1.4K views

Uploaded by Eric Fleming

- Wheel-Rail Interface Handbook
- The Hertz contact problem_Solving in abaqus
- K. L. Johnson-Contact Mechanics-Cambridge University Press (1985)
- Contact Mechanics in Tribology
- Fundamentals of Rail Vehicle Dynamics
- Hertz Pressure
- Contact Mechanics K L Johnson
- FEM MATLAB Code for Geometric Nonlinear Analysis of Membranes
- Calculation of Indentation Contact Area and Strain Using Hertz Theory
- T672 Wheel Steel Handbook Final
- Matlab Tutorial for Numerical Implementation of Hertz Contact Theory
- Contact Mechanics
- corrosion
- A. H. Wickens Fundamentals of rail vehicle dynamics guidance and stability 2003.pdf
- Hertz Contact Stresses
- A Review of Rolling Contact Fatigue
- H Lee Finite Element Simulations With ANSYS Workbench 14
- Fracture Lecture of Abaqus
- Hose Coupling 04
- P.O.K. Krehl- History of Shock Waves, Explosions and Impact: A Chronological and Biographical Reference- Chapter 2: General Survey

You are on page 1of 20

MECH 570 – Tribology of Mechanical Systems

May 4th, 2011

Eric Fleming

Graduate Student of Mechanical Engineering

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, USA

ABSTRACT (eq1)

This report inspects the details of the development of two

MATLAB programs (normalized and non-normalized results)

which models the Hertzian Contact of cylinders. Material

properties may be user defined and the material is assumed to

be of elastic-perfectly plastic nature for analysis. Results of the (eq2)

subsurface stresses are plotted and verified with reference [6],

special cases are discussed.

MATHEMATICAL NOTATIONS

E* Composite Modulous The subscripted properties above are those of the two

Re Composite Radius different materials. It is important to note that, for concave

υ Poisson’s Ratio surfaces, the relative radius is of negative value. [2]

a Radius of Contact (Half-Width)

δ Elastic Displacement 1.1 POINT CONTACT FORMULAE

P0,Ph Hertzian Pressure (P is also used for distributions) Since line and point (cylindrical and spherical) contact

P,W Forcing Load behave differently, there are separate representations for the

σ Stress Component same parameters. The contact radius and others for point

τ Shear Component contact are as follows:

(Unless noted, all units throughout this report are in SI format) (eq3)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Contact between surface asperities can me modeled in the

simplest form with point or line contact among asperities. Point

contact involves two spherical/elliptical surfaces with relative

radii of curvature. Line contact involves two cylindrical Hertzian Pressure:

surfaces with relative radii of curvature as point contact (eq4)

involves two spherical surfaces. [2] The model involves a

Silicon Carbide cylinder on an AISI 52100 Steel plate.

Properties are as follows:

SiC Clyinder:

E=550 GPa Displacement:

υ=0.3 (eq5)

R=0.001m

AISI 52100 Steel:

E=200 GPa

υ=0.3

R=Infinite (Flat Plate)

For calculation of subsurface stress fields, several critical 1.2 LINE CONTACT FORMULAE

parameters must be calculated first and foremost. This is Eqn’s 3-5 are modeled in line contact mode in the

required for equivalent moduli and radii of the two materials, following formulas. The forcing load is in units of force per

the contact half-width, and (peak) Hertzian pressure. unit length, unlike point loading where the load is solely in

units of force. [6]

1

The y-component may also be calculated if desired:

Contact Radius:

(eq6) (eq15)

function which is based of the peak pressure, or Hertzian

Hertzian Pressure: pressure.

(eq16)

(eq7)

MATLAB code was utilized to study the effects of the

Displacement:

stress distribution across the contact area. The basis of the

(eq8)

code was studied from reference [5]; the logical “for” loops

were altered for the formulation of the stress and shear contour

plots while encoding the formulas from references [4] and [6].

