Author’s Accepted Manuscript

Analysis of elastic and plastic impact models

Hany A. Sherif, Fahad. A. Almufadi

www.elsevier.com/locate/wear

PII: S0043-1648(17)31823-9
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2018.07.013
Reference: WEA102461
To appear in: Wear
Received date: 26 December 2017
Revised date: 29 June 2018
Accepted date: 19 July 2018
Cite this article as: Hany A. Sherif and Fahad. A. Almufadi, Analysis of elastic
and plastic impact models, Wear, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2018.07.013
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for
publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of
the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting galley proof before it is published in its final citable form.
Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which
could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Analysis of elastic and plastic impact models

Hany A. Sherifa*, Fahad. A. Almufadia

a
Department of Mechanical Eng., College of Engineering, Qassim University
*
Corresponding author
E-mail address: hasherif@qec.edu.sa

Abstract

The analysis of elastic and plastic models for the determination of impact
resistance from impact data of a spherical indenter and an elastic–plastic material is
presented. The establishment of fully elastic and plastic impact regimes for materials
with different elastic moduli of elasticity, yield strengths and hardness are
experimentally investigated. Yielding limit is defined in terms of the contact time to
plastic deformation while the modulus of elasticity is given in terms of the contact
time to elastic deformation and impact velocity. Experimental results show that an
assessment of materials resistance to impact from the measured impact force-time
signals is well correlated to the material hardness. The plastic impact wear depth for
normal impact has been analytically and experimentally verified in terms of time to
plastic deformation.

Key words: Elastic impact, Plastic impact, Impact wear, Yield strength.

1. Introduction

Impact wear can be simply defined as the wear of a solid surface due to multiple
impacts. It is admitted long time ago that the impact wear behavior can be divided
into three types of test methods [1]. Those are the cycling impact wear test, low
velocity impact test [2] and the erosion test [3]. It is shown [4] that impact of metallic
elements at moderate loads causes work-hardening on the subsurface leading to
cracks that are nucleated below the surface and it may also cause piling-up or sinking-
in phenomena. These two aspects of plastic deformation affect the accuracy of contact
size and plastic depth determination.

1
 On the other hand, plastically deformed surface by impact results in delamination
due to micro cracks and surface shear. The repetitive impact of metallic components
at moderate stress conditions results in small submicron wear particles and a highly
oxidized surface [1,5,6]. The mechanism of material removal due to impact can
simply be understood by the analysis of the impact of a spherical indenter with
elastic–plastic materials. Rastegar and Karimi [7] have shown that the microstructure
in the surface and the subsurface region of steel samples is affected by the plastic
impact. This subsurface deformation was found to increase with increasing impact
velocity and decreasing steel hardness.
The elasto-plastic mechanical impact was the subject of many research work [8-
14] to identify the mechanical behavior of metallic surface and extract the elasto-
plastic mechanical properties such as the yield stress. Much work [14-18] was
oriented towards the modeling of elastic impact problems to estimate the parameters
of elastic contact like contact stiffness, restitution coefficient and elastic force-
displacement relationship.
The aim of the present analysis is to investigate the elastic and plastic impact
behavior of three different alloys during well-defined impact conditions using
different hard spheres (impactors). The theoretical and experimental analysis of a
fully elastic Hertzian impact regime as well as plastic impact regime are presented.
The plastic deformation is evaluated using 3D surface profilometry and optical
microscopy of the impacted surfaces. The experimental work focuses on the
measurement of the temporal signal of impact force that the hard sphere imposes on
three tested materials (AISI 400c, Ti-6Al-4V and Al 7075) with different proportional
mechanical properties. The strong influences of material hardness and yield strength
on the contact time of elastic and plastic impact are demonstrated. The parameters
related to the elastic impact like the reduced modulus of elasticity, elastic normal
approach, and contact size can be obtained using the measurement of the contact time
of maximum elastic deformation. Similarly, the parameters related to the plastic
impact like the material yield strength and plastic contact size are obtained from the
measurement of the contact time of maximum plastic deformation.

2. Elastic Hertzian model and impact wear

2
 The equation of motion for the free oscillations of a rigid sphere striking an elastic
half-space is written as follows [19,20]:

̈( ) ( ) (1)

Where m is the mass of the rigid sphere.

