Concept

Contact — where it appears

The touching of two solid surfaces, which happens on a small fraction of the apparent area at asperities that flatten until they can carry the load. Almost every property of a contact — its friction, its electrical resistance, its stiffness — is a property of that true area rather than of the shapes involved.

Named by 5 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

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

The same block, one of them with no upthrust at all. Two identical blocks 0.8 m tall with their tops 1.2 m under the surface, drawn with the pressure on every wetted face at its true relative size. On the right the block is clear of the floor and the pressure on its underside exceeds that on its top by 7.8 kPa, which is ρgh and is exactly Archimedes' 7.8 kPa. On the left the bedding is perfect and there is no water under it, so nothing pushes up: the resultant is 11.8 kPa downward and the block presses on the floor with more than its own weight. Buoyancy is not something the fluid has. It is what the bottom face is doing, and a face the fluid cannot reach does nothing.

The block the water does not lift

A block bedded flat on the bottom of a tank, with no water underneath it, feels no upthrust at all. It is fully submerged, Archimedes' principle is not suspended, and it presses on the floor with more than its own weight — because buoyancy is not something a fluid has, it is what the bottom face is doing, and a face the water cannot reach does nothing.

fluids · Buoyancy

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

5 balls whose contact force goes as the overlap to the three halves, touching. The velocity of every ball in a line of 5, against time in units of one binary contact, with the first arriving at unit speed. Nothing about collisions is assumed: neighbours push on each other with k times their overlap raised to the power 1.5, and the equations of motion are integrated. With the balls touching there is no such separation — several overlaps are non-zero at once and the disturbance crosses the line as a single compression wave. The far ball leaves at 0.989 of the striking speed and the others keep 0.011 between them, which is why a real cradle's balls do not quite come to rest. Momentum and energy are conserved to 4.4e-16 and 4.1e-8, so the difference between the two cases is the contact law and not the bookkeeping.

Five balls, and the law that does not choose

The usual account of a Newton's cradle says that momentum and energy conservation force one ball out at the striking speed. For three balls or more they do no such thing: the two laws leave a whole curve of possible outcomes, and what picks one is the shape of the force between two touching spheres.

mechanics · Momentum

The resistance that is a length

Two metals touching do not touch over the area they appear to. Current crosses at a few small spots and has to converge into each one, and the resistance of that convergence contains no area and no path length — only the size of the spot, divided into the resistivity.

electromagnetism · Conductors

Named alongside it

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

Friction Boundary conditions Coefficient of friction Contact area Elasticity Scaling Stiffness Adhesion Buoyancy Conductivity Conductor Constraint counting

All concepts