Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 47 references

A Two-Phase Flow Solver with Variable Liquid Compressibility and Temperature Equation for Partitioned Simulation of Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A two-phase CFD solver with variable liquid compressibility and a temperature equation, coupled to a structural solver, reproduces reference pressure and film-thickness profiles in elastohydrodynamic lubrication and predicts…

desk verdict A genuinely useful OpenFOAM EHL solver, well implemented and clearly written, but the thermal/variable-compressibility validation rests on a near-twin co-authored reference, so 'validated against literature' is too strong as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.12779 v1 pith:SNIHNSVV submitted 2024-12-17 cs.CE

Nicolas Delaissé , Peyman Havaej , Dieter Fauconnier , Joris Degroote This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CE
keywords elastohydrodynamiclubricationtwo-phaseflowcavitationvariablecompressibilitythermaleffectsshearthinningpartitionedfluid-structureinteractionsqualane
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Elastohydrodynamically lubricated contacts — the narrow, high-pressure oil films that separate rollers, gears and cams — are usually modeled with reduced Reynolds and Boussinesq equations. This paper argues that a full two-phase CFD solver with variable liquid compressibility, cavitation, shear-thinning rheology and a temperature equation can replace those reductions and still reproduce accepted reference solutions. The solver is validated against two independent numerical benchmarks, one thermal sliding and one isothermal pure rolling, with close agreement in pressure and film-thickness profiles. If the validation holds, it gives engineers a modular route to predict film thickness, load and friction in contacts where slip, temperature and compressibility matter.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the homogeneous equilibrium model (HEM) for cavitation, in which liquid and vapor share velocity, pressure and temperature and the pressure is pinned at the saturation pressure while the vapor fraction adjusts. Around that core, the solver couples the pressure equation with a compressibility relation from the Tait equation, a Doolittle viscosity law, Carreau shear thinning, a limiting shear stress, and an enthalpy-based temperature equation. The segregated PIMPLE loop — an iterative momentum-prediction/pressure-correction sequence — carries the pressure-velocity coupling, and the cavitation step enforces saturation through a linearized pressure-density relation. The whole sequence runs on a moving mesh and is driven by a quasi-Newton coupling iteration with a structural solver, which is what turns the flow solver into an elastohydrodynamic lubrication solver.

What would settle it

Measure central film thickness and friction coefficient in a controlled rolling-sliding EHL contact at the same nominal load and slip ratios 0, 1 and 2, and compare with the predicted values of about 0.33 μm and friction coefficients from 0.001 to 0.033; deviations well beyond the spread between the two literature benchmarks would show that the constitutive closure fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that a pressure-based finite-volume solver for two-phase lubricant flow, built by adding a variable liquid compressibility and a temperature equation to an existing homogeneous-equilibrium cavitation solver, can simulate elastohydrodynamic line contacts at gigapascal pressures without relying on the Reynolds and Boussinesq reductions. The liquid phase is closed by the Tait equation for compressibility, the Doolittle equation for piezoviscosity, the Carreau model for shear thinning and a limiting-shear-stress cutoff, with thermal conductivity and heat capacity depending on the thermodynamic state. Coupled in a partitioned manner to a structural finite-element solver, the framework produces pressure and film-thickness profiles that closely match published numerical results for a thermal sliding contact and for an isothermal pure-rolling contact, and it resolves cavitation, a sevenfold variation of liquid compressibility across the contact, and temperature rises up to about 29 K under slip.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim depends on the constitutive equations and constants for squalane — Tait compressibility, Doolittle viscosity, Carreau shear thinning and the thermal property laws — remaining faithful at pressures up to several gigapascals and high shear rates; if those models or fitted constants are off in that regime, the validated agreement and predicted film thickness and friction would not transfer to other conditions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Film thickness and pressure profiles for line contacts can be obtained without the Reynolds and Boussinesq assumptions, so inertial and large-deformation effects at the inlet are captured.
  • Cavitation appears where the pressure drops to the saturation value; the vapor pocket location and density field are outputs of the solver rather than imposed.
  • The liquid compressibility varies by about a factor of 7 across a pure-rolling contact, so constant-compressibility cavitation solvers would misrepresent the high-pressure region.
  • Under sliding, viscous heating raises the central temperature by roughly 8 K at slip-to-roll ratio 1 and 29 K at ratio 2, dropping viscosity by an order of magnitude and forming a shear band; the friction coefficient rises from 0.00115 to 0.03331.
  • Constitutive models can be selected at run time, so the same solver can be retargeted to other lubricants or to other compressibility and viscosity closures without rewriting the flow solver.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The partitioned moving-mesh architecture should extend to point contacts, wavy or rough surfaces, and transient load or speed reversal, although those cases are not demonstrated in the paper.
  • A combined validation at high slip with independently measured traction would close the gap between the thermal-sliding and pure-rolling benchmark cases, which the paper compares separately.
  • The fixed-temperature boundary on the rolling solid is justified by slow thermal time scales, but repeated or long-duration contacts would likely need a conjugate heat model.
  • Because constitutive models are interchangeable, the same solver could be used to quantify model-form uncertainty by comparing Tait-Doolittle-Carreau closures against classical Dowson-Roelands closures, which the paper does not do.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a new OpenFOAM-based two-phase flow solver for elastohrodynamic lubrication (EHL) line contacts. The solver extends cavitatingFoam with variable liquid compressibility via the Tait equation, a temperature equation, Doolittle/Carreau rheology, thermal-conductivity and heat-capacity models, and a homogeneous equilibrium cavitation model. It is coupled in a partitioned way to the Kratos Multiphysics structural solver through the CoCoNuT coupling tool. The manuscript describes the governing equations, the PIMPLE-based implementation, and a line-contact test case with squalane. Validation in Section 4.2 compares pressure and film-thickness profiles against Havaej et al. [34], Srirattayawong [45], and Tošić et al. [19], and Section 4.3 presents results for three slip-to-roll ratios.