Using Hertzian impact theory, the impact normal force is defined as:
⁄
( ) ( ) ( )
Where y(t) is the surface elastic deformation (approach), and
k is a constant which depends on the geometry and material properties of both
the sphere and the half-space and it has the unit (N m-1.5) and k is defined as

√ ( )
Where R is the sphere radius and E* is the reduced modulus of elasticity defined as:
( ) ( )
( )

Es and Ei , s, i are moduli of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio of the hard sphere and the
impacted material, respectively.
The impulsive force that a sphere imparts to a massive half-space was well
approximated by a half-sine pulse [21] of the form shown in Fig.1. The main relevant
parameters of the impact normal force F(t) are the amplitude F*, time t* of the
maximum force and the time of contact tc as shown in Fig.1.

F*
Normal force of contact, N

t*

tc

Time, s

Fig.1 Main relevant parameters of elastic force temporal signal

3
The maximum surface elastic deformation y*(t) and the time to maximum
compression t* can be obtained by first direct and second indirect integration,
respectively of Eq. (1) as [19]:

⁄
( ) ( )
and

( )

Where is the velocity of impact.

Eq. (6) reveals that the elastic force temporal signal is symmetric about the time to the
maximum elastic deformation .

2.1 Non-destructive assessment of impact resistance

Examining the energy balance during the impact, it has been shown [22,23]
that at least 90% of the initial kinetic energy of the particle is dissipated in plastic
deformation in the metal target, and this confirms sometimes to ignore elastic effects.
However, the material response to elastic deformation changes at impact pressure
exceeding the quasi-static indentation hardness. All impact cycles before onset of
plastic deformation are balanced only by the elastic deformation of the impacted
surface.
A relationship between the time to maximum compression t* and maximum normal
contact force F* can be obtained by eliminating vo between Eq. (5) and (6) and using
⁄
Eq. (2) at maximum force , i.e.,

⁄ √
⁄
( )
√
Let this constant be ⁄ as an “impact wear number”. Thus, Eq. (7) is

given as:
⁄
( )

2.2 Elastic parameters from temporal force signal of impact

The surface maximum elastic deformation y*(t), the radius of contact area a*(t)
and the reduced modulus of elasticity E* can directly be computed from the measured
force temporal signal at velocity of impact vo. From the displacement-time

4
dependence in Eq. (6), the elastic surface deformation (elastic approach) can be
defined as:
( )

and the maximum elastic contact size a* is:

√ √ ( )
Eliminating y* between Eq. (5) and (6) the constant k is obtained as:

⁄
( )

Substituting Eq. (3) into Eq. (11), the reduced modulus of elasticity is given as:

( )
√
Eq. (12) shows that the time can be predicted knowing the material elastic modulus
, velocity and particle size .

3. Plastic model and impact wear

With impact wear, no material is progressively lost from the surface as in

traditional concepts of wear. The loss of materials is a post stage after plastic strain by
impact. With impact increasing, the problems of deformation and delamination
become more serious [7]. Here, the impact wear depth is more broadly taken to equate
to the surface plastic deformation of material after a single impact. Elastic model
based on Hertz theory remains valid to the onset of plastic deformation at a dynamic
pressure pd, where:

( )

and the corresponding plastic contact size (chordal radius of the dent) is given as:

√ ( )

Where are the parameters of plastic contact

Hence, within plastic regime, Eq. (1) can be rewritten as:
̈ ( ) ( ) ( )
The first direct and second indirect integration of Eq. (15) give the maximum plastic
deformation (wear depth) as:

5
 √ ( )

It is useful to mention that combining of Eq. (13) and (14) coincides with that used by
Hutchings [23] in case of impact wear produced by impinging particles with mass
⁄ .
Also, the time of plastic indentation is given as

√ ( )

The plastic surface deformation can be obtained in terms of by the elimination

of quotient ⁄ between Eq. (16) and (17) as:

( )

4. Experimental Study

An experimental setup is designed to measure the time of maximum surface

deformation and the maximum normal force of impact F* due to impact between a
hard sphere and elastic materials at different velocity of impacts v0. The experimental
test rig used in this study is explained in detail in Ref. [14]. A scheme of the test setup
is shown in Fig. 2. In the present study four cap mounts with different masses and
indenter radii (Table 1) are used as end impactors attached to the free end of the
pendulum arm. The rigid steel sphere indenters used in the experiments are type FAG
made from steel 100Cr6 (Es=207 GPa,s = 0.27-0.3, oil quenched and tempered,
hardness = 63 HRC).
Table 1
Cap mounts specifications
Cap mount Sphere radius R (mm) Mass of cap mount, (g) Total equivalent mass (m)of cap assembly
at point of contact, (g)

C1 3.0 12.25 78.7

C2 2.5 5.0 71.45
C3 1.75 2.35 68.8
C4 1.2 2.22 68.67

Three samples with proportional values of mechanical properties (hardness H, yield

strength Y, Young’s modulus E) are used. Two samples are cut from wrought
untreated rolled bar (40x 7mm) of Al 7075-T651 and Ti-6Al-4V while the third one
(AISI 400c) is heat treated (oil quenched and tempered). The mechanical properties

6
shown in Table 2 are extracted from standard tables and experimentally verified using
Universal hardness tester (Type ZHU250) from Zwick/Roell. Test samples are
polished to a mirror finish as given in Table 3.

