Most statistical contact analyses assume that asperity height distributions $(g(z*))$ follow a Gaussian distribution. However, engineered surfaces are frequently non-Gaussian with the type dependent on the material and surface state being evaluated. When two rough surfaces experience contact deformations, the original topography of the surfaces varies with different loads, and the deformed topography of the surfaces after unloading and elastic recovery is quite different from surface contacts under a constant load. A theoretical method is proposed in the present study to discuss the variations of the topography of the surfaces for two contact conditions. The first kind of topography is obtained during the contact of two surfaces under a normal load. The second kind of topography is obtained from a rough contact surface after elastic recovery. The profile of the probability density function is quite sharp and has a large peak value if it is obtained from the surface contacts under a normal load. The profile of the probability density function defined for the contact surface after elastic recovery is quite close to the profile before experiencing contact deformations if the plasticity index is a small value. However, the probability density function for the contact surface after elastic recovery is closer to that shown in the contacts under a normal load if a large initial plasticity index is assumed. How skewness (Sk) and kurtosis (Kt), which are the parameters in the probability density function, are affected by a change in the dimensionless contact load, the initial skewness (the initial kurtosis is fixed in this study) or the initial plasticity index of the rough surface is also discussed on the basis of the topography models mentioned above. The behavior of the contact parameters exhibited in the model of the invariant probability density function is different from the behavior exhibited in the present model.

1.
Liu
,
G.
,
Wang
,
Q. J.
, and
Lin
,
C.
, 1999, “
A Survey of Current Models for Simulating the Contact Between Rough Surfaces
,”
STLE Tribol. Trans.
1040-2004,
42
, pp.
581
591
.
2.
Bhushan
,
B.
, 1996, “
Contact Mechanics of Rough Surfaces in Tribology: Single Asperity Contact
,”
Tribol. Lett.
1023-8883,
4
, pp.
1
35
.
3.
Bhushan
,
B.
, 1998, “
Contact Mechanics of Rough Surfaces in Tribology: Multiple Asperity Contact
,”
Tribol. Int.
0301-679X,
34
, pp.
299
305
.
4.
Greenwood
,
J. A.
, and
Williamson
,
J. B. P.
, 1966, “
Contact of Nominally Flat Surfaces
,”
Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A
1364-5021,
295
, pp.
300
319
.
5.
Zhuravlev
,
V. A.
, 1940, “
On Question of Theoretical Justification of the Amontons-Coulomb Law for Friction of Unlubricated Surfaces
,”
Zh. Tekh. Fiz.
0044-4642,
10
, pp.
1447
1452
.
6.
Greenwood
,
J. A.
, and
Tripp
,
J. H.
, 1967, “
The Elastic Contact of Rough Spheres
,”
ASME J. Appl. Mech.
0021-8936,
34
, pp.
153
259
.
7.
Whitehouse
,
D. J.
, and
Archard
,
J. F.
, 1970, “
The Properties of Random Surfaces of Significance in Their Contact
,”
Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A
1364-5021,
316
, pp.
97
121
.
8.
,
T.
, 1974, “
Effects of Surface Roughness on Contact Between Solid Surfaces
,”
Wear
0043-1648,
28
, pp.
217
234
.
9.
Bush
,
A. W.
,
Gibson
,
R. D.
, and
Thomas
,
T. R.
, 1975, “
The Elastic Contact of a Rough Surface
,”
Wear
0043-1648,
35
, pp.
87
111
.
10.
Bush
,
A. W.
,
Gibson
,
R. D.
, and
Keogh
,
G. P.
, 1979, “
Strongly Anisotropic Rough Surface
,”
ASME J. Lubr. Technol.
0022-2305,
101
, pp.
15
20
.
11.
Greenwood
,
J. A.
, and
Wu
,
J. J.
, 2001, “
Surface Roughness and Contact: An Apology
,”
Meccanica
0025-6455,
36
, pp.
617
630
.
12.
Williamson
,
J. B. P.
, 1968, “
Topography of Solid Surfaces
,”
Interdisciplinary Approach to Friction and Wear
,
P. M.
Ku
, ed.,
NASA
,
Washington, DC
, NASA Special Publication No. SP-181, pp.