Significance. If the solver is adequately validated, it would be a useful open-source tool for CFD-based EHL simulation, combining modular constitutive models, cavitation, thermal effects, and partitioned FSI with entirely open-source components. A clear strength is that all constitutive parameters are taken from external literature sources (Bair [42], Björling et al. [27]); no target result is fitted in this paper, so the core derivation is not circular in a parameter-fitting sense. The governing equations and implementation steps are presented in sufficient detail to be reproduced. However, the significance is currently limited by a validation strategy whose distinctive thermal/variable-compressibility claim rests on comparison with a near-identical, co-authored solver, with no quantitative error metrics or convergence study.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.2, Fig. 9] The only case exercising the new solver's distinguishing features—variable liquid compressibility, the temperature equation, shear thinning, and the squalane parameters of Table 1—is compared against Havaej et al. [34], a model that shares two authors with the present paper and is explicitly described as using 'almost identical lubricant models and parameters.' Agreement between two implementations built on the same models by the same group is not independent evidence that the new physics is captured correctly, and no quantitative error metric is reported; the comparison is visual only. Please add a comparison against an independent numerical solver or experimental data for a thermal EHL case, or at minimum report error norms and a sensitivity study of the boundary-condition differences (solid energy equation, Carslaw–Jaeger condition) that are invoked to explain the discrepancies.
  2. [§3.3, §4.2] No grid-refinement or time-step convergence study is reported for this solver. The mesh size and time step are justified by reference to Tošić et al. [19], but that work used different discretization techniques and did not include the new thermal and variable-compressibility terms. Since the central claim is quantitative agreement of pressure and film thickness in a thin-film contact with very high pressure gradients, the absence of a convergence check leaves open the possibility that discretization error contributes to the observed agreement or disagreement. Please add a convergence study (e.g., central and minimum film thickness, maximum pressure, and the Petrusevich spike) or provide a quantitative argument that the present resolution is sufficient for the new terms.
  3. [§4.2, Figs. 9–10] The validation set does not directly test the temperature solution. Figure 9 plots only pressure and film thickness, despite the thermal nature of that case, and Figure 10 is isothermal. Because the temperature equation is one of the two main novelties of the solver, the temperature field itself, or a directly temperature-sensitive integrated quantity such as friction, should be compared with an independent result. Without this, the thermal model is not independently anchored.
  4. [§5] The conclusion states that the 'resulting solution setup is successfully validated against results found in literature.' As it stands, this overstates the evidence: the thermal/variable-compressibility validation is anchored to a non-independent reference, and the independent comparison is an isothermal case with different rheology that does not exercise the novel physics. Please either add the additional independent validation suggested above or substantially narrow the conclusion to describe what is actually demonstrated.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4.2, Table 2] The first validation case is described as 'SSR 1' and the caption of Table 2 uses 'SSR'; these should be 'SRR' for slip-to-roll ratio.
  2. [Abstract] The sentence 'and at the same the illustration' is missing the word 'time'; it should read 'and at the same time the illustration.'
  3. [§2.2.7, Eq. (30)] The temperature equation is presented with correction terms that vanish upon convergence. A short explanation of why the correction terms are needed, and how their magnitude is monitored, would improve readability.
  4. [§3.5] The fixed-temperature wall condition on the roller is justified by a time-scale argument, but the paper does not quantify the resulting error relative to the Carslaw–Jaeger condition used in the reference case. A quantitative estimate or a sensitivity check would strengthen the comparison in Fig. 9.
  5. [§2.1.3, Eq. (17)] The footnote noting that other sources use an exponent of −4 instead of −3 in the heat-capacity model is helpful, but the implications of this difference for the thermal results are not discussed. A one-sentence comment on the sensitivity would be useful.
  6. [Generally] The paper states that the solver is intended to benefit the OpenFOAM community, but no repository or code-availability statement is given. A link to a public repository or a clear statement of availability would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the solver is built from stated governing equations and externally sourced constitutive parameters; the thermal validation against a co-authored near-identical model is a non-independence caveat, not a circular step.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain from the governing equations (Section 2.1) through the OpenFOAM implementation (Section 2.2) to the partitioned EHL results (Sections 3 and 4). No target quantity is fitted: the Tait, Doolittle, Carreau and thermal parameters in Table 1 are adopted from Bair [42] and Björling et al. [27], and the solver outputs are computed from the discretized Navier-Stokes, energy and homogeneous equilibrium equations. There is no equation in the paper that defines an input in terms of a predicted output, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The main caveat is that the validation of the thermal and variable-compressibility features (Fig. 9) compares against Havaej et al. [34], which uses "almost identical lubricant models and parameters" and shares two authors with the present paper; this weakens the independence of that benchmark, but it is a comparison of two independently solved discretizations, not a reduction of the present result to the cited paper's output. The second validation (Fig. 10) against Tošić et al. [19] and Srirattayawong [45] is independent, though isothermal and with different rheology. These are validation weaknesses that belong in a correctness and evidence assessment, not in a circularity finding. No self-definitional, fitted-input, uniqueness-imported, ansatz-smuggling, or renaming pattern is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The solver's predictions rest on externally fitted material constants and modeling assumptions; no new physical entity is proposed. All constitutive parameters come from prior literature (Bair [42], Björling et al. [27]), and the validation is numerical rather than experimental.