7
Table 2
Mechanical properties of tested samples

Sample Density Hardness Hardness Yield strength Modulus of elasticity Reduced modulus
material g/cm3 Vickers (HV) H (MPa) Y (MPa) Ei (GPa) [ i] E*(GPa)
designations
Al 7075-T651 2.81 154 508 503 72 [0.33] 113
Ti-6Al-4V 4.43 349 1121 880 113.8 [0.342] 82
AISI 400c 7.85 633 1879 1896 207 [0.29] 59.5

Table 3
Measured surface parameters using Contour GT optical profiler

Measured surface parameters

Sample material designations
Ra(µm) Rq (µm) Rt (µm) Rp (µm)
Al 7075-T651 0.097 0.146 1.432 1.007
Ti-6Al-4V 0.048 0.0725 0.722 0.344
AISI 400c 0.208 0.264 1.683 0.924

CASSY DAC card

USB
DC-power supply
+ Cassy
Rotary motion sensor Software
supply

Movable support Lap Top

Steel bracket

Test sample Charge amplifier

Fig.2. Scheme of pendulum test setup

At the beginning of every impact test, the pendulum arm is held vertically with
the impactor just touching the sample, the output from the rotary motion sensor is
zeroed and the arm is then raised to the position of the selected launching angle and
the sample is impacted by the release of pendulum arm and is caught manually after
rebound to prevent a second impact. The velocity vo of the initial collision is
calculated from the measured angular velocity and the length of the pendulum. The
impact point on the tested sample surface was monitored after each impact shooting
using magnifying glass lens to probe the initiation of surface notches and to record the
force and velocity at which the onset of plastic deformation begins. This procedure is
repeated many times at each angle of launching to the moment of dent emerging.

8
Once the dent appears, the test is stopped, the studs holding the sample are unfastened
and the sample is slightly shifted up or down by about 1.8 mm, studs are refastened
again and the impact is resumed at the same angle of impact to the desired number of
impacts. If no dents are observed, the impact process continues to the instant of dent
emerging. After finishing the impact test, the sample is dismounted and the sizes of
the first and the last dent are measured and visualized using light optical microscope
with high resolution camera.
Example of measured force temporal signals due to the impact of Ti-6Al-4V alloy
with a 2.5 mm steel sphere is shown in Fig.3. Plastic regimes are established at an
impact velocity > 0.3046 m/s. A clear asymmetry of the force signal is marked at
plastic yielding. This means that the time to maximum plastic deformation is not
equal to as the case of elastic impact. With plastic yield, tc=0.16 ms and
ms.

7
Ti-6Al-4V, R=2.5 mm
6

5
vo=0.040 m/s (Elastic impact)
Force of impact, N

4
vo=0.095 m/s (Elastic impact)
3

2 vo=0.305 m/s (Plastic impact)

1

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
-1

-2
Time, ms

Fig. 3. Measured force temporal signals.

Fig.4 shows the measured time-force curves for the Ti-6Al-4V sample. In the case of
R=3.0 mm, a fully elastic impact regime for all measured points with no surface dent
is observed. For R=2.5 and 1.2 mm, surface dents are emerged with an abrupt
decrease of contact time at the instant of yield as a sign of transition from elastic
mode to plastic one.

9
 0.34
Ti-6Al-4V
0.3 R=3.0 mm
R=2.5 mm
Time of contact tC , ms

0.26
R=1.2 mm

0.22

0.18

0.14

0.1

0.06
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Maximum contact force F*, N

Fig. 4. Time - force relationship measured at different sphere radii.

To clearly show the abrupt change of the time of contact at onset of plastic
deformation, the time-force and time-velocity relationships are plotted in terms of the
time of maximum compression instead of the contact time as shown in Fig.5 and
6. The transition from elastic to plastic mode is indicated on the plots by the dashed
arrows 12 and the point 3 is the end of multiple impacts. Per the theoretical analysis
presented in section 3, the time at point 1 is and is at point 2.

