minimum point in Figure 3(a) represents the maximum pull force required to separate the two surfaces. In the proposed dynamic model, the part detaches from or flies off the surface once the acceleration component perpendicular to the surface, generates an inertial force larger than the maximum pull force shown on Applied Force vs. Distance graph in Figure 3(a).

Min force point

No Applied Force

(a)

(b)

(c) Figure 4: Forces acting on MicroDistance Vs Force Fig: Applied Particle. = 20nm Minimum point marked on the applied force graph represents the maximum pull off force required to separate the two surfaces.

Particle Motion in Air: NEED TO REFERENCE DUSCUSSION to figure 3 and 4. If the input acceleration is such that the particle gains enough energy to overcome the attraction and gravity forces it will detach from the surface and this changes the dynamics of the system. At this system state, the particle motion is affected only by gravitational force and the surface attraction force. To, predict the motion of the particle, while detached from the surface, requires initial conditions which are set to be the states from the previous time step when the particle was in contact with the surface. The surface attraction force is estimated by continuously (at every integration time step) evaluating the shortest distance of the particle from the deformed surface for the current system state using potential field approach as shown in Figure 4. . In addition to the distance, the direction of the suface attraction force is calculated as well. The resultant force acting on particle is the vector sum of force of attraction and gravitational force. This net applied force is resolved into its components along global coordinates to estimate system states for next time step.

Min. distance

Particle with potential field R W

Flexible Surface

Fatt= Surface Attraction Force W= Weight R = Resultant Force

Fatt

Figure 5: Particle motion in air. Minimum distance of the particle is calculated to estimate the magnitude and direction of force of attraction. Resultant force is the vector sum of both forces

Asperity Density: The surface roughness has an apriori defined asperity density. We are aware that when a surface is deformed it will experience stretching that will cause the characteristics of the surface roughness to change. In proposed system model, the asperity density is assumed to be constant. Particle Velocity Perpendicular to Surface: The relative perpendicular velocity of the part with respect to the surface is zero while the part stays on or is in contact with the surface due to the non-compliant surface assumption. The position of micro particle is monitored to identify the time at which it detaches (flies of the surface) and the time at which it returns or re-touches the surface. When the particle returns to the surface, its velocity is decomposed to the local coordinate system into perpendicular and tangential components based on surface deformation. The particle velocity after contact is the decomposed tangential velocity and this is conserved and used for the next time step in the analysis while the perpendicular component is eliminated since no impact dynamics are considered. Area of contact: Nominal area of contact between the particle and the surface is assumed to be constant even when the surface is deformed. Air Damping: The model assumes that the effects of air damping even when the particle detaches from the surface are negligible and therefore not included in the analysis. Friction Logic: The system dynamics are a function of the nonlinear behavior of the friction force or friction coefficient which in effect is a function of surface roughness, asperity contact and deformation, surface attraction force and distance of the particle from the surface. The logic for defining the friction force/coefficient implemented in the proposed dynamic model as described by Woods [37] which considers the relative velocity between the two surfaces to

capture hysteresis and stick-slip behavior. The governing equations of the system are functions of the state of the particle relative to the surface. v = Relative Velocity = Base Velocity Part Velocity

v = y u If the relative velocity of the particle with respect to surface is zero then friction is equal to tangential component of applied force on the particle. If the relative velocity has a non-zero value, , the friction force is equal to its maximum value and friction force direction is opposite to direction of relative velocity. In order to implement this logic in a numerical simulation and to capture hysteresis and stick-slip behavior, a threshold of relative velocity is defined. The threshold value of relative velocity depends upon the friction force, integration step size and particle mass. The threshold of velocity is defined as the maximum velocity of the mass, when it is applied by an external force opposing the velocity, it will decelerate it to complete stop (Vf = 0) within one time step. The details can be found in Woods [37] Vf = 0

acceleration = Vth V f / t acceleration = Ftot / m Combining the above three equations Vth = ( FricF t ) / m
When the relative velocity is less than threshold velocity (Vth) and the absolute value of threshold velocity is reducing, the part will come to complete stop with respect to base and the acceleration and velocity of the part is same as the base. Contrary to this, if the value of relative velocity is less than Vth , and the absolute value of relative velocity is increasing, the acceleration of the part is determined by the net applied force and the equation of system will be
The sign of friction force is always opposite to the direction of relative velocity. Numerical implementation of the logic is

if [ abs(v) Vth ] OR if [ abs(v) < Vth AND abs (total force on mass) Max value of Friction Force ] FF = Max value of Friction Force sign(v) x = velocity of particle FF x= mass if [ abs(v) < Vth AND abs (total force on mass) Max value of Friction Force x = velocity of base x = acceleration of base
At micro scale, friction force is a function of normal force, thus the value of threshold velocity varies and is estimated at each time step. Inversion of Friction Model: The presented friction model considers the material properties of contacting surfaces, their surface roughness and the distance between them as input. The friction model is used to calculate normal force on the part, friction force and true contact area. This model must be inverted in order to be used in the dynamic model for the part motion. In