free parameters (7)
  • Tait compressibility constants (K00, K'0, av, betaK) = K00=8.658e9 N/m2, K'0=11.74, av=8.36e-4 1/K, betaK=6.232e-3 1/K
    External squalane constants adopted from Bair [42]; they determine density and compressibility up to gigapascal pressures.
  • Doolittle viscosity constants (muR, B, a_inf, R0) = muR=0.0157 Pa s, B=4.71, a_inf=-7.273e-4 1/K, R0=0.6568
    External squalane viscosity parameters from Bair [42]; they set the pressure and temperature dependence of viscosity.
  • Carreau shear-thinning constants (n, lambdaR, GR, Lambda) = n=0.463, lambdaR=2.2622e-9 s, GR=muR/lambdaR, Lambda=0.075
    External parameters from Bair [42]; they control shear thinning and limiting shear stress in the contact.
  • Thermal conductivity constants (Ck, s, K, q) = Ck=0.074 J/(m s K), s=4.5, K=-0.115, q=2
    External constants from Björling et al. [27]; they model the pressure and temperature dependence of thermal conductivity.
  • Heat capacity constants (C0, m) = C0=9.4e5 J/(m3 K), m=6.2e5 J/(m3 K)
    External constants from Björling et al. [27]; they model the pressure and temperature dependence of heat capacity.
  • Reference and vapor-phase inputs (TR, rhoR, psat, hvap, cpv, kv, psiv, muv) = TR=313.15 K, rhoR=794.6 kg/m3, psat=5000 Pa, hvap=287e3 J/kg, cpv=1800 J/(kg K), kv=0.025 J/(m s K), psiv=5.76e-6…
    Model inputs taken from literature rather than measured in this paper; they fix the reference state and vapor properties.
  • Numerical discretization parameters (min cell size, time step, cell count) = min cell 5e-7 m, 10 cells across film, time step 1e-8 s, 20100 fluid cells
    Chosen by the authors, partly inherited from Tošić et al. [19] and Hartinger [33], with no dedicated convergence study in this paper.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math The flow is governed by the Navier-Stokes, continuity and energy equations with no body forces or external heat sources.
    Assumed throughout Section 2.1.1; standard continuum mechanics, though the absence of body forces is a modeling choice.
  • domain assumption Liquid and vapor phases are in mechanical and thermodynamic equilibrium (equal velocity, pressure, temperature) in every cell.
    Homogeneous equilibrium model, Section 2.1.2, Eq. 8 and surrounding text.
  • domain assumption Cavitation occurs only by flash evaporation of the lubricant; dissolved gases are absent and surface tension is neglected.
    Stated in Section 2.1.2; the authors note the surface-tension limitation and argue its effect is small.
  • domain assumption Squalane's thermodynamic and rheological behavior is captured by the Tait, Doolittle, Carreau and thermal property models with constants from Bair [42] and Björling et al. [27].
    Section 2.1.3 and Table 1; the validity of these fits at multi-GPa pressures and high shear rates is not experimentally verified in this paper.
  • domain assumption The flow in the narrow gap is laminar.
    Section 3.7, Reynolds number estimate Re approximately 0.0316; reasonable for this case, but a modeling assumption for other operating points.
  • domain assumption The roller surface is isothermal; no energy equation is solved in the solid.
    Section 3.5; the authors justify this by thermal time scales and rotation, and acknowledge that other works use conjugate heat transfer or Carslaw-Jaeger boundary conditions.
  • ad hoc to paper In the enthalpy integral from the Tait equation, p and T are treated as independent quantities.
    Appendix A.1, Eq. 38; this is an explicit integration assumption that may not hold during rapid transients.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Two-Phase Flow Solver with Variable Liquid Compressibility and Temperature Equation for Partitioned Simulation of Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SNIHNSVV