10
 0.18
Ti-6Al-4V
0.16
Time of maximum deformation t*, ms R=3.0 mm
0.14 R=2.5 mm
0.12 R=1.2 mm
1
0.1 1

0.08
2
0.06
2
0.04
3 3
0.02

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Maximum contact force F*, N

Fig. 5. Variation of time to maximum compression with the maximum normal contact force at
different sphere radii. (path 1 2 is the transition from elastic to plastic mode, point 3 is the end of
multiple plastic impacts)

0.18
Ti-6Al-4V
R=3.0 mm
Time of maximum deformation t*, ms

0.16
R=2.5 mm
0.14
R=1.2 mm
0.12 1

0.1 1

0.08
2
0.06
2
0.04 3
3
0.02

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Velocity of impact v0, m/s

Fig. 6. Variation of time to maximum compression with the velocity of impact vo at different sphere
radii. (path 1 2 is the transition from elastic to plastic mode, point 3 is the end of multiple plastic
impacts)

11
Using the optical microscope, the plastic contact size at point 2 can be estimated from
the microscope image shown in Fig.7.

2bm=418m

Fig. 7. Dent shape of Ti-6Al-4V sample at point 2 ( =5.85 N, vo=0.305 m/s, R=2.5 mm)

The 2D and 3D surface profiles are obtained using light interferometry technique. A
non-contact surface metrology equipment (Type GTK1-A Contour optical microscope
from Bruker) is used to explore the surface profile of the polished sample by light
scanning at speed of 47 µm/sec with standard camera. The metrology equipment has
an application software to provide the optical analyses and the advanced image
processing for both thick and thin films.

Using GTK1-A Contour optical profile, it is possible to have a precise insight of the
measured dent with scanned area dimensions x=623.5 µm and y= 467.6 µm. Fig. 8
shows the 2D surface profile at point 2, and the 3D representation of the surface
profile is given in Fig.9. Either 2D or 3D representation of the surface profile can be
used to show the dent status if it is piling-up or sinking-in. In Fig. 9, a slight pile-up
has appeared which means that real contact size am investigated by the optical
microscope is smaller than apparent surface dent bm shown by the surface profiler.

12
 Ti-6Al-4V, R=2.5 mm
6
2bm =418 m
4

Impact wear depth, m

2
2am =355m
0
-2 ym =6.4 m
-4
-6
-8
-10
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Exploration distance, m

Fig. 8. 2D surface profile at point 2, in y-direction of exploration at yield ( =5.85 N, vo=0.305 m/s)
showing slight piling-up (2bm=418m, 2am=355m, =6.4 m).

Fig. 9. 3D surface profile image of Ti-6Al-4V surface dent at point 2 due to one impact ( =5.85 N,
vo=0.305 m/s, R=2.5 mm).

In the case of extremely hard material like AISI 400c sample, fully elastic regimes are
easily emerged within larger velocity range as can be shown in Fig.10. The abrupt
decrease of contact time is only shown in the case of R=1.2 mm where a shallow dent
is emerged at the instant of yield as shown by the 3D representation of the surface
profile in Fig.11. The impact wear depth is  .

13
 0.14 AISI 400c
Time of maximum deformation t* , ms
0.12 R=2.5 mm

0.1 1
R=1.75 mm
R=1.2 mm
0.08

0.06

0.04
2
0.02

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Velocity of impact v0, m/s

Fig. 10. Time – velocity relationship measured at different sphere radii. (path 1 2 is the transition
from elastic to plastic mode)

Fig. 11. 3D surface profile image of AISI 400c surface dent at point 2, ( =5.8 N, vo=0.438 m/s,
R=1.2 mm) due to one impact.

Impact test procedures are conducted on the softer sample Al 7075 using two sphere
radii R=3.0 mm and 2.5 mm to investigate the effect of material mechanical properties
on the transition from elastic mode to a plastic one. The time-force and time-velocity
relationships of Al 7075 sample are shown in Fig.12 and 13. The Al 7075 sample at
R=2.5 mm looks softer than R=3.0 mm because of the yield conditions in both cases,

14
where (vo= 0.17 m/s) for R=2.5 mm whereas , vo=0.172 m/s
for R=3.0 mm.
0.18
Al 7075
0.16
Time of maximum deformation t*, ms