Code was developed for cylindrical cases, verified, and then

1.3 LINE CONTACT SUBSURFACE STRESSES studied.

FORMULAE

McEwen (1949) represents stress in terms of arbitrary 2.1 STRESS FUNCTIONS ALONG AXIS-OF-

constants m and n: [6] SYMMETRY

(eq9) Functions along the z-axis (x=0) were observed by

extracting the data from the center (line of symmetry) column

of the stress matrices. This column in the data happens to be

(eq10) column 68.

In order to confirm the integrity of the formulated code

Where equations 9 and 10 are the signs of the z-axis and x- found in Appendix B, results for normalized stress were

axis respectively. [2] The constants are then substituted into the compared with those in the appendix of reference [4]. The

following formulas: weights for normalized stress in the x direction (σx) from the

(eq11) aforementioned reference are as follows:

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 1 0.980 0.917 0.800 0.600 0 0 0

0.4 0.426 0.416 0.391 0.357 0.330 0.316 0.197 0.109

(eq12) 0.6 0.275 0.272 0.267 0.265 0.270 0.276 0.221 0.142

0.8 0.180 0.182 0.188 0.200 0.217 0.232 0.218 0.160

1.0 0.121 0.125 0.135 0.153 0.173 0.192 0.201 0.165

1.5 0.051 0.054 0.065 0.081 0.099 0.118 0.148 0.148

2.0 0.025 0.027 0.034 0.045 0.059 0.073 0.103 0.117

(eq13) (Tbl 1, σx from reference [4])

values of σx from the formulated program:

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 0.99 0.976 0.917 0.793 0.576 0 0 0

These formulas are used to find stress components σx, σz, 0.2 0.661 0.646 0.608 0.522 0.409 0.328 0.126 0.059

and shear in the ‘xz’ plane,. For computation of the principal 0.4 0.435 0.413 0.391 0.372 0.329 0.315 0.203 0.111

shear stress, the following formula is used. [4] This is also 0.6 0.284 0.273 0.268 0.270 0.269 0.276 0.225 0.144

known as Tresca Stress. 0.182 0.184 0.188 0.199 0.199 0.234 0.220 0.161

0.8

1.0 0.124 0.123 0.132 0.149 0.150 0.192 0.201 0.166

(eq14)

1.5 0.052 0.054 0.063 0.079 0.110 0.118 0.147 0.148

2.0 0.025 0.027 0.033 0.044 0.073 0.073 0.103 0.117

(Tbl 2, σx from MATLAB program)

2

From observation, the obtained results are very similar to

the published results. There are slight discrepancies due to how

relative positions were discretized in the program. Further

verifications for σz and τxz may be found in Appendix C.

and location of normalized principal shear along the z-axis. It

was found to be 0.302@z=0.78a. [3]

After the program was verified, the case for normalized

results was run several times to observe the change in contours

as initial values were significantly altered. The contours of

principal shear stress (eq14) was plotted. (Fig2, Principal Shear, 1 kN case)

changes in the principal shear stress plot:

modified for both materials and the normalized contour plots

were unaffected, except σy which has no influence on other

plots, and is directly influenced by Poisson’s Ratio. Some (Fig3, Principal Shear, 50N case)

parameters such as Hertzian Pressure, composite modulus, and

contact radius were however affected. This will in part affect As it can be observed, the contours have indeed shifted in

results for simulations which are not normalized. It is magnitude (much smaller contours) and location. The loading

imperative to recognize the fact that modification of user- force is now reverted back to the original value of 1000N, and

defined variables does not have an effect on normalized results. the Poisson’s Ratio for both materials is changed to 0.9.

Appendix A, which include σ x, σy, σz, τxz, pressure distribution,

and stress values across the axis of symmetry.

In order to grasp a better idea of what is happening in the

subsurface, it is important to study results which are not

normalized to the Hertzian pressure. By keeping results un-

normalized, the contours shift and change value accordingly to

input. Below is figure 1 without normalization, forcing load is

set to 1000 Newtons.

significant effect on the principal contours. The maximum

location is now effectively one order of magnitude greater and

its location is significantly deeper into the subsurface.

Material properties are again reverted back to their original

3

state, and the radius is changes from a millimeter to a substrate. This model also assumes a frictionless environment,

micrometer. which is far from realistic.

