Dependence of friction on area.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of frictional force and its dependence on the area of contact between objects. Participants explore various theoretical perspectives, practical implications, and mathematical models related to this topic, including both solid and fluid friction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that friction is independent of area due to the microscopic nature of actual contact being a small fraction of the geometric area.
  • Another point raised is that friction may be independent of area only up to a certain limit, specifically when an object begins to dip into another.
  • A theory proposed involves considering points of contact as free bodies, where an increase in geometric area leads to more contact points but also a reduction in normal force, potentially canceling each other out.
  • Another theory based on pressure states that friction is proportional to pressure times area times the coefficient of friction, but this does not account for the behavior when objects start to dip into each other.
  • One participant mentions that many models exist to explain forces between objects in contact, noting that the simplest model fails for non-linear behaviors and relies on the assumption that effective contact area is proportional to pressure.
  • Fluid friction is introduced as a more complex consideration, with questions about how contact area fits into this context.
  • Another participant references Newton's equations related to fluid friction, indicating the complexity of the topic.
  • There is a request for links to models explaining friction, indicating a desire for further exploration of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the dependence of friction on area, with no consensus reached on the validity of the various theories and models presented.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on definitions of contact area, assumptions about the nature of materials involved, and the unresolved mathematical steps in the proposed theories.

suryanarayan
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Hello Guys,
I have been pondering on the nature of the frictional force and its dependency on the area of contact for the past few days and I had already searched for plausible explanations for the same.Although I could gather a few discrete points ,I couldn't get a complete picture of it.
Some of the points I had found online are as follows
a) It is independent of area because the area of actual contact(at the microscopic level) is a very tiny fraction of the geometric area of the object. Thus any increase or decrease in geometric area is insignificant.
b)Friction is independent of area up to a limit, that limit being the point at which the object starts dipping into the other object.

Based on some literature survey, The following are my deductions on the nature of the frictional force
1)Regarding point 'a', if that is so a thin sheet and a small box of the same mass should have the same friction. But shouldn't an increase in the geometric area result in more chances of actual contacts as well.If so, this should surely increase the friction(because of more interlocking at the newly contacted sites.)
2)The point 'b' seems plausible from a practical point of view but gives no mathematical or cause for why friction exhibits such behavior,in the ideal and in the dipping case.
3)One theory that I derived from point 'a', is that the points of contact can be considered as free bodies with dF(friction) and dN(normal force) acting at area dA. Then the total friction would be the sum of the friction acting at all points. Thus if geometric area increases, the number of such area elements also would increase but with a reduction in the normal force at the elemental area.So this would tend to cancel out the effect in the increase of area and thus friction becomes independent of area. But the problem with this theory is that it assumes that the reduction in normal force and the increase in the number of elemental areas has a connection which exactly cancels them both out.
4)Another theory that I have is based on pressure.It states that
Friction,F=Pressure x Area x coefficient of friction. So when area increases force acting per unit area (pressure)decreases and this would cancel out.
But this does not explain why friction would depend on area when the object starts dipping into the other object and this theory does not reconcile with the point 'a'.

Please comment on this issue with both mathematical and logical explanations.
Thank you :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are many models to 'explain' the forces between objects in contact. The simplest model is not at all bad for describing many phenomena but it fails when things behave non-linearly. Your 'coefficient of friction' is a quantity that's based on linear deformation of two microscopically uneven surfaces in contact and it assumes that the effective contact area is proportional to the pressure between them and not on the total 'apparent' area of contact.
This model can't work accurately for more complex materials.
 
What about fluid friction?:smile:
 
e-pie said:
What about fluid friction?:smile:
Where would contact area fit in neatly? It's a much harder thing to consider, I think.
 
sophiecentaur said:
It's a much harder thing to consider,

Newton has an answer to everything I suppose.

T=m (del u/del y)IIx

m is shear viscosity, del means partial differentiation and T is Force per area. IIx in subscript means flow parallel to X axis.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur
sophiecentaur said:
There are many models to 'explain' the forces between objects in contact. The simplest model is not at all bad for describing many phenomena but it fails when things behave non-linearly. Your 'coefficient of friction' is a quantity that's based on linear deformation of two microscopically uneven surfaces in contact and it assumes that the effective contact area is proportional to the pressure between them and not on the total 'apparent' area of contact.
This model can't work accurately for more complex materials.
Can you give me a link to these models?
 
suryanarayan said:
Can you give me a link to these models?
I am about to go out of the house, to visit my Son for the week end. But you can easily find yourself a suitable web source by googling "Friction Theory" or suchlike. Slipping in the term linear or non-linear could perhaps select what you actually want. The advantage of doing your own searching is that you can select something at your own level. Friction and lubrication (Tribology) have been popular topics throughout the ages so there is a vast range of studies.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K