proposed model system dynamics, the applied normal force is input while the friction force and the surface force of attraction are to be calculated. The friction model is not in the form of explicit equations which can be easily inverted. In order to accomplish the inversion task, data for applied load is generated for a range of distance values for defined surface roughness and material properties. The set of estimated applied load as function of distance is used to identify an explicit curve fit equation, A plot of generated data is shown in Figure 5(a) where the identified curve fit equation for two steel surfaces with = 20 nm and = 2.5 is shown in Figure 5(b). The explicit equation is used during simulation to evaluate the friction force at each time step as function of the mean distance between the surfaces.

(a)

(b)

Figure 6: Estimated Applied Load as function of Distance and Curve fitting corresponding to

steel surfaces with with = 20 nm and = 2.5 A rational curve was fitted on the data with the following values of goodness of fit SSE = 0.02223 and R2 = 0.999 using Curve Fit Toolbox of Matlab.

The resultant equation for distance, d, as a function of applied load, (x), is given by
d=

( 69.86 x (x
5

+ 0.0494 x 3 + 2.885 10 6 x 2 + 4.249 10 11 x + 1.839 10 16 )

+ 1.37 x 4 + 7.569 10 4 x 3 + 4.0314 10 8 x 2 + 5.7 10 13 x + 2.436 10 18 )

This equation is used to calculate the distance which is further used to calculate attraction force between the surfaces and friction force. Solution Methodology: The set of derived system dynamic equations, representing a non-linear, discontinuous system, are solved using a custom written 4th order Runge-Kutta integration scheme. The states of micro-particle are monitored at each time step as the particle is moving along the surface for stick-slip and part detachment and updated accordingly. Two coordinate systems are employed in parallel; a fixed global coordinate system and a local coordinate system attached to the particle. The local system not only moves but also orients with the movement of particle. The ordinate of the local coordinate system is always perpendicular to

the surface at the point of contact with the particle. The two coordinate systems and the particle at two instances (undeformed and deformed surface) are shown in Figure 6
Y X (a) Y
X, Y , Global Coordinates Local Coordinates

(b)

Figure 7: Local and Global coordinates in solution. Global coordinates remain fixed while local coordinates move and orient with the motion of particle.

At each time step, input surface velocity and acceleration at the location of particle are known in global coordinates and are decomposed in local coordinates. The acceleration along ordinate (abscissa and ordinate will be used only for local coordinates) is used to calculate the inertia forces normal to particle which determine instantaneous value of friction factor. The acceleration along abscissa is used to calculate the force on the particle. The velocities along abscissa and ordinate are used to estimate updated position in local coordinates. These derivatives of the states are transformed to global coordinates and all four states in global coordinates are updated for next time step. The transform is achieved through coordinate transformation u = x cos y sin v = x sin + y cos
The friction force, being a function of normal force, varies as the acceleration of surface along ordinate changes. The threshold velocity is calculated at each time step. The relative velocity of surface and particle are calculated at the particle location in tangential direction. This value is compared with threshold velocity to determine the relative motion of particle with respect to surface during the next time step. If relative velocity is larger than threshold value, the part will not be captured or stick to the surface during the next time step. If relative velocity is smaller than threshold value, the particle could stick to the surface or continue slipping, depending upon the stick-slip condition. The stick-slip condition is evaluated according to the derivative of the absolute value of relative velocity; if this derivative is negative, the particle will be captured or stick to the surface. Once it sticks to the surface, the velocity and acceleration of the particle are the same as those of the surface during the next time step. If the value of this derivative is positive, the particle will continue sliding during the next time step. If the input inertia force due to the motion of the surface causes the particle to detach or fly off the surface, the forces acting on the particle are gravity and surface attraction force (which is a

function of distance between them). The states of the particle are monitored and updated in global coordinate system only. At every time step, the position of particle is estimated relative to the surface, to calculate force of attraction and to check whether the particle re-attaches to the surface. If the distance of particle from surface is less than the distance corresponding to the minimum force point on Applied Force vs. Distance graph in Figure (3) and the velocity component perpendicular to surface is towards the surface, the particle is considered re-attached and the system dynamics model switches back to the dynamics of particle while on the surface.

