Search Results for number

Fig. 13 The number of grains per unit volume as a function of the number of refiner particles per unit volume, showing a general trend to lower efficiency at higher addition level. Data from grain diameters measured in TP-1 tests (closed circles) are compared with predictions of the free More

Fig. 3 Flow patterns as a function of Bingham number, Bi , and Reynolds number, Re . The figure illustrates five distinct filling patterns (bubble, mound, shell, disk, and transition) in semisolid casting. Source: Ref 4 More

Fig. 2 Number of publications per year, without filtering for number of citations More

Fig. 6 Fluorescent yield versus atomic number for K and L lines More

Fig. 5 Sensitivity of PIXE analysis versus proton energy and atomic number based on typical parameter given in the text. Source: Ref 4 More

Fig. 5 Inclusion volume fraction as a function of magnification and number of fields measured. More

Fig. 8 Range of inclusion volume fraction data as a function of the number of fields measured and magnification. More

Fig. 9 Volume fraction of ferrite as a function of number of fields measured and magnification. At high magnifications, equiaxed ferrite and ferrite within the coarse pearlite were detected More

Fig. 10 The effect of atomic number on phases of structure factors. F is the vector sum of F H , the contribution from the heavy atom(s), and a series of F L 's, the contributions of all the light atoms. Because F H is the dominant contributor to F , Φ ≅ ϕ H . More

Fig. 17 Monte Carlo calculated interaction events in iron for a large number of electrons from a 20-keV beam. (a) Scattering locations of incoming electrons. (b) Scattering locations that produced K-shell ionization events that provide Kα x-rays or Auger electrons. Source: Ref 3 More

Fig. 6 Relative sensitivity as a function of atomic number for 2-keV helium and neon ions. More

Fig. 3 Specific wear rate for a number of polymers as reported in the literature. The experimental conditions as reported in the literature are given in the table. Specimen Material Counterface roughness ( R a ), μm Sliding speed ( v ), m/s 1/ S ε (a) Normal pressure ( p More

Fig. 2 Approximate relationship of coefficient of friction to Sommerfeld number, η N / p. More

Fig. 9 Relation between diameter of fretting scar and the number of cycles for a ball on a flat under conditions of total slip. P , 437 N (43.7 kgf); P max , 1.2 GPa (175 ksi); amplitude of movement, 8 μm (320 μin.); frequency, 50 Hz More

Fig. 15 Plot of fretting wear versus number of cycles for mild steel with 90 μm (0.0036 in.) slip amplitude in both dry air and nitrogen atmospheres. Source: Ref 24 More

Fig. 20 Fading of surface compressive stress induced with a number of fretting cycles by shot peening More

Fig. 31 Changes in surface roughness as a function of the number of fretting cycles for metal-to-metal contact. (a) As received. (b) 10 3 cycle. (c) 5 × 10 4 cycles. (d) 3 × 10 5 cycles More

Fig. 32 Plot of the coefficient of friction versus the number of fretting cycles for three selected materials tested on steel. PTFE, polytetrafluoroethylene More

Fig. 33 Plot of contact resistance versus the number of fretting cycles More

Fig. 8 Height change vs. number of compound impact cycles for aluminium 2011 T3 specimens tested against 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces with varying impact stresses (sliding velocity 5.33 m/s). Source: Ref 5 More