Static Friction: Phone Books & Wood Blocks

AI Thread Summary
Interleaving two phone books creates numerous contact surfaces, similar to sliding a block of wood on a table. This configuration increases the normal force on the pages, enhancing static friction as the books are pulled apart. The compression of the middle pages contributes to a stronger maximum force of static friction. Each of the 1000 surfaces experiences the same compressive force per unit area, resulting in significant total friction. The discussion confirms that the mechanics of interleaving pages effectively amplify the frictional resistance.
cragar
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
3
when you take 2 phone books , and inter-lay them page by page , so it makes them hard to pull apart . is this because it is like sliding a block of wood on a table just now you have like 1000 surfaces sliding on each other , is that what is going on .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cragar said:
is this because it is like sliding a block of wood on a table just now you have like 1000 surfaces sliding on each other , is that what is going on .
Exactly right.
 
I would also hypothesize that since interleaving the pages spreads the pages out (i.e., the front and back covers are further away from the middle pages than they would be if not interleaved), that attempting to pull the books apart tends to compress the pages in the middle, increasing the normal force (and thus the static friction). Thus, the harder you pull, the stronger the maximum force of static friction on each page->page contact, especially at the middle pages.
 
The OP had it right, all 1000 surfaces experience the same compressive force (per unit area), so the total friction is large.
 
thanks for your responses , just wanted to make sure what was going on .
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top