@misc{pith2026241212779,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Two-Phase Flow Solver with Variable Liquid Compressibility and Temperature Equation for Partitioned Simulation of Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SNIHNSVV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.12779}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents a new solver developed in OpenFOAM for the modeling of lubricant in the narrow gap between two surfaces inducing hydrodynamic pressures up to few gigapascal. Cavitation is modeled using the homogeneous equilibrium model. The mechanical and thermodynamic constitutive behavior of the lubricant is accurately captured by inclusion of compressibility, lubricant rheology and thermal effects. Different constitutive models can be selected at run time, through the adoption of the modular approach of OpenFOAM. By combining the lubricant solver with a structural solver using a coupling tool, elastohydrodynamically lubricated contacts can be accurately simulated in a partitioned way. The solution approach is validated and examples with different slip conditions are included. The benefit for the OpenFOAM community of this work is the creation of a new solver for lubricant flow in challenging conditions and at the same the illustration of combining OpenFOAM solvers with other open-source software packages.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.12779 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of elastohydrodynamic lubrication. the film thickness in the contact exist [1–4], but they are based on very restrictive assumptions, e.g., exponential piezo-viscous relation, and the parameters in these equations are obtained through curve￾fitting, resulting in limited accuracy. Experimentally, it is challenging to measure quantities such as film thickness and pressure in non-conformal contacts without… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Flowchart illustrating the PIMPLE loop of the flow solver for use in a par￾titioned FSI approach to simulate EHL. 2.2.3. Density equation. Next, the continuity equation, Eqn. 5, is solved for ρ using the relative flux φ as ∂ρ ∂t + ∇ · (φρ) = 0. (22) 2.2.4. Vapor fraction. The newly obtained density is used to determine the vapor fraction by comparing its value to the liquid saturation density ρl,sat = ρ(psat, T) (ps… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left part of the fluid mesh (yellow-green) and structural mesh (gray). Both are symmetric with respect to the z-axis. The radius R equals 10 mm. The entrainment speed u is 2.5 m/s and is defined as the average of the two rolling velocities u1 and u2 of the upper and lower contacting surfaces, respectively, u = u1 + u2 2 . (31) In case of pure rolling, both surfaces have the same velocity. In reality, however, slip m… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Partitioned coupling in each time step between the flow solver (OpenFOAM®) and the structural solver (Kratos Multiphysics) with the coupling tool CoCoNuT. A schematic illustration of the partitioned coupling of the flow and structural solver is given in [PITH_FULL_IMA…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The fluid mesh is divided into zones to obtain a proper meshing of the contact region. The right-bottom part is shown and the x-position of the zones is indicated relative to the roller radius (not to scale). This is also used for the temperature on the same boundaries…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Prescribed vertical displacement of the bottom rigid plane. The zoomed in detail shows that the motion is smooth, which is achieved by using a sigmoid curve when changing the velocity to a new value. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 ·10−4 0 2 4 ·104 Time (s) Load (N/m) [PITH_FULL_…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Contact load on bottom plane in function of time, obtained by integrating the relative pressure for |x| < 5×10−4 m. The gray dashed line indicates the point where the plane stops moving. Further, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Evolution of central and minimal film thickness in time due to the pressure build-up at the start of the simulation and the upward motion of the bottom plane. The gray dashed line indicates the point where the plane stops moving. −1.5 −1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1.5 …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Validation by comparison of pressure and film thickness profiles for a thermal sliding contact (SRR 1) with a load of 100 kN/m simulated by Havaej et al. [34] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Validation by comparison of pressure and film thickness profiles for isother￾mal pure rolling (SRR 0) with a load of 50 kN/m independently simulated by Toˇsi´c et al. [19] and Srirattayawong [45] (data of Toˇsi´c et al. not shown as it is similar). 4.3. Results with d…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Pressure and film thickness profiles for different SRR values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Plots of liquid compressibility, density and vapor fraction for SRR 0. The axis labels are given in µm. Note that the first two figures are scaled with a factor 100 in the y-direction, while the last is scaled with a factor 25 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Plots of velocity, dynamic viscosity, temperature and strain rate for SRR 0. The axis labels are given in µm. Note that the figures are scaled with a factor 100 in the y-direction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Plots of velocity, dynamic viscosity, temperature and strain rate for SRR 1. The axis labels are given in µm. Note that the figures are scaled with a factor 100 in the y-direction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Plots of velocity, dynamic viscosity, temperature and strain rate for SRR 2. The axis labels are given in µm. Note that the figures are scaled with a factor 100 in the y-direction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [34]