R=3.0 mm
0.14
1 1
0.12 R=2.5 mm

0.1

0.08

0.06
2 2
0.04
3 3
0.02

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Maximum contact force F* ,N

Fig. 12. Time – force relationship measured at two different sphere radii. (path 1 2 is the
transition from elastic to plastic mode and point 3 is the end of multiple impacts)

0.18
Al 7075
0.16
Time of maximum deformation t*, ms

R=3.0 mm
0.14

0.12 1 R=2.5 mm
1
0.1

0.08

0.06
2 2
0.04
3
0.02 3

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Velocity of impact v0 , m/s

Fig. 13. Variation of time to maximum compression with the velocity of impact vo at different
sphere radii. (path 1 2 is the transition from elastic to plastic mode, point 3 is the end of
multiple plastic impacts)

15
The dent of Al 7075 sample corresponding to the onset of plastic deformation (point
2) and after 6 plastic impacts (point 3) using sphere of R=2.5 mm is shown by
microscopic image in Fig.14.

Point 2

Point 3

Fig. 14. Dent of Al 7075, at initial plastic deformation (point 2) ( , vo=0.17 m/s) and
after 6 successive plastic impacts (point 3) ( , vo=0.522 m/s). At point 2, 2bm=392 m
and at point 3, 2bm=456 m, R=2.5 mm

Fig.15 shows what is called “sinking-in” of Al 7075 sample at onset of plastic

deformation (point 3).

Al 7075 R=2.5 mm
15
2bm=456  m
10
Impact wear depth, m

5 2am=372 m

0
ym=10 m
-5

-10

-15
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Exploration distance, m

Fig. 15 2D surface profile at point 3 after 6 successive impacts with the increase of contact sizes
due to multiple impacts (2am=372µm, =10 m).

16
 It can be seen from Fig.6, 10 and 13 that the time to maximum compression
is independent of the velocity of impact v0 within the plastic mode which coincides
with Eq. (21). The measured time - force and velocity relationships of the tested
samples (AISI 400c and Ti-6Al-4V) as well as their surface’s profiles under multiple
impacts are given as supplementary material.

4.1 Effect of multiple impacts on plastic depth

To investigate the effect of multiple impact on the impact wear depth
(plastic depth), the impact test must be resumed after the onset of plastic deformation.
Once the plastic mode is initiated, the test is stopped, and the sample is slightly
shifted up or down by about 1.8 mm and the impact is resumed at the same angle of
impact of point 2 to the desired number of impacts. The dent geometry after 6
successive plastic impacts with R=2.5 mm from elastic point 1 to plastic point 3 can
also be seen from its dent profile from Fig.16. Although the contact size changed a lot
due to multiple impacts, the impact wear depth has not been largely changed as
shown in Fig.16 in comparison to that in Fig.8.

Ti-6Al-4V, R=2.5 mm
8
6 2am =534m
4
Impact wear depth, m

2
0
-2
-4 ym =7.9m
-6
-8
-10
-12
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Exploration distance, m
Fig.16. 2D surface profile at point 3 in x-direction of exploration after 6 successive impacts showing
piling-up. (2am=534µm, =7.9 m).

A clear widening of the contact size due to multiple impacts is also shown on the 3D
image in Fig.17. This image shows how the contact size increased.

17
Fig.17. 3D surface profile image of Ti-6Al-4V surface dent at point 3 after 6 successive impacts
( =11.1N, vo=0.555 m/s, R=2.5 mm).

Similar data analysis of the tested samples AISI 400c and Al 7075 as well as
their surface’s profiles under multiple impacts are given as supplementary data.

5. Results and discussion

The analysis of fully elastic and plastic impact models showed that the onset of plastic
deformation is characterized by an abrupt decrease of the contact time to maximum
compression. Using the time to maximum elastic compression within elastic impact
regime, the material elastic parameters, e.g. a*, y*, k, E* can be estimated. Similarly,
some material plastic properties, e.g. can be obtained using the time to the
maximum plastic compression at the onset plastic deformation.

5.1 Elastic modulus of elasticity

One of the important elastic parameters is the reduced modulus of elasticity E* which
can be estimated with a good precision from the measured temporal signal within
fully elastic regime as given by Eq. (12). Fig.18 shows the predicted reduced modulus
of elasticity for the steel AISI 400 C sample impacted by three hard steel spheres with
different diameters within the elastic regime.

