160 likes | 270 Views
Explore the intriguing world of friction from atomic effects to everyday life applications like walking, driving, adhesion, and material wear. Learn about the economic costs and the complex contact morphology that affects friction mechanisms on various scales. Discover the correlation between static and kinetic friction and how surfaces interlock to produce friction. Unlock the mysteries behind why friction is proportional to load and the significance of wall geometries in controlling frictional behavior.
E N D
Friction: From Atoms to Earthquakes Sponsored by: National Science Foundation Collaborators: S. Hyun, L. Pei, J. F. Molinari,N. Bernstein, J. Harrison, B. Luan,G. He, M. H. Müser, L. Wenning Rough Surface ContactAtomic EffectsFriction Space Telescope Science Institute, 1/30/07
Friction and Every Day Life Allows us to walk and drive Holds nails, screws, bolts, bricks, … in place Holds fabric and knots together Gives adhesives their strength Determines how things feel, texture of food Wastes energy ~20% in car engine Produces wear abrades material destroys lubricants Economic cost of poor friction controlmore than 6% of GNP > $400 billion/year
Typical measurement of friction Load v F Static friction Fs minimum force needed to initiate sliding. Kinetic friction Fk(v) force to keep sliding at velocity v. Typically, Fk(v) varies only as log(v) and Fs>Fk(v) at low v Amontons’ Laws (1699): Friction load constant =F/Load. Friction force independent of the apparentcontact area Aapp. But: Amontons coated all surfaces with pork fat Friction at zero and negative loads Aapp Friction depends on history Nice to have data to show with green text
N F WhyFriction Load, Independent of Apparent Area? Geometric explanation (Amontons,Parents,Euler,Coulomb) Surfaces are rough Friction = force to lift up ramp formed by bottom surface F=N tan =tan Problems: Most surfaces can’t mesh, A/A0 small (Müser, Wenning, Robbins, PRL 86, 1295 (2001)) Roughening can reduce (hard disks) Monolayer of grease changes not roughness Once over peak, load favors sliding kinetic friction=0 Static friction Force to escape metastable stateHow can two surfaces always lock together?Kinetic friction Energy dissipation as slideWhy is this correlated to static friction? Why does T matter?
Surfaces Often Rough on Many Scales Self-Affine Height variation Dh over length ℓ Dh ℓH H<1Average slope Dh / ℓ ℓH-1 diverges as scale ℓ decreases goes to zero as ℓ increases(J. Greenwood) H=0.5
Examples, with H=0.8(www.phys.ntnu.no) Picture of Mount Everest 10x10mm AFM image of clay Crack in a plexiglass block Fractured and polished surfaces self-affine over large range of scales Polished wood, granite, lucite H~0.6 Simple way of parameterizing large range of roughness scalesFind similar results for non-fractal experimental surfaces
Complex Contact Morphology – Area Load Experimental contact area – Dieterich & Kilgore
Constant mean pressure in contact ‹ p ›=N/A at low N Controlled by rms local slope, D, not total roughness Elastic: <p>/E’=D/kE’=E/(1-n2) =effective modulus =rms surface slope k(H,) from1.8 to 2.2Analytic predictions: Bush et al., k=(2p)1/2≈2.5 Persson k=(8/p)1/2≈1.6 Plastic: ‹p›≠ 3sy 3sy=single-asperity hardness Area load N for nonadhesive contact Plastic E’/<p>≡AE’/N Elastic
Complex Morphology Varies with Constitutive Law Power law distribution of connected areas ac: P(ac) ac-t Connected regions are fractal ac rDfInconsistent with overlap model → Ideal Elastic Perfectly Plastic Overlap Modelt >2, Df=1.6 t≈ 2, Df=1.8 t=(2-H/2), Df=2Spread evenly Near highest peak All results for same surface, 0.015% in contact.
Geometrical Interlocking: F=N tan q Unlikely to mesh, F goes up as smooth Kinetic friction vanishes Elastic Metastability: Intersurface interaction too weak Mixing or Cold-Welding Hard to observe in sims. even with clean, unpassivated surfaces in vacuum Plastic Deformation (plowing) Load and roughness dependentHigh loads, sharp tips Mobile third bodies → “glassy state”hydrocarbons, wear debris, gouge, … Glass seen in Surface Force Apparatus,Robust friction, Mech. on many scales Friction Mechanisms in Contacts
Why is friction often proportional to load? • Not just Areal Load and FAreal since Areal varies with parameters like D that have weaker effect on m • Friction between clean surfaces very sensitive to local structure, surface orientation, … but measured m is not • Assume friction from yield stress s of molecular contacts Glassy systems: s rises linearly with pressure p If: Fs=Areal s(p) with s=0+p (Briscoe) • Then: Fs=Areal 0 + Load s= Fs/Load = + 0/<p>Constant if <p>=Load/ Areal=const.or0 << <p> (Independent of distribution of pressure)Friction at zero or negative load with adhesion, as observed • Adsorbed layers give s=0+P with small t0 anda nearly independent of factors not controlled in experiment
Wall Geometries b) 8.2º a) 0º d) dtop/dbot=13/12 c)90º
Find:s > 0 for incommensurate walls with adsorbed film All incommensurate walls (b-d) give same ss independent of sliding direction: x, y, etc. s = 0 + P up to P > 1GPa (-3~ 40MPa) quartermonolayer
Effect of Potential indep. of coverage, chain length (n6), w or rc increases with d/w “rougher” surface default:ew=1sw=1 d=1.2 -3 40MPa
Geometric Explanation If pressure high enough hard sphere limitRepulsive force balances pressure F ~P/c ~ 48 (w /w )(w /r)13 where c=coverage r ~ w (c w /P w )1/13 Effective hard-sphere radius: insensitive to c, w , P almost linear in w Surface of closest approach depends on d/sw a maximum slope as in geometric model larger d/ w, steeper slope, bigger a w w d Analytic theory: Müser, Wenning, Robbins PRL 86, 1295, ‘01
Airborne hydrocarbon films can explain Amontons’ laws Adsorbed layers (even diffusing) lock surfaces together producing a static friction consistent with macro experiments s=0+P for P up to ~1GPa of order 0.1 crystal: 0.03 to 0.2, amorphous larger 0 small compared to typical P 0 < 10MPa s independent of uncontrolled experimental parameters sliding direction wall orientation thickness of adsorbed film (coverage) chain length n=1 to 6 (~C20H42 and smaller) a primarily depends on relative size of wall atoms and adsorbed molecules in this simple modelG. He, M. H. Muser and M. O. Robbins, Science 284, 1650 (1999); Phys. Rev. B64, 035413 (2001).