Feasibility of Motion: The objective of this exercise is to establish the feasibility of motion of a micro particle while on a flexible surface. The feasibility is estimated by checking the initiation of motion while on a flat surface and by the distance travelled by particle by some possible form of actuation configuration. Particle on flat surface with acceleration direction along the surface is the most favorable combination to slide of particle against the surface. If the inertia force generated by acceleration is more than the friction force, the part will slide along the surface as shown in Figure 8. Friction force is calculated from KE model and the acceleration required to initiate acceleration needs to be checked against the capability of available actuation mechanisms to establish possibility of initiation of motion. Data of force of attraction, friction force and friction coefficient is generated for the following Particle values of parameters of surface and particle as Inertia Friction Force Acceleration shown in Table 1 and the graphs of friction force, Force Direction coefficient of friction and Applied Load are shown
Surface

in Figure 9.

Figure 8: Part on flat surface with acceleration along surface

Table 1: Input Parameters for feasibility study Input Value Description Parameter Variable Standard deviation of surface roughness 20 nm Cross-section area (contact area) An 100m x 100m Thickness of micro particle t 10 m ~100 m Poissons ratio 0.33 Plasticity index 2.5 Difference of surface energy 1 Hardness of material H 200 HB, Approx 1000 MPA

Assuming the Micro particle mass = 2 x 10-9 kg To calculate the friction force from KE model, distance between the two surfaces is needed. To estimate the distance, see the Applied Load vs. Distance curve for corresponding parameters of surface roughness and material constants. With no acceleration in normal direction, the only normal load on the part is its weight. Find the distance from the graph corresponding to this

normal applied load. Once distance is known, the friction force can be calculated easily by using Distance vs. Friction Force curve or using equation for friction force from the set of KE equation mentioned above. Friction Force = 0.8 x 10-7 N To initiate motion, the inertial force component parallel to the friction force should be large enough to overcome it. At the moment of initiation of motion these two forces will be equal.

Ffriction = Finertia Finertia = ma so Ffriction = ma a = Ffriction / m = 40 m / sec2

Figure 9: variation of friction force and coefficient of friction with the change of distance between the two surfaces

With this value of applied acceleration, the particle will start slipping on the base surface. This value is within the range of current piezoelectric actuators which can be used to actuate the system. The second criteria to check the feasibility is a reasonable distance-travel for a specific actuation configuration. To calculate the distance travelled by the particle, considering the nature of equations, no analytical solution can be calculated. The numerical simulation scheme elaborated in Figure 13 is employed in MATLAB to calculate the distance travelled.

The chosen actuation configuration is shown in Figure 10. An actuator placed vertically beneath a flexible surface deforms it vertically upwards. Micro particle is placed on the surface experiences an inertia force. The component of inertia force along the surface will move the particle along the surface. This configuration had been selected because of its viability for real time application.
Y Y X X

Actuator beneath the surface in retracted position (a)

Surface deformation by actuator stroke (b)

Figure 10: schematic of the deformation of a surface and the resultant particle motion

Surface deformation profile is assumed to be Gaussian. Simulation is done to estimate the distance travel. Variation of friction force plotted against the time is in Figure 11 (a). The horizontal component of velocity of particle (in global coordinate system) with respect to time is represented in Figure 11 (b). The graph of the distance the particle moved along the surface, with single stroke of actuator, with the variation of input frequency is shown in Figure 12.

Reverse stroke Forward stroke

(a)

(b)

Figure 11: Particle Velocity and Friction Force during Actuator Stroke

From the Velocity vs. Time curve (Figure 11(b)) it is clear that in the acceleration phase of forward stroke of actuator the particle gains positive velocity but due to smaller slope of surface, the velocity gain is small, during deceleration of forward stroke, the component of inertia along abscissa of local coordinate is high and the velocity gain is larger. The similar situation is available in the reverse stroke which results into a net unidirectional distance of 1.25 mm covered by particle.

Figure 12: Distance Travelled by Particle with The Variation in Input Frequency of Actuation

Conclusion: Motion of a micro part on a surface is discontinuous system with non linear behavior. The dynamics of motion on a surface is modeled on micro scale and simulation scheme is developed. After estimating the friction force between micro part and base surface, the initiation of motion has been confirmed using simple mechanics. Viability of process depends upon the distance travelled by micro particle. With the help of developed simulation scheme, the estimated value of distance travelled by micro particle is estimated to be 1.25 mm. This lays the foundation of a new methodology in micro part handling. The process can be tested for variation of material, surface roughness and actuation parameters.