    A quantitative analysis of double-sided surface waviness on TEHL line contacts,

    P. Havaej, J. Degroote, and D. Fauconnier, “A quantitative analysis of double-sided surface waviness on TEHL line contacts,” Tribology International , vol. 183, p. 108389, May 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2023.108389

    arXiv 2023

  2. [45]

    CFD study of surface roughness effects on the thermo-elastohydrodynamic lubrication line contact problem,

    S. Srirattayawong, “CFD study of surface roughness effects on the thermo-elastohydrodynamic lubrication line contact problem,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [19]

    A computational fluid dynamics study on shearing mechanisms in thermal elastohydrodynamic line contacts,

    M. Toˇ si´ c, R. Larsson, J. Jovanovi´ c, T. Lohner, M. Bj¨ orling, and K. Stahl, “A computational fluid dynamics study on shearing mechanisms in thermal elastohydrodynamic line contacts,” Lubricants, vol. 7, no. 8, p. 69, Aug. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/lubricants7080069

    work page doi:10.3390/lubricants7080069 2019

  4. [42]

    Reference liquids for quantitative elastohydrodynamics: selection and rheological characterization,

    S. Bair, “Reference liquids for quantitative elastohydrodynamics: selection and rheological characterization,” Tribology Letters, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 197–206, May 2006. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11249-006-9083-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s11249-006-9083-y 2006

  5. [27]

    Friction reduction in elastohydrodynamic contacts by thin-layer thermal insulation,

    M. Bj¨ orling, W. Habchi, S. Bair, R. Larsson, and P. Marklund, “Friction reduction in elastohydrodynamic contacts by thin-layer thermal insulation,” Tribology Letters, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 477–486, Jan. 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11249-013-0286-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s11249-013-0286-8 2014