18
 240 AISI 400c
R=2.5 mm
Reduced modulus of elasticity, GPa
200 R=1.75 mm
R=1.2 mm
160 Hertz theory

120

80

40

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Velocity of impact , m/s

Fig. 18. Comparison between reduced modulus of elasticity E* estimated from measured data and
its theoretical mean value E*mean=113 GPa

For less hard materials, the plastic deformation mode is dominant at lower loading
conditions and smaller impactor radius. By only including the elastic deformation data
up to the transition point 2, the predicted reduced modulus of elasticity for Ti-6Al-4V
and Al 7075 samples can be plotted as shown in Figs.19 and 20, respectively.

120 Ti-6Al-4V
Reduced modulus of elasticity, GPa

100

80

60
R=2.5 mm
40
R=1.2 mm
20 Hertz theory

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Velocity of impact , m/s

Fig. 19 Comparison between reduced modulus of elasticity E* estimated from measured data and its
theoretical mean value E*mean=82 GPa.

19
 120
Al 7075
R=3.0 mm
Reduced modulus of elasticity, GPa 100
R=2.5 mm
80
Hertz theory

60

40

20

0
0 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15

Velocity of impact , m/s

Fig. 20. Comparison between reduced modulus of elasticity E* estimated from measured data and its
theoretical mean value E*mean=59.5 GPa

It can be seen from the above curves that using impactor with larger radius will
increase the precision of the predicted modulus E*.

5.2 Impact wear resistance number

Within the elastic regime, the impact wear resistance number F is a constant number
that can simply be obtained from measured force temporal signal using the two
relevant parameters F* and from one measured temporal signal F(t) from Eq. (8).
Measured data of F using different sphere radii within elastic regime is nearly
constant and it starts to deviate from elastic trend at the velocity causing the yield as
shown in Fig. 21 for the AISI 400c sample. It is also shown that F is decreasing by
the change in sphere radius.

20
 AISI 400c
0.14

0.12
Impact wear number, F

0.1

0.08

0.06
R=2.5 mm
0.04 R=1.75 mm

0.02 R=1.2 mm

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Velocity of impact , m/s

Fig. 21. Variation of the impact wear number of AISI 400c sample with sphere radius of the
impactor (For R=1.2 mm, vY < 0.39 m/s).

Excluding the plastic impact data, the trend of the number F variation with the
hardness Vickers number of the three tested samples can be shown by plot in Fig.22
and 23. It is shown that F decreases with the increase of the material hardness. Also,
the range of the velocity of elastic impact extends with the material hardness.

0.14 R=2.5 mm

0.12
Impact wear number,  F

0.1

0.08
AISI 400c (633 HV)
0.06
Ti-6Al-4V (349 HV)
0.04
Al 7075 (154 HV)
0.02

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Velocity of impact , m/s

Fig. 22. Comparison of the impact wear number of three materials with different hardness Vickers
using sphere with radius R=2.5 mm.

21
 0.16 R=3 mm
0.14
Impact Wear number, F

0.12

0.1

0.08
AISI 400c (633 HV)
0.06

0.04 Ti-6Al-4V (349 HV)

0.02 Al 7075 (154 HV)

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Velocity of impact , m/s
Fig.23. Comparison of the impact wear number of three materials with different hardness Vickers
using sphere with radius R=3.0 mm.

A good correlation between the experimental data described by the number F and
the reported hardness Vickers can be shown in Fig. 22 and 23.

5.2 Materials yielding strength

The mean material yield strength ̅̅̅ can be predicted from the impact data within
plastic impact mode using Eq. (16) where the dynamic pressure is given as:

( ) ( )

Tabor [24] and Crook [25] proved through impact experiments that the plastic
deformation occurs at a dynamic pressure pd greater than the mean contact pressure pm
by a factor n (i.e. pd = n pm), which is a material type dependent. Thus;

( ) ( )

Using the von Mises criteria [19], the condition of material yield is where
p0 is the maximum contact pressure before the onset of plastic deformation and is
related to mean contact pressure as ⁄ . From Eq. (18) and (20), the
yield strength ̅̅̅ is given as:

22
 ̅ ( ) ( )

Eq. (21) shows that the impact time can be predicted from the material yield
strength and particles size R.
In our experiments, it is found that n=9 for AISI400c and Ti-6Al-4V alloys while n=
9.6 for Al 7075 alloy. As it is shown by experimental results, the measured time is
equivalent to the time of plastic indentation .
Applying these conditions, the yield strength ̅ can be obtained from impact data as:

̅ ( )

and,

̅ ( )

Table 4 shows the comparison between the true yield strength Y and the estimated ̅̅̅
from the measured time for the three tested materials.

