Enhancing forecasting of current-carrying performance through spatial frequency analysis of interface morphology
Source abstract
Abstract
Electrical contact interfaces, integral to devices such as connectors, switches, and conductive slip rings, play a crucial role in determining current-carrying capabilities. This study adopts spatial frequency analysis to assess the current-carrying performance of interfaces based on their morphological characteristics. Initially, rough surfaces with various parameters, including the cutoff frequency (N), the spectral index (β), and the gain factor (A), were generated using spatial frequency methods, followed by current-carrying simulations. The findings reveal that the characteristic parameters derived from spatial frequency methods exhibit a significantly stronger correlation with current-carrying performance than traditional roughness metrics. To enhance the practical applicability of this research, a physical-informed machine learning approach for rough surface features extraction was developed, demonstrating high predictive parameter identification accuracy for the three parameters. Overall, this paper introduces a tribo-informatics approach for analyzing and extracting rough surface features that considers the curvature characteristics of contact points. This approach holds significant potential for evaluating the processing state of current-carrying interfaces, selecting high-quality surfaces, and forecasting current-carrying performances.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Surface Roughness and Optical Measurements · Semiconductor materials and devices · Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (28)
Show source-provided references
1. Beake B D, Harris A J, Liskiewicz T W, et al. Friction and electrical contact resistance in reciprocating nano-scale wear testing of metallic materials. Wear, 2021, 474–475: 20386610.1016/j.wear.2021.203866 ↗
2. Fu Y, Qin H, Xu X, et al. What are the progresses and challenges, from the electrical properties of current-carrying friction system to tribological performance, for a stable current-carrying interface? J Bio Tribo Corros, 2021, 8: 410.1007/s40735-021-00516-5 ↗
3. Wang W, Sui Y, Ge X, et al. An efficient method for solving electrical constriction resistance of rough surfaces. Tribol Int, 2024, 197: 10980810.1016/j.triboint.2024.109808 ↗
4. Liskiewicz T W, Kubiak K J, Mann D L, et al. Analysis of surface roughness morphology with TRIZ methodology in automotive electrical contacts: Design against third body fretting-corrosion. Tribol Int, 2020, 143: 10601910.1016/j.triboint.2019.106019 ↗
5. Guo F, Wang X, Kou J, et al. Impact of surface roughness on pantograph-catenary current collection quality. IEEE Access, 2022, 10: 93951–9395910.1109/ACCESS.2022.3203569 ↗
6. Magsipoc E, Zhao Q, Grasselli G. 2D and 3D roughness characterization. Rock Mech Rock Eng, 2020, 53: 1495–151910.1007/s00603-019-01977-4 ↗
7. Wang Y, Liu Y. Preparation of measured engineering surfaces for modeling tribological systems, part I: Characterization and reconstruction. Tribol Int, 2024, 199: 11002610.1016/j.triboint.2024.110026 ↗
8. Croll S G. Surface roughness profile and its effect on coating adhesion and corrosion protection: A review. Prog Org Coatings, 2020, 148: 10584710.1016/j.porgcoat.2020.105847 ↗
9. Pan Y, Zhou P, Yan Y, et al. New insights into the methods for predicting ground surface roughness in the age of digitalisation. Precision Eng, 2021, 67: 393–41810.1016/j.precisioneng.2020.11.001 ↗
10. Kong D, Zhu J, Duan C, et al. Bayesian linear regression for surface roughness prediction. Mech Syst Signal Processing, 2020, 142: 10677010.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106770 ↗
11. Lin S, Xiao D, Shi Z, et al. Surface reconstruction from point clouds without normals by parametrizing the gauss formula. ACM Trans Graph, 2023, 42: 1–19
12. Grigoriu M. On the spectral representation method in simulation. Probab Eng Mech, 1993, 8: 75–9010.1016/0266-8920(93)90002-D ↗
13. Wu Y, Li R, Gao Y, et al. Simple and efficient method to simulate homogenous multidimensional non-Gaussian vector fields by the spectral representation method. J Eng Mech, 2017, 143: 0601701610.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001368 ↗
14. Wu Y, Gao Y, Zhang N, et al. Simulation of spatially varying non-Gaussian and nonstationary seismic ground motions by the spectral representation method. J Eng Mech, 2018, 144: 0401714310.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0001371 ↗
15. He B, Zheng H, Ding S, et al. A review of digital filtering in evaluation of surface roughness. Metrology Measurement Syst, 2021, 28: 217–25310.24425/mms.2021.136606 ↗
16. Li S, Kwok J T, Wang Y. Combination of images with diverse focuses using the spatial frequency. Inf Fusion, 2001, 2: 169–17610.1016/S1566-2535(01)00038-0 ↗
17. Wang H, Chi G, Jia Y, et al. Surface roughness evaluation and morphology reconstruction of electrical discharge machining by frequency spectral analysis. Measurement, 2021, 172: 10887910.1016/j.measurement.2020.108879 ↗
18. Lehmann P, Künne M, Pahl T. Analysis of interference microscopy in the spatial frequency domain. J Phys Photonics, 2021, 3: 01400610.1088/2515-7647/abda15 ↗
19. Myers T J, Throckmorton J A, Borrelli R A, et al. Smoothing surface roughness using Al2O3 atomic layer deposition. Appl Surf Sci, 2021, 569: 15087810.1016/j.apsusc.2021.150878 ↗
20. Podulka P, Macek W, Szala M, et al. Evaluation of high-frequency roughness measurement errors for composite and ceramic surfaces after machining. J Manufacturing Processes, 2024, 121: 150–17110.1016/j.jmapro.2024.05.032 ↗
21. Zhang Z, Yin N, Chen S, et al. Tribo-informatics: Concept, architecture, and case study. Friction, 2021, 9: 642–65510.1007/s40544-020-0457-3 ↗
22. Hasan M S, Nosonovsky M. Triboinformatics: Machine learning algorithms and data topology methods for tribology. Surf Innovations, 2022, 10: 229–24210.1680/jsuin.22.00027 ↗
23. Yin N, Xing Z, He K, et al. Tribo-informatics approaches in tribology research: A review. Friction, 2023, 11: 1–2210.1007/s40544-022-0596-7 ↗
24. Yin N, Yang P, Liu S, et al. AI for tribology: Present and future. Friction, 2024, 12: 1060–109710.1007/s40544-024-0879-2 ↗
25. Hong D, Wu X, Ghamisi P, et al. Invariant attribute profiles: A spatial-frequency joint feature extractor for hyperspectral image classification. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens, 2020, 58: 3791–380810.1109/TGRS.2019.2957251 ↗
26. Sato K, Suto K, Inage K, et al. Space-frequency-interpolated radio map. IEEE Trans Veh Technol, 2021, 70: 714–72510.1109/TVT.2021.3049894 ↗
27. Chen T, Guestrin C. XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 2016. 785–79410.1145/2939672.2939785 ↗
28. Dong J, Chen Y, Yao B, et al. A neural network boosting regression model based on XGBoost. Appl Soft Computing, 2022, 125: 10906710.1016/j.asoc.2022.109067 ↗