Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Coefficient of friction — where it appears

The ratio of the largest friction available to the normal force pressing the surfaces together, set by the materials and not by the area. It has a meaning only at the instant sliding begins, because static friction supplies whatever equilibrium demands up to that point and no more.

Named by 5 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

What friction returns, against what it is asked for. The friction force on a block under a 50 N normal load, against the force applied to it. Below 30.0 N — the static limit μs·N — friction returns exactly what is asked for and nothing moves, so the curve is the 45° line and the coefficient never appears. At that point the surface gives way and the force drops to μk·N = 22.5 N, where it stays however hard the block is pushed. The gap above the flat line is the surplus that accelerates it: 22.5 N at the right-hand edge of the axis.

The force that takes what it needs

Static friction has no value of its own. It supplies exactly what equilibrium demands and not a newton more, right up to the moment it cannot — which is the only instant in the whole business at which a coefficient of friction means anything at all.

mechanics · Friction Which failure comes first. The dividing line between a block that slides and one that tips over, for a horizontal push applied at the top. Sliding needs a force of μ_s times the weight; tipping needs the push's moment about the leading bottom edge to beat the weight's, which is the weight times half the width. The weight appears in both and cancels, so the boundary is the curve aspect ratio = 1/2μ_s and nothing else: not the mass, not how hard the block is pushed, and not what it is made of except through μ. At μ_s = 0.5 the dividing shape is as tall as it is wide; at μ_s = 0.2 it is 2.5 times as tall. Of the 5 objects marked, 3 sit above the line and go over rather than sliding: a paperback, standing, a full filing cabinet, a pint glass.

Slide or topple

Push a wardrobe and it goes over; push a brick and it skids. Both are held by the same friction and both are pushed by the same hand, and which of the two failures arrives first has nothing to do with how hard the push is. The floor decides it, by shifting where it pushes back.

mechanics · Free-body The same steady pull, twice. Spring force divided by the normal load, against time, with the far end drawn away at 100 µm/s in both traces and every property of the contact the same. The soft holder at 0.4 k_c produces events every 3.75 s, each of which reaches 0.94 m/s — 9.4e+3 times the speed it is being pulled at. The stiff one at 1.6 k_c settles to a straight line and stays on it.

The chatter a stiffer holder removes

A brake squeals, a bow sounds a string, a fault slips in jerks. The usual explanation is that static friction exceeds kinetic friction — and that explanation, taken seriously, predicts the jerking would happen no matter how the thing were held. It does not, and what decides is a length nobody mentions.

mechanics · Friction Rough contact grows as W^1.000, and one smooth bump as W^0.667. Real contact area against load, both logarithmic, three ways. Plastic flow of the asperities gives A = W/H, a slope of exactly one, which is the account Bowden and Tabor's argument uses. A single elastic sphere gives Hertz's answer, A ∝ W^(2/3), and a friction coefficient falling as W^(−1/3) — Amontons' law would be false. A rough elastic surface, with many asperities spread exponentially in height and integrated here rather than quoted, gives a slope of 1.0000, because pressing harder mostly recruits new contacts rather than enlarging existing ones. The dotted curve repeats that integration with a Gaussian spread of heights and gives 0.9695 — the upper tail of a Gaussian is nearly exponential, so the answer is nearly and not exactly linear. Amontons' law does not need plasticity. It needs roughness, it is exact for one distribution and good to three per cent for another, and it survives whichever way the individual junctions deform.

The grip that is not a coefficient

A friction coefficient is independent of load and of area, and the reason is usually given as plastic flow of the asperities. It is not — a rough elastic surface gives the same law, integrated here to a slope of 1.0000, because pressing harder recruits new contacts rather than enlarging old ones. What breaks the law is a contact that is smooth, or a material that dissipates in its bulk — where μ passes one and stops being a coefficient at all.

mechanics · Friction How much a wrap holds, against how many turns it is. The ratio of the two tensions a rope can hold across, against the number of turns it is wrapped, for coefficients of 0.1, 0.25, 0.5. The axis is logarithmic because the law is exponential, so each line is straight and its slope is the coefficient. At µ = 0.1 one turn multiplies by 1.9, two turns by 4 and three by 7 — so a person pulling with the strength of one arm holds a load that a small crane would be needed to lift. The practical consequence is the one a sailor states as a rule: turns are cheap and each is worth as much as the one before it, which is a statement about a constant factor rather than a constant force.

The part of the wrap that is actually gripping

The capstan equation gives the largest tension ratio a wrap can hold, and almost nothing spends its life at that limit. Below it the wrap divides in two: an idle arc doing nothing at all and an active arc creeping and carrying the whole exponential — and the division explains a belt's speed loss and its squeal.

mechanics · Friction

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Contact areaFrictionEquilibriumNormal forceStatic frictionContactScalingStick-slipAdhesionCentre of gravityCentre of pressureDamping

All concepts