Here you find a response to the MCD paradox from McMeeking, M.Ciavarella, G.Cricrì, and KS Kim. Here.
The paper is dedicated to number one of Mechanical engineering in the world, John Hutchinson from Harvard.
Just submitted a paper on electroadhesion of rough surfaces, greatly simplifying the recent theory of the great Bo Persson , with hot application to touch screens : see here.
Comments welcome.
Title: The false myth of the rise in self-citations, and the impressively positive effect of bibliometric evaluations on the increase of the impact of Italian research
Authors: Pietro D'Antuono and Michele Ciavarella
Categories: physics.soc-ph math.ST stat.TH Comments: 20 pages, 8 figures, 10 tables, in English and inItalian License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
A criterion for the mean stress effect correction in the shift factor approach for variable amplitude life prediction is presented for both smooth and notched specimens. The criterion is applied to the simple idea proposed by the authors in a previous note that Gaßner curves can be interpreted as shifted Wöhler curves. The mean stress correction used has been proposed by Smith, Watson and Topper and, more in general, by Walker.
An interesting paper on historical aspects of classical beam theory.
A nice seminar, here.
See this impressive ranking of the top 100 000 scientists in the world.
Somebody told me about it as I appear as the best of my University, Politecnico di Bari in Italy.
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3…
A very interesting recent paper by Dalvi et al. has demonstrated convincingly with adhesion experiments of a soft material with a hard rough material that the simple energy idea of Persson and Tosatti works reasonably well, namely the reduction in apparent work of adhesion is equal to the energy required to achieve conformal contact. We demonstrate here that, in terms of a stickiness criterion, this is extremely close to a criterion we derive from BAM (Bearing Area Model) of Ciavarella, and not very far from that of Violano et al.
I attach a Letter I sent to the Editor of a tribology journal, concerning adhesion of rough surfaces.
I contend that some "criteria" that have been proposed based on extrapolation of numerical results are due to the limitations in present numerical sophisticated rough contact simulations, which only span at most 3 orders of magnitude of wavelengths, so typically people simulate from nanometer to micrometer scale.