Figure 13: simulation scheme to trace the particle motion on the flexible surface

References [1] Ning Yu, Shaun R. Pergande, A. A. Polycarpou Static friction model for rough surfaces with asymmetric distribution of asperity heights [2] W. R. Chang, I. Etsion, D. B. Bogy. An elastic-plastic model for the contact of rough surfaces [3] W. R. Chang, I. Etsion, D. B. Bogy. Adhesion model for metallic rough surfaces [4] W. R. Chang, I. Etsion, D. B. Bogy. Static friction coeffifient model for rough metallic surfaces [5] Micheal A Erdmann and M. T Mason. An Exploration of Sensorless Manipulation [6] Suresh Goyal and Andy Ruina Planar Sliding with Dry Friction. Part 1 : Limit Surface and Moment Functions [7] Suresh Goyal and Andy Ruina Planar Sliding with Dry Friction. Part 2 : Dynamics of Motion [8] Yves Rollot, Stephane Regnier, Jean-Claude Guinot Simulation of Micro-Manipulations: Adhesion Forces and Specific Dynamic Models [9] Cyrique Genet, Astrid Lambrecht and Serge Reynaud The Casimir force and quantum theory of lossy optical cavities [10] Paulo A. Maia Neto, Astrid Lambrecht and Serge Reynaud Casimir effect with rough metallic mirrors [11] K. L. Johnson, K. Kendall and A. D. Roberts Surface energy and contact of elastic solids [12] B. V. Derjaguin, V. M. Muller and YU. P. Toporov Effect of contact deformation on the adhesion of particles [13] J. A. Greenwood and J. B. P. Williamson Contact of nominally flat surface [14] J. A. Greenwood and J. H. Tripp The contact of two nominally flat rough surfaces [15] K. N. G. Fuller and D. Tabor The effect of surface roughness on the adhesion of elastic solids [16] Daniel Maugis Adhesion of spheres: The JKR-DMT transition using a Dugdale model [17] Eui-Sung Yoon, R. Arvind Singh, Hyun-Jin Oh, Hosung kong The effect of contact area on nano/micro scale friction [18] L. Kogut, I. Etsion Elastic-Plastic contact analysis of a sphere and a rigid flat [19] L. Kogut, I. Etsion A semi-analytical solution for the sliding inception of a spherical contact [20] L. Kogut, I. Etsion Adhesion in elastic-plastic spherical micro-contact [21] I. Etsion, O Lavinson, G. Halperin, M. Varenberg Experimental investigation of the Elastic-Plastic contact area and static friction of a sphere on flat [22] L. Kogut, I. Etsion A static friction model for elastic-plastic contacting rough surfaces [23] Shu-Ang Zhou On the forces in microelectromechanical systems [24] Ning Yu, Andreas A. Polycarpou Adhesive Contact Based on the Lennard Jones Potential: A Correction to the Value of the Equilibrium Distance as Used in the Potential [25] A. W. Bush, R. D. Gibson, G. P. Keogh. The limit of elastic deformation in the contact of rough surfaces [26] L. Kogut, I. EtsionA finite element based elastic plastic model for contact of rough surfaces

[27] Ming Feng, Takashi Kenjo Friction and wear of spindle motor hydrodynamic bearings for information storage systems during startup and shutdown [28] J. Jaeger New solutions in contact mechanics [29] John Ferrante Metallic adhesion and bonding [30] S. Niederberger, D. H. Gracias, K. Komvopoulos, G. A. Somorjai Transitions from nanoscale to microscale dynamic friction mechanisms on polyethylene and silicon surfaces [31] A. W. Bush, R. D. Gibson, G. P. Keogh, The Limit of Elastic Deformation in the contact of rough surfaces [32] Yongwu Zhao, David M. Maietta. L. Chang An Asperity Microcontact Model Incorporating the Transition From Elastic Deformation to Fully Plastic Flow [33] Bharat Bhushan Contact Mechanics of Rough Surfaces in Tribology: Multiple asperity contact [34] K Mao, Y. Sun, T. Bell A numerical Model for the Dry Sliding Contact of Layered Elastic Bodies with Rough Surfaces [35] Johnson K. L. Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [36] J. T. Oden, J. A. C. Martins Models and Computational Methods for Dynamic Friction Phenomenoa [37] (details Dr woods friction paper)

Nomenclature Nc = number of asperities in contact

P = total contact load N = number of asperities per unit area Fs = force of attraction Qd = total shear force Qmax = maximum friction force Ae = elastic area of contact Ap = plastic area of contact R = radius of curvature of asperities = density of asperities jd = prob.distribution of asperities peak = molecular distance c = interference at elasticity limit H = brinnell hardness = change in surface energy d = distance between surfaces E = resultant elastic modulus = poisson's ratio of material = plasticity index = interference of peak with smooth surface Z = distance btw flat surf and noncontacting area s = standard deviation of asperity heights = standard deviation of surface heights v = relative velocity of particle parallel to surface Vth = Threshold velovity u = Acceleration of particle parallel to surface FricF = Friction force on particle m = mass of particle yt = Velocity of surface at the location of part. ytb = Component of velocity perpendicular to the surface. yta = Component of velocity along the surface. ytt = Instantaneous acceleration of microparticle. -mytta = Component of inertial force along the surface. -myttb = Component of inertial force perp. to the surface.