Journal: Mathematical Problems in Engineering  

Ref manuscript ID 6250694

Manuscript title “Simulation Study on Friction and Wear Law of the Brake Pad in
High-Power Disc Brake”

Comments to authors:
I think that the authors presented good scientific contribution that will be in the results
can be useful for security and engineering and mechanical design components of braking.

This paper reads very comfortable. But, I suggest following the reinforcement a little bit
the impact of the scientific contribution of this paper.
It can be published after major revision.
I recommend the authors when they revise their paper to make corrections and changes in
the manuscript must be made in red color, and to facilitate the examiner for further
consideration of it.
Therefore, the authors should revise the article by taking into consideration the following
comments.

 The document contains several unknown symbols and characters, and

incomprehensible and so, a nomenclature is quite necessary for these components
in order to describe them in order and in a clear and exhaustive manner. Please
insert this nomenclature before the introduction section.
 Authors should improve the English of this paper, in order to enable readers to
understand the content of your paper easily; you should check your paper
carefully and revise the grammar mistakes. Indeed, there are many errors in this
document, some words are missing in several places, punctuation was not
observed along the paper also lacks a comma (,) and point in several places, some
sentences have meaning disorders and should be checked. we can cite by way of
example only :

- In abstract page 1 line 7, , " The research shows that amount" should be
corrected to " The research shows that the amount"
- In Introduction page 2 line 1, " to characterise " should be corrected to " a to
characterize "
Please, there are many other errors in this document in several places, please
carefully refine the English language.
 Author questions
On page 2, paragraph 2, the authors stated the following sentence: « And there is a
certainly difficult in the wear profile expression due to the limitations of finite element
software.” the authors must clarify here the idea why, there are difficulties.
- - Page 3, section 2, what does it mean " abrasive wear" ?
- Page 4, please provide a bibliographic reference of the equation number (6).
- - On page 4, the authors quoted this “Therefore, the classical Archard wear model is
no longer applicable for the simulated wear depth of a certain contact node”. why,
please clarify this idea
- - The same thing, for page 5, “the solution of Equation (10) is very difficult because
the variable curve of the contact node is very complicated” this statement needs to be
clarified clearly
- Page 5, equation (12) requires a reference that must be inserted

1
- Page 6, a reminder on Euler's method needs to be added
- Page 6, please provide a bibliographic reference of Equation (15) and (16)
Page 8, are the geometrical dimensions reported here by the authors are concrete, if yes
please bring them preferably in the form of a table
- Page 9, what does dynamic behavior mean?
- Page 9, the Johnson-Cook model must be clarified by the authors
- Page 9, a reference must be provided by the authors on the inserted expression
- Page 9, equation (20), the elementary displacements upx, upy must be indicated in the
global figure in order to elucidate the idea to the readers
-Page 10, the authors spoke on the coefficient of heat exchange (h) but we know in the
case of the dynamic behavior that it is variable as a function of time, why, it was taken
constant in the present study
Page 12, figure 10, in my opinion I would like the authors to make a comparison of
graphs for selected points on the calculus software at the top, medial and lower edges of
the brake pad.
Page 12, the authors cited in this document this «Different points P1-P12of the brake pad
in the same circumferential direction are selected» did the points randomly select the
results of the software or they were chosen in a uniform way
The same page, there is the following statement « One part of wear is caused by extrusion
which caused by the relative movement of the brake disc and the brake pad,» this must be
explained by the authors
Page 17 , brake pad material is made of copper-based powder metallurgy and the brake
disc material is Q345B. Do disc materials and brake pads have the same characteristics in
Table 1?
- Page 21, figure 19, the comparison between the experimental test and the simulation of
brake pad wear is not quite clear in the graph and there is a certain ambiguity, the graph
must be improved by the clarity of the idea, I suggest the authors to draw the curves in
two dimensions preferably so that we clearly see the difference
 what is the name of the finite element software used by the authors in the
simulation, this information should be added to this contribution
 Authors should explain more about the novelty of their work in introduction
 The quality of the figures in this document needs to be improved; the figures need
to be larger in size so the data and labels can be clearly read.
 The introduction section is adequate but needs some language revision.
 Numerical modeling of the disk-brake pad model is generally based on relevant
assumptions, so the axisymmetry hypothesis is commonly adopted which implies
that disc rotation and three-dimensional phenomena will be neglected, I think the
authors neglected the Importance of the coupled thermomechanical effect in the
phenomenon. The model developed by the authors is not entirely adequate and
not accurate and is based on assumptions that were not addressed by the authors.
 The dynamics boundary conditions of the model (disc-pad) are not clear in the
document and therefore they must be schematized in detail and interpreted more
clearly in the paper, this information must be added using a schema from
calculation software
 The information of the adopted mesh of the model is given in the paper neither
number of element nor number of nodes nor the element used, Also , the
information of the adapted mesh must be provided in the form of figures for the
models treated ( CAD ) with the help of the computation code
 The authors must provide a greater discussion of the results

2
  The basic idea of finite element method and the contact stiffness in this document
should be explained much more clearly, no information on the type of contact
element used in the analysis was provided by the authors
 I do not know, if the authors used these equations in the calculations or they cited
them as a bibliographic citation, if yes please provide a source reference of these
equations.
 The boundary conditions of the FE model (disc-pad) are not clear in the document
and therefore they must be schematized in detail and interpreted more clearly in
the paper
 The experimental model developed by the authors is not entirely adequate and not
accurate and is based on assumptions that were not addressed by the authors.
 The authors must provide a greater discussion of the results
 The conclusions should be re-written, they should be specific and should not
include as the initial paragraphs, which seems a summary, it must be enriched
about discussion on solving problem.
In conclusion, the publication of this paper in Mathematical Problems in Engineering  
could be considered provided that the above-raised point will be addressed.

I look forward to receiving the revised version of this manuscript

My best regards