Table 4
Comparison between estimated true and yield strength from measured time to plastic deformation
R=3.0 mm R=2.5 mm R=1.2 mm True value
(s) ̅̅̅ (MPa) (s) ̅̅̅ (MPa) (s) ̅̅̅ (MPa) Y (MPa)
AISI 400c ------ ------ ------ ------ 37 1974 1896
Ti-6Al-4V ------ ------ 45 659 60 751 880
Al 7075 49 483 50 500 70 516 503

The discrepancy between predicted and true values reported in Table 4 is mainly due
to the error in capturing the real time to maximum plastic deformation. This error
can be minimized by decreasing the increment in the angle of impact (decreasing the
incremental velocity  v0). An accurate measurement of the time to plastic
deformation is realized by using higher sampling rate in time signal acquisition (i.e. >
50 kHz).

5.3 Prediction of plastic depth from impact data

Within the plastic deformation mode, the plastic surface deformation can be
obtained from Eq. (18) as . Table 5 reports the comparison between

23
 the measured plastic depth from optical profilometry and the predicted plastic
depth from impact data and .

Table 5
Comparison of measured impact wear depth and measured from impact data at point 2
AISI 400c Ti-6Al-4V Al 7075
R
(mm) m/s s m m m/s s m m m/s s m m
3.0 ---- ---- ----- ----- ---- ---- ----- ----- 0.172 49 5.37 7.3
2.5 ---- ---- ----- ----- 0.305 45 8.7 6.4 0.170 50 5.42 10.0
1.2 0.438 37 10.3 5.7 0.179 60 6.8 5.0 0.126 70 5.62 10.0

The large deviation between some predicted and measured is also attributed to
the error of the measured time in addition to the presence of sinking-in and piling-
up which results in uncertainty of the measured wear depth .

5.4 Prediction of plastic contact size due to multiple impact

It is shown in the above analysis of surface profiles that the effect of multiple impacts
is confined only to increasing the contact sizes am with an insignificant effect on the
plastic depth . Using Eq. (14) and (18), the contact size can be obtained from the
impact data as:

√ ( )

Table 6 shows the comparison between the contact size am from surface profiler data
and ap from the impact data using Eq. (24)

Table 5
Comparison of measured contact depth and measured from impact data at points 2 and 3
AISI 400c Ti-6Al-4V Al 7075
Single impact Multiple impacts Single impact Multiple impacts Single impact Multiple impacts
R
(mm) m m m m m m m m m m m m
3.0 ---- ---- ----- ----- ---- ---- ----- ----- 178 135 202 230
2.5 ---- ---- ----- ----- 206 178 266 267 164 127 203 217
1.2 157 126 212 153 128 81 135 171 116 102 142 128

Exact measurement of is not possible due to the phenomena of sinking-in and

piling-up. Piling-up can be shown from Fig.16, while Fig. 24 shows the case of
“sinking-in” of Al 7075 sample impacted by a sphere of radius R=1.2mm. Here, the
surface dent shows two contact sizes, one at the level of the surface dent, i.e. bm and
the other is an imprint of sphere curvature, i.e. am.

24
 Al 7075 R=1.2 mm
10

2bm=430 m

Impact wear depth, m

5

2am=204 m
0

-5
ym=10 m
-10

-15
0 100 200 300 400 500

Exploration distance, m

Fig. 24. Effect of sinking-in on the predicted contact size measured at point 2

Similarly, the time can be predicted from the dent contact size ,velocity and
particles size using Eq. (24).

6. Conclusions

The theoretical and experimental analysis of the material response under normal
impact conditions are investigated. Both elastic and plastic regimes are
experimentally presented via impacting three materials with different mechanical
properties by hard steel spheres of different sizes. The results obtained in this study
are the following:
 Elastic modulus of elasticity, elastic approach and contact size can be
estimated via the measured contact time of maximum elastic compression.
 Material yield strength and dynamic plastic hardness [26,27] can be
determined from the measured contact time to plastic deformation.
 Within elastic regime, impact wear number a good correlation to the hardness
Vickers number.
 Wear dent is affected by the plastic impact phenomena of the sink-in and pile-
up.

25
  Analysis developed in this paper is helpful in predicting impact conditions
(contact time, wear dents) knowing the inputs (material properties, velocity
and particles size).
References
[1] A. Azzam, W. Li, The low velocity impact damage resistance of the composite
structures a review, Rev Adv Mater Sci 40 (2015) 127–145.

[2] M.F.B. Abdollah, Y. Yamaguchi, T. Akao, N. Inayoshi, N. Miyamoto, T.