If a forthcoming student decides to build from these

results he/she must understand that modeling of friction and

substrates/layers requires a much different approach. One

which involves calculation of numerous constants, Fourier

transforms, and complicated program scripting possibly with

ANSYS. For a much simpler challenge, it is recommended

that a program be formulated for spherical point contact. It is

more commonly modeled using polar/spherical coordinates;

however, Cartesian coordinates may be used.

(Fig4, Principal Shear, R=1µm case) implemented, but was unsuccessful. It disobeyed the

mathematical representations in the Introduction since

Now the principal shear contour has much more density in contours would halt at the contact radius and not extrude

magnitude, the maximum value is much greater than the beyond. A non-Hertzian pressure follows different formulae.

standard case, and it is condensed into a much smaller area. A Therefore, it is also recommended that a non-Hertzian contact

complete overview of the graphical results can be observed in solution be encoded.

Appendix A.

Numerous articles were obtained for this report and its

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS code development, and all of them did not give their

A finite element MATLAB program for the simulation of underlying equations for analysis. Future work should look

subsurface stresses is successfully developed for the Hertzian into numerous cross-references of these reports which were

solution in a line contact mode. It is a program that is verified unobtainable at Loyola Marymount University. The reports are

with published results for a normalized case. referenced in a section named UNOBTAINABLE

REFERENCES.

Generating normalized stress contours for this case of

Hertzian line contact will yield constant results, no matter what REFERENCES

values of material properties you may define. This normalized [1] B. Bushan, Introduction to Tribology, 2002

case can be considered universal, no matter how the code is [2] M. Siniawski, Tribology of Mechanical Systems, Lecture

formulated (as long as it follows physical law), and what Notes of Contact Mechanics, MECH 570 – Spring 2011

material properties are chosen, all normalized contours will be [3] Vizintin, J., Kalin, M., Dohda, K. and Jahanmir. , 2004,

exactly the same. This applies to every normalized contour Tribology of Mechanical Systems, ASME

except for σy which is affected by Poisson’s Ratio, yet has no [4] “Contact Mechanics”, Wikipedia, Modified 6 January

influence on principal shear stress. 2011, Accessed 8 February 2011

[5] M. Read, “Matlab Tool for Analyzing Stresses, Principle

In order to observe actual changes in the contours, the Stresses, and Surface Displacement on any Loading of an

results shall remain in form without normalization. This enables Elastic Half Space and for analyzing Hertz 2D contact

the user of the program to see the changes in the subsurface stresses” 5/12/2004. Massachusetts Institute of Technology

stress fields as material parameters are altered. [6] K.L. Johnson, CONTACT MECHANICS, 1985,

Cambridge University Press

It can be inferred with much certainty that these stress [7] A. Elsharkawy. (1999) “Effect of friction on subsurface

fields are greatly affected by material properties, contact radius, stresses in sliding line contact of unilayered elastic solids”

and forcing load. Being the fact that the fields would conform International Journal of Solids and Structures, Volume 36,

to the ranges of inputs specified, as the fields would shift in Issue 26

location and magnitude.

UNOBTAINABLE REFERENCES

It is also important to note that this analysis is for the most (FUTURE STUDENTS)

ideal of contact cases. Foremost, the solutions of the simulation – H. Djabella & R.D. Arnell. (1993) “Finite element

rely on the un-realistic fact that the materials are assumed to be analysis of the contact stresses in elastic

elastic-perfectly plastic. Meaning that if the material is forced coating/substrate under normal and tangential load” Thin

into the plastic zone of stress, there will be no work hardening Solid Films, Volume 223, Issue 1

and the material will not benefit from an increase in strength. – K. Komvopoulos. (1988) “Finite Element Analysis of a

The material is infinitely elastic. [1] This model does not Layered Elastic Solid in Normal Contact with a Rigid

incorporate layers which is very beneficial to see how stresses Surface” Journal of Tribology. Volume 110. Issue 3

are distributed in a hardened layer and transferred onto a softer

4

– H. Djabella & R.D. Arnell. (1994) “Finite element – K. Mao, T. Bell, & Y. Sun. (1997) “Effect of Sliding

analysis of elastic stresses in multilayered systems” Thin Friction on Contact Stresses for Multi-Layered Elastic

