4