  6. [1]

    A. N. Grubin and I. E. Vinogradova, Book 30. Central Scientific Research Institute for Technology and Mechanical Engineering (Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Transl. 337), 1949

    work page 1949

  7. [2]

    Elastohydrodynamic and micro-elastohydrodynamic lubrication,

    D. Dowson, “Elastohydrodynamic and micro-elastohydrodynamic lubrication,” Wear, vol. 190, no. 2, pp. 125–138, Dec. 1995. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(95)06660-8

    work page doi:10.1016/0043-1648(95)06660-8 1995

  8. [3]

    Optimum similarity analysis with applications to elastohydrodynamic lubrication,

    H. Moes, “Optimum similarity analysis with applications to elastohydrodynamic lubrication,” Wear, vol. 159, no. 1, pp. 57–66, Nov. 1992. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(92)90286-h

    work page doi:10.1016/0043-1648(92)90286-h 1992

Show all 47 references
  1. [4]

    B. J. Hamrock, S. R. Schmid, and B. O. Jacobson, Fundamentals of fluid film lubrication. Marcel Dekker, Mar. 2004. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203021187

    2004 doi

  2. [5]

    Stachowiak and A

    G. Stachowiak and A. W. Batchelor, Experimental Methods in Tribology , ser. Tribology and Interface Engineering. Elsevier Science, 2004, vol. 44

    2004

  3. [6]

    Electrical impedance spectroscopy for precise film thickness assessment in line contacts,

    M. Manjunath, S. Hausner, A. Heine, P. De Baets, and D. Fauconnier, “Electrical impedance spectroscopy for precise film thickness assessment in line contacts,” Lubricants, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 51, Feb. 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/lubricants12020051

    2024 doi

  4. [7]

    Evaluation of EHD films by electrical capacitance,

    K. Jablonka, R. Glovnea, and J. Bongaerts, “Evaluation of EHD films by electrical capacitance,” Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics , vol. 45, no. 38, p. 385301, Sep. 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/45/38/385301

    2012 doi

  5. [8]

    Quantitative analysis of Reynolds and Navier–Stokes based modeling approaches for isothermal Newtonian elastohydrodynamic lubrication,

    L. Scurria, T. Tamarozzi, O. Voronkov, and D. Fauconnier, “Quantitative analysis of Reynolds and Navier–Stokes based modeling approaches for isothermal Newtonian elastohydrodynamic lubrication,” Journal of Tribology, vol. 143, no. 12, Mar. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://do...

    2021 doi

  6. [9]

    A coupled finite-volume CFD solver for two-dimensional elasto-hydrodynamic lubrication problems with particular application to rolling element bearings,

    A. Hajishafiee, A. Kadiric, S. Ioannides, and D. Dini, “A coupled finite-volume CFD solver for two-dimensional elasto-hydrodynamic lubrication problems with particular application to rolling element bearings,” Tribology International, vol. 109, pp. 258–273, May 2017. [Online]....

    2017 doi

  7. [10]

    Fluid–structure interaction modeling of elastohydrodynamically lubricated line contacts,

    K. Singh, F. Sadeghi, T. Russell, S. J. Lorenz, W. Peterson, J. Villarreal, and T. Jinmon, “Fluid–structure interaction modeling of elastohydrodynamically lubricated line contacts,” Journal of Tribology , vol. 143, no. 9, Jan. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115...

    2021 doi

  8. [11]

    C. J. Greenshields and H. G. Weller, Notes on Computational Fluid Dynamics: General Principles . Reading, United Kingdom: CFD Direct Ltd, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doc.cfd.direct/notes/cfd-general-principles/

    2022

  9. [12]

    Two-phase flow: Models and methods,

    H. B. Stewart and B. Wendroff, “Two-phase flow: Models and methods,” Journal of Computational Physics , vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 363–409, Dec. 1984. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(84)90103-7

    1984 doi

  10. [13]

    Modelling injector flow including cavitation effects for diesel applications,

    F. P. K¨ arrholm, H. Weller, and N. Nordin, “Modelling injector flow including cavitation effects for diesel applications,” in 5th Joint ASME/JSME Fluids Engineering Conference . San Diego: ASMEDC, Jan. 2007, pp. 1–10. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/fedsm2007-37518