Tokoroyama, et al., Deformation-wear transition map of DLC coating under cyclic
impact loading, Wear 274–275 (2012) 435–441.

[3] H. Qi, J.M. Fan, J. Wang, H.Z. Li, Impact erosion by high velocity micro-particles
on a quartz crystal, Tribol Int 82 (2015) 200–210.

[4] P.A. Engel, Percussive impact wear. A study of repetitively impacting solid
components in engineering, Tribol. Int., 1978, 11(3), p 169–176

[5] P.A. Engel, Impact wear of materials, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1976.

[6] R.W. Fricke, C. Allen, Repetitive impact-wear of steels, Wear 163 (1993) 837–
847.

[7] V. Rastegar, A. Karimi, Surface and subsurface deformation of wear-resistant

steels exposed to impact wear, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
(2014) 23:927–936

[8] W.R. Chang, I. Etsion, D.B. Bogy, An elastic-plastic model for the contact of
rough surfaces, ASME J. Tribol., 109 (2) (1987) 257–263.

[9] L. Yu, D. C. Long, Z. J. Jia, J. Hao, Elastic-plastic impact loads of steel spheres
impacting on planes, Applied Mechanics and Materials, 43 (2010) 666.

[10] M.R. Brake, An analytical elastic-perfectly plastic contact model, Int. J. of Solids
and Structures, 49 (2012) 3129 – 3141

[11] B. Alfredsson, E. Nordin, An elastic–plastic model for single shot-peening

impacts, Tribo. Lett (2013) 52:231–251
[12] Big-Alabo, A., Harrison, P., Cartmell, M.P., Contact model for elastoplastic
analysis of half-space indentation by a spherical impactor. Computers and Structures
151(2015) 20–29.

[13] H.Wanga, X.Yina, X. Qib, Q.Denga, B. Yua, Q. Haoa, Experimental and

theoretical analysis of the elastic-plastic normal repeated impacts of a sphere on a
beam, International Journal of Solids and Structures 109 ( 2017) 131–142.
[14] H.A. Sherif, F.A., Almufadi, Identification of contact parameters from elastic-
plastic impact of hard sphere and elastic half space. Wear 368-369 (2016), 358-367.

26
[15] R.V. Rangel, R. J. Thornhill, Prediction of impact forces using Hertzian contact
theory and measured modal structural data, Mechanical Systems and Signal
Processing 4(4) (1990) 287-294.

[16] B. P. Mann, R. E. Carter, S. S. Hazra, Experimental study of an impact oscillator

with viscoelastic and Hertzian contact, Nonlinear Dynamics 50 (3) (2007) 587–596.

[17] I.I. Argatov, Asymptotic modeling of the impact of a spherical indenter on an

elastic half-space, International Journal of Solids and Structures 45 (18–19) (2008)
5035–5048

[18] G.C. McLaskey, S.D. Glaser, Hertzian impact: Experimental study of the force
pulse and resulting stress waves, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128 (3) (2010) 1087-1096.

[19] K. L. Johnson, Contact Mechanics, first edition, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, 1985.

[20] B. Bhushan, Principles and applications of tribology. Wiley, New York, 1999.

[21] S. C. Hunter, Energy absorbed by elastic waves during impact. J. Mech. Phys.
Solids 5 (1957) 162–171.

[22] I. M. Hutchings, Proc. 5th Znt. Conf. on Erosion by Liquid and Solid Impact,
Cambridge, Cambridge shire, 36 (1979), Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge.

[23] I. M. Hutchings, A model for the erosion of metals by spherical particles at

normal incidence, Wear 70 (1981) 269 – 281

[24] D. Tabor, A simple theory of static and dynamic hardness. Proceedings, Royal
Society, A192 (247) (1948) 181-364

[25] A.W. Crook, A study of some impacts between metal bodies by a piezoelectric
method. Proceedings, Royal Society A212 (377) (1952) 360-364.

[26] D. Tabor, The hardness of metals. Oxford Univ.Press, London, 1951.

[27]Y. Tirupataiah, G. Sundarajan, A dynamic indentation technique for the

characterization of the high strain rate plastic flow behaviour of ductile metals and
alloys”, J. Mech. Phys. Solids, v.39 (2), 1991, p.p. 243-271.

Highlights

 Elastic and plastic impact regimes are investigated for three different metals

 A simple criterion for impact wear resistance is developed

27
 Impact wear depth is determined from impact data

 Eelastic modulus of elasticity is obtained from measured time to elastic

deformation

 Yield strength can be determined from measured time to plastic deformation

28