Solid Films, Volume 245, Issues 1-2 Bodies with Rough Surfaces” Journal of Tribology,

– H. Djabella & R.D. Arnell. (1992) “Finite element Volume 119, Issue 3

analysis of the contact stresses in elastic coating on an – E.R. Kral & K. Komvopoulos. (1997) “Three-

elastic substrate” Thin Solid Films, Volume 213, Issue 2 Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Subsurface Stress

– D.M. Bailey & R.S. Sayles. (1997) “Effect of Sliding and Strain Fields Due to Sliding Contact on an Elastic-

Friction on Contact Stresses for Multi-Layered Elastic Plastic Layered Medium” Journal of Tribology. Volume

Bodies with Rough Surfaces” Journal of Tribology, Volume 119, Issue 2

113, Issue 4 –

5

1kN, υ=0.3, R=1mm Case

6

1kN, υ=0.3, R=1mm Case

7

50N, υ=0.3, R=1mm Case

8

50N, υ=0.3, R=1mm Case

9

1kN, υ=0.9, R=1mm Case

10

1kN, υ=0.9, R=1mm Case

11

1kN, υ=0.3, R=1µm Case

12

1kN, υ=0.3, R=1µm Case

13

14

Appendix B – MATLAB Code

clear

%USER-DEFINED MATERIAL PROPERTIES (SI UNITS)

R1=inf; %Asperity Radius (inf for flat surface)

R2=0.1;

E1=200*10^9; %Elastic Modulous

E2=550*10^9;

v1=0.3; %Poisson's Ratio

v2=0.3;

p=1000; %Forcing Load

%Input choice=1 for normalized results

%Choice=2 for dimensionalized results

choice=1;

R=1/(1/R1+1/R2); %Composite Radius

E=1/((1-v1^2)/E1+(1-v2^2)/E2); %Composite Modulous

a=(0.75*p*R/E)^(1/3); %Contact Half-Width

x=[-2*a:.01*3*a:2*a]; %Discrete values for the x-axis

z=[0:.005*3*a:2*a]; %Discrete values for the z-axis

Ph=(p.*E./(pi.*R)).^(1/2); %Hertzian Pressure for Line Contact

for i=1:length(x)

P(i)=Ph*[1-(x(i)/a)^2]^.5;

end

%Therefore, this loops creates a constant value for x-axis positions

%vertically (column constant) and constant values for the z-axis

%horizontally (row constant).

for i=1:length(z);

for j=1:length(x);

xx(i, j)=x(j);

zz(i, j)=z(i);

end

end

for i=1:length(x);

for j=1:length(z);

m(j, i)=(0.5*(((a^2-xx(j, i)^2+zz(j, i)^2).^2+4.*xx(j, i)^2.*zz(j,

i)^2).^0.5+(a.^2.-xx(j, i)^2+zz(j, i)^2))).^0.5;

n(j, i)=(0.5*(((a^2-xx(j, i)^2+zz(j, i)^2).^2+4.*xx(j, i)^2.*zz(j,

i)^2).^0.5-(a.^2.-xx(j, i)^2+zz(j, i)^2))).^0.5;

if x(i) < 0

n(j, i)=-n(j, i);

end

sx(j, i)=(-Ph/a)*(m(j, i)*((1+((zz(j, i)^2+n(j, i)^2)/(m(j,

i)^2+n(j, i)^2))))-2.*zz(j, i));

sz(j, i)=(-Ph/a)*m(j, i)*((1-((zz(j, i)^2+n(j, i)^2)/(m(j, i)^2+n(j,

i)^2))));

sy(j, i)=v1*(sx(j, i)+sz(j, i));

txz(j, i)=(-Ph/a).*n(j, i)*((m(j, i)^2-zz(j, i)^2)./(m(j, i)^2+n(j,

i)^2));

15

Appendix B – MATLAB Code

end

end

%OUTPUT

if choice==1

figure('name','Normalized');

subplot(231)

contour(xx/a, -zz/a, sx/Ph)

C = contour(xx/a, -zz/a, sx/Ph);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x/a')

ylabel('z/a')

title('Stress x-axis')

subplot(232)

contour(xx/a, -zz/a, sy/Ph)

C = contour(xx/a, -zz/a, sy/Ph);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x/a')

ylabel('z/a')

title('Stress y-axis')

subplot(233)

contour(xx/a, -zz/a, sz/Ph)

C = contour(xx/a, -zz/a, sz/Ph);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x/a')

ylabel('z/a')

title('Stress z-axis')

subplot(234)

contour(xx/a, -zz/a, txz/Ph)

C = contour(xx/a, -zz/a, txz/Ph);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x/a')

ylabel('z/a')

title('Shear Stress xz-plane')

subplot(235)

contour(xx/a, -zz/a, tmax/Ph)

C = contour(xx/a, -zz/a, tmax/Ph);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x/a')

ylabel('z/a')

title('Principal Shear Stress')

subplot(236)

plot(x/a,P./Ph)

title('Normalized Pressure Distribution')

xlabel('x/a')

plot(z/a,abs(sx(:,67)/Ph),'b',z/a,abs(sz(:,67)/Ph),'r',z/a,abs(tmax(:,67)/Ph),

'g');

hleg1 = legend('sx','sz','principal shear');

16

Appendix B – MATLAB Code

end

if choice==2

figure('name','Non-Normalized');

subplot(231)

contour(xx, -zz, sx)

C = contour(xx, -zz, sx);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x')

ylabel('z')

title('Stress x-axis')

subplot(232)

contour(xx, -zz, sy)

C = contour(xx, -zz, sy);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x')

ylabel('z')

title('Stress y-axis')

subplot(233)

contour(xx, -zz, sz)

C = contour(xx, -zz, sz);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x')

ylabel('z')

title('Stress z-axis')

subplot(234)

contour(xx, -zz, txz)

C = contour(xx, -zz, txz);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x')

ylabel('z')

title('Shear Stress xz-plane')

subplot(235)

contour(xx, -zz, tmax)

C = contour(xx, -zz, tmax);

clabel(C)

xlabel('x')

ylabel('z')

title('Principal Shear Stress')

subplot(236)

plot(x,P)

title('Pressure Distribution')

xlabel('x')

plot(z,abs(sx(:,67)),'b',z,abs(sz(:,67)),'r',z,abs(tmax(:,67)),'g');

hleg1 = legend('sx','sz','principal shear');

title('Stress Components along Axis-of-Symmetry')

xlabel('z')

ylabel('Pressure')

17

Appendix B – MATLAB Code

end

sxnorm=sx./Ph;

sznorm=sz./Ph;

txznorm=txz./Ph;

v=[0,0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.75, 1];

sxv=sxnorm(round(v.*133+1),round(v.*67+67));

szv=sznorm(round(v.*133+1),round(v.*67+67));

txzv=txynorm(round(v.*133+1),round(v.*67+67));

18

Appendix CB – MATLAB Code Verification

σx Published

Normalized 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 1 0.980 0.917 0.800 0.600 0 0 0

0.2 0.659 0.642 0.591 0.507 0.402 0.329 0.124 0.060

0.4 0.426 0.416 0.391 0.357 0.330 0.316 0.197 0.109

0.6 0.275 0.272 0.267 0.265 0.270 0.276 0.221 0.142

0.8 0.180 0.182 0.188 0.200 0.217 0.232 0.218 0.160

1.0 0.121 0.125 0.135 0.153 0.173 0.192 0.201 0.165

1.5 0.051 0.054 0.065 0.081 0.099 0.118 0.148 0.148

2.0 0.025 0.027 0.034 0.045 0.059 0.073 0.103 0.117

Normalized 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 0.999 0.981 0.929 0.814 0.613 0 0 0

0.2 0.665 0.650 0.607 0.522 0.409 0.328 0.126 0.059

0.4 0.420 0.412 0.391 0.357 0.329 0.311 0.203 0.111

0.6 0.274 0.272 0.267 0.264 0.269 0.276 0.224 0.143

0.8 0.182 0.183 0.188 0.199 0.217 0.233 0.219 0.160

1.0 0.120 0.123 0.132 0.149 0.171 0.191 0.201 0.165

1.5 0.050 0.054 0.062 0.072 0.098 0.117 0.147 0.148

2.0 0.025 0.027 0.033 0.044 0.058 0.073 0.103 0.117

σz Published

Normalized 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 1 0.980 0.917 0.800 0.600 0 0 0

0.2 0.981 0.959 0.892 0.767 0.549 0.212 0.006 0.001

0.4 0.928 0.906 0.834 0.705 0.509 0.281 0.034 0.007

0.6 0.857 0.834 0.765 0.648 0.490 0.320 0.074 0.020

0.8 0.781 0.760 0.699 0.600 0.474 0.342 0.0114 0.038

1.0 0.707 0.690 0.638 0.557 0.457 0.352 0.148 0.059

1.5 0.555 0.544 0.514 0.468 0.410 0.346 0.202 0.107

2.0 0.447 0.441 0.424 0.396 0.361 0.322 0.221 0.140

Normalized 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 0.999 0.981 0.929 0.814 0.613 0 0 0

0.2 0.981 0.962 0.906 0.783 0.564 0.209 0.006 0.001

0.4 0.926 0.906 0.846 0.719 0.519 0.282 0.037 0.007

0.6 0.857 0.836 0.778 0.662 0.498 0.319 0.078 0.020

0.8 0.782 0.764 0.712 0.612 0.481 0.341 0.118 0.038

1.0 0.705 0.689 0.646 0.565 0.462 0.351 0.154 0.060

1.5 0.554 0.545 0.519 0.472 0.412 0.346 0.206 0.108

2.0 0.448 0.442 0.427 0.399 0.363 0.322 0.224 0.141

τxz Published

19

Appendix CB – MATLAB Code Verification

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.2 0 0.308 0.080 0.131 0.192 0.192 0.025 0.007

0.4 0 0.0604 0.130 0.195 0.242 0.230 0.076 0.027

0.6 0 0.075 0.147 0.209 0.245 0.238 0.119 0.051

0.8 0 0.075 0.145 0.200 0.231 0.231 0.147 0.075

1.0 0 0.070 0.133 0.182 0.211 0.217 0.161 0.095

1.5 0 0.050 0.096 0.134 0.160 0.173 0.162 0.121

2.0 0 0.035 0.068 0.096 0.118 0.133 0.142 0.124

Normalized 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.2 0.004 0.035 0.072 0.123 0.186 0.189 0.025 0.009

0.4 0.006 0.061 0.120 0.189 0.241 0.230 0.081 0.028

0.6 0.007 0.071 0.137 0.203 0.244 0.238 0.123 0.052

0.8 0.007 0.072 0.135 0.195 0.230 0.231 0.150 0.07

1.0 0.007 0.066 0.123 0.177 0.209 0.216 0.164 0.096

1.5 0.005 0.048 0.089 0.130 0.158 0.173 0.163 0.122

2.0 0.003 0.034 0.064 0.094 0.117 0.133 0.142 0.124

20

- Wheel-Rail Interface HandbookUploaded byisarries@ya.com
- The Hertz contact problem_Solving in abaqusUploaded bySwamy Babu
- K. L. Johnson-Contact Mechanics-Cambridge University Press (1985)Uploaded byJay Srivastava
- Contact Mechanics in TribologyUploaded bylauradance2006
- Fundamentals of Rail Vehicle DynamicsUploaded byValentin Toncoglaz
- Hertz PressureUploaded byAlham Dulillah
- Contact Mechanics K L JohnsonUploaded byrajkpal3542
- FEM MATLAB Code for Geometric Nonlinear Analysis of MembranesUploaded byडॉ. कनिष्क शर्मा
- Calculation of Indentation Contact Area and Strain Using Hertz TheoryUploaded byatomicnads
- T672 Wheel Steel Handbook FinalUploaded bydaniel
- Matlab Tutorial for Numerical Implementation of Hertz Contact TheoryUploaded byAbdul Rehman
- Contact MechanicsUploaded byalphading
- corrosionUploaded bySantiago Cubillos
- A. H. Wickens Fundamentals of rail vehicle dynamics guidance and stability 2003.pdfUploaded byPedro Bernardes
- Hertz Contact StressesUploaded byVuiKuan
- A Review of Rolling Contact FatigueUploaded bymans2014
- H Lee Finite Element Simulations With ANSYS Workbench 14Uploaded byVictor David Larco Torres
- Fracture Lecture of AbaqusUploaded byMohammed Abu Sufian
- Hose Coupling 04Uploaded byAteeq Rahman
- P.O.K. Krehl- History of Shock Waves, Explosions and Impact: A Chronological and Biographical Reference- Chapter 2: General SurveyUploaded byMfdrr
- 7.pdfUploaded bySri Pudu
- Corrosion Resistance of Austenitic and Duplex Stainless Steels in EnvironmentsUploaded bysajay2010
- Duplex Stainless Steel 3rd Edition (1)Uploaded byPhani Sridhar Ch
- Fractography of Metals and PlasticsUploaded byreurri
- 6i Titanium.pptUploaded byRajesh Patel
- Seal Design GuideUploaded byDANE80
- SS316 butt weldingUploaded bydevinder_bamrah
- C149-86R95.pdfUploaded bywhoknowshimself
- Design of New Biomedical Titanium Alloy Based on D-electron Alloy Design Theory and JMatPro SoftwareUploaded byAbraão Santos Silva
- electric stressUploaded byakkumbakkum1

- Katalog Dcb 2011 WebUploaded byIbnu Lawless
- Valuation Dicounts for Holding CompaniesUploaded byAnonymous V4jDKjUR6
- Journal OrtoUploaded byCesar Augusto Rojas Machuca
- Moma Catalogue Louise BourgeoisUploaded byMorenoMoreno
- Top 10 Inner Game Sticking Points with Women -- And How to Overcome Them - AMP (Authentic Man Program)Uploaded bybbayer
- [CRD] Perfect TwoUploaded byairplaneunderwater
- Fundamentals of Electricity DerivativesUploaded byFrancisco José Murias Dominguez
- PDF 0113Uploaded byJames Mckean
- Infrared Plastic Solar CellUploaded byanushpl
- Mitigating Operational, Technical and Strategic Risk In ICT Through Knowledge Codification TechniqueUploaded byBokolo Anthony Jnr.
- NormesClfileUploaded byseb_dominique
- AWP_unit-1 Only 07 RegulationUploaded byRaja Sekhar
- Franco, K., Alvarez, G., & Ramírez, R. E. (2011). Instrumentos Para Trastornos Del Comportamiento Alimentario Validados en Mujeres Mexicanas Una Revisión de La Literatura.Uploaded byP. Noemi
- Deriving Simpsons Rule Using Newton Interpolation (1)Uploaded byVinjk
- Mobile Immersion 101 Version 1 ModUploaded byAna Vizir
- The Way of the World EssayUploaded byViry Vr
- At the Court of Itzam Nah_BootUploaded byRogelio Valencia Rivera
- 07CSUploaded bySaimo Mghase
- 33939101-Lesson-Plan-Year-4-2008Uploaded bySalmah Ahmad
- Psych Nursing CareplanUploaded bywrite4js
- The Final Proposal of Rabindranath Tagore Env Thinking2_26!6!2015Uploaded byNayeem Sazzad
- Chapter 11Uploaded byMauricio Arteaga Soruco
- 0814-H GI Bleeding Sample Issue2(2)Uploaded byshashwathh
- Illustration of the IPA European PortugueseUploaded bytacarvalho
- Statics and Dynamics of Rigid BodiesUploaded byJulia Chiesa
- 2nd Edition CX Strategy Summit 2017Uploaded byruchi21july
- projUploaded byannu1987
- Tutorial 14 Cofferdam SeepageUploaded byinsomnia_bear
- Home Loan GuideUploaded bypiyushbams
- Notable QuotationsUploaded byPhilip A. Senessie