    2007 doi

  11. [14]

    CFD modeling of a thermal and shear-thinning elastohydrodynamic line contact,

    M. Hartinger, M.-L. Dumont, S. Ioannides, D. Gosman, and H. Spikes, “CFD modeling of a thermal and shear-thinning elastohydrodynamic line contact,” Journal of Tribology, vol. 130, no. 4, Aug. 2008. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2958077

    2008 doi

  12. [15]

    The Navier-Stokes approach for thermal EHL line contact solutions,

    T. Almqvist and R. Larsson, “The Navier-Stokes approach for thermal EHL line contact solutions,” Tribology International, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 163–170, Mar. 2002. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-679x(01) 00112-8

    2002 doi

  13. [16]

    M. J. Moran and H. N. Shapiro, Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics . John Wiley & Sons, 2006

    2006

  14. [17]

    A note on the use of Roelands equation to describe viscosity for EHD hertzian zone calculations,

    S. Bair, “A note on the use of Roelands equation to describe viscosity for EHD hertzian zone calculations,” Journal of Tribology, vol. 115, no. 2, pp. 333–334, Apr. 1993. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2921011

    1993 doi

  15. [18]

    The variation of viscosity with temperature and pressure for various real lubricants,

    ——, “The variation of viscosity with temperature and pressure for various real lubricants,” Journal of Tribology, vol. 123, no. 2, pp. 433–436, Jun. 2000. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1308024 24 N. Delaiss´ e, P. Havaej, D. Fauconnier, and J. Degroote

    doi

  16. [20]

    Sensitivity of TEHL simulations to the use of different models for the constitutive behaviour of lubricants,

    P. Havaej, J. Degroote, and D. Fauconnier, “Sensitivity of TEHL simulations to the use of different models for the constitutive behaviour of lubricants,” Lubricants, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 151, Mar. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/lubricants11030151

    2023 doi

  17. [21]

    Dowson and G

    D. Dowson and G. R. Higginson, Elasto-hydrodynamic lubrication . Pergamon Press, 1977. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/c2013-0-05764-7

    1977 doi

  18. [22]

    Correlational aspects of the viscosity-temperature-pressure relationship of lubricating oils,

    C. J. A. Roelands, “Correlational aspects of the viscosity-temperature-pressure relationship of lubricating oils,” Ph.D. dissertation, Techinical University of Delft, Delft, the Netherlands, 1966. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3451519

    1966 doi

  19. [23]

    New results of traction force calculations in elastohydrodynamic contacts,

    L. Houpert, “New results of traction force calculations in elastohydrodynamic contacts,” Journal of Tribology , vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 241–245, Apr. 1985. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3261033

    1985 doi

  20. [24]

    The rheological properties of elastohydrodynamic lubricants,

    C. R. Evans and K. L. Johnson, “The rheological properties of elastohydrodynamic lubricants,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science , vol. 200, no. 5, pp. 303–312, Sep. 1986. [Online]. Available: https://doi.o...

    1986 doi

  21. [25]

    Correlations for the temperature and pressure and composition dependence of low-shear viscosity,

    S. Bair, “Correlations for the temperature and pressure and composition dependence of low-shear viscosity,” in High Pressure Rheology for Quantitative Elastohydrodynamics . Elsevier, 2019, pp. 135–182. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-64156-4.00006-4

    2019 doi

  22. [26]

    Revisiting the ASME pressure-viscosity report using the tait-doolittle correlations,

    T. J. Zolper, S. Bair, and K. Horne, “Revisiting the ASME pressure-viscosity report using the tait-doolittle correlations,” Journal of Tribology, vol. 143, no. 6, Oct. 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4048605

    2020 doi

  23. [28]

    Calculation of viscous EHL traction for squalane using molecular simulation and rheometry,

    S. Bair, C. McCabe, and P. T. Cummings, “Calculation of viscous EHL traction for squalane using molecular simulation and rheometry,” Tribology Letters, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 251–254, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1021011225316

    2002 doi

  24. [29]