85
142
.
13.
Whitehouse
,
D. J.
, 1994,
Handbook of Surface Metrology
,
IOP
,
Bristol
.
14.
Stout
,
K. J.
,
Davis
,
E. J.
, and
Sullivan
,
P. J.
, 1990,
Atlas of Machined Surfaces
,
Chapman and Hall
,
London
.
15.
Whitehouse
,
D. J.
, 2003,
Handbook of Surface and Nanometrology
,
IOP
,
Bristol
, p.
99
.
16.
McCool
,
J. I.
, 1992, “
Non-Gaussian Effects in Microcontact
,”
Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf.
0890-6955,
32
(
1
), pp.
115
123
.
17.
McCool
,
J. I.
, 2000, “
Extending the Capability of the Greenwood Williamson Microcontact Model
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
0742-4787,
122
, pp.
496
502
.
18.
Yu
,
N.
, and
Polycarpou
,
A. A.
, 2002, “
Contact of Rough Surfaces With Asymmetric Distribution of Asperity Heights
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
0742-4787,
124
, pp.
367
376
.
19.
Yu
,
N.
, and
Polycarpou
,
A. A.
, 2004, “
Combining and Contacting of Two Rough Surfaces With Asymmetric Distribution of Asperity Heights
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
0742-4787,
126
, pp.
225
232
.
20.
Yu
,
N.
, and
Polycarpou
,
A. A.
, 2004, “
Extracting Summit Roughness Parameters From Random Gaussian Surfaces According for Asymmetry of the Summit Heights
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
0742-4787,
126
, pp.
761
766
.
21.
Kotwal
,
C. A.
, and
Bhushan
,
B.
, 1996, “
Contact Analysis of Non-Gaussian Surfaces for Minimum Static and Kinetic Friction and Wear
,”
Tribol. Trans.
1040-2004,
39
, pp.
890
898
.
22.
Othmani
,
A.
, and
Kaminsky
,
C.
, 1998, “
Three Dimensional Fractal Analysis of Sheet Metal Surfaces
,”
Wear
0043-1648,
214
, pp.
147
150
.
23.
Chung
,
J. C.
, and
Lin
,
J. F.
, 2006, “
Variation in Fractal Properties and Non-Gaussian Distributions of Microcontact Between Elastic-Plastic Rough Surfaces With Mean Surface Separation
,”
ASME J. Appl. Mech.
0021-8936,
73
, pp.
143
152
.
24.
Johnson
,
K. L.
, 1985,
Contact Mechanics
,
Cambridge University Press
,
Cambridge
.
25.
Chang
,
W. R.
,
Etsion
,
I.
, and
Bogy
,
D. B.
, 1987, “
An Elastic-Plastic Model for the Contact of Rough Surfaces
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
0742-4787,
109
, pp.
257
263
.
26.
Chang
,
W. R.
,
Etsion
,
I.
, and
Bogy
,
D. B.
, 1988, “
Static Friction Coefficient Model for Metallic Rough Surfaces
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
0742-4787,
110
, pp.
57
63
.
27.
Kogut
,
L.
, and
Etsion
,
I.
, 2002, “
Elastic-Plastic Contact Analysis of a Sphere and a Rigid Flat
,”
ASME J. Appl. Mech.
0021-8936,
69
, pp.
657
662
.
28.
Kogut
,
L.
, and
Etsion
,
I.
, 2003, “
A Finite Element Based Elastic-Plastic Model for the Contact of Rough Surfaces
,”
STLE Tribol. Trans.
1040-2004,
46
, pp.
383
390
.
29.
Gibra
,
I. N.
, 1973,
Probability and Statistical Inference for Scientists and Engineers
,
Prentice-Hall
,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ
.
30.
Zhao
,
Y.
, and
Chang
,
L.
, 2001, “
A Model of Asperity Interactions in Elastic-Plastic Contact of Rough Surfaces
,”
ASME J. Tribol.
0742-4787,
123
, pp.
857
864
.
31.
Nuri
,
K. A.
, and
Halling
,
J.
, 1975, “
The Normal Approach Between Rough Flat Surface in Contact
,”
Wear
0043-1648,
32
, pp.
81
93
.