    Methodology and use of tensor invariants for satellite gravity gradiometry,

    O. Baur, N. Sneeuw, and E. W. Grafarend, “Methodology and use of tensor invariants for satellite gravity gradiometry,” Journal of Geodesy , vol. 82, no. 4-5, pp. 279–293, Aug. 2007. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-007-0178-5

    2007 doi

  25. [30]

    G. B. Gurevich, J. R. M. Radok, and A. J. M. Spencer, Foundations of the theory of algebraic invariants . Groningen, the Netherlands: Noordhoff, 1964

    1964

  26. [31]

    Shear localisation in simulated fluid,

    R. A. Gray, S. Chynoweth, Y. Michopoulos, and G. S. Pawley, “Shear localisation in simulated fluid,” Europhysics Letters, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 491–496, Sep. 1998. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1209/epl/i1998-00387-4

    1998 doi

  27. [32]

    Influence of pressure and temperature dependence of thermal properties of a lubricant on the behaviour of circular TEHD contacts,

    W. Habchi, P. Vergne, S. Bair, O. Andersson, D. Eyheramendy, and G. E. Morales-Espejel, “Influence of pressure and temperature dependence of thermal properties of a lubricant on the behaviour of circular TEHD contacts,” Tribology International , vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 1842–1850,...

    2010 doi

  28. [33]

    CFD modelling of elastohydrodynamic lubrication,

    M. Hartinger, “CFD modelling of elastohydrodynamic lubrication,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of London, London, United Kingdom, 2007

    2007

  29. [35]

    J. H. Ferziger and M. Peri´ c,Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics . Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002

    2002

  30. [36]

    A tensorial approach to computational continuum mechanics using object orientated techniques,

    H. G. Weller, G. Tabor, H. Jasak, and C. Fureby, “A tensorial approach to computational continuum mechanics using object orientated techniques,” Computers in Physics , vol. 12, pp. 620–631, 1998

    1998

  31. [37]

    Greenshields, OpenFOAM v8 User Guide

    C. Greenshields, OpenFOAM v8 User Guide . London, United Kingdom: The OpenFOAM Foundation, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doc.cfd.direct/openfoam/user-guide-v8

    2020

  32. [38]

    Numerical modelling of diesel spray injection, turbulence interaction and combustion,

    F. P. K¨ arrholm, “Numerical modelling of diesel spray injection, turbulence interaction and combustion,” Ph.D. disser- tation, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden, 2008

    2008

  33. [39]

    An object-oriented environment for developing finite element codes for multi-disciplinary applications,

    P. Dadvand, R. Rossi, and E. O˜ nate, “An object-oriented environment for developing finite element codes for multi-disciplinary applications,” Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering , vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 253–297, Jul

  34. [40]

    Quasi-Newton methods for partitioned simulation of fluid-structure interaction reviewed in the generalized Broyden framework,

    N. Delaiss´ e, T. Demeester, R. Haelterman, and J. Degroote, “Quasi-Newton methods for partitioned simulation of fluid-structure interaction reviewed in the generalized Broyden framework,” Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 3271–3300, Apr. 20...

    2023 doi

  35. [41]

    Surrogate-based acceleration of quasi-Newton techniques for fluid-structure interaction simulations,

    N. Delaiss´ e, T. Demeester, D. Fauconnier, and J. Degroote, “Surrogate-based acceleration of quasi-Newton techniques for fluid-structure interaction simulations,” Computers & Structures , vol. 260, p. 106720, Feb. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc...

    2022

  36. [43]

    Thermal elastohydrodynamic analysis of circular contacts Part 1: Newtonian model,

    H. J. Kim, P. Ehret, D. Dowson, and C. M. Taylor, “Thermal elastohydrodynamic analysis of circular contacts Part 1: Newtonian model,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part J: Journal of Engineering Tribology , vol. 215, no. 4, pp. 339–352, Apr. 2001. [On...

    2001 doi

  37. [44]

    Thermal elastohydrodynamic analysis of circular contacts Part 2: Non-Newtonian model,

    ——, “Thermal elastohydrodynamic analysis of circular contacts Part 2: Non-Newtonian model,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part J: Journal of Engineering Tribology , vol. 215, no. 4, pp. 353–362, Apr

  38. [2001]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.1243/1350650011543592

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1243/1350650011543592

    doi

  39. [2010]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-010-9045-2

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-010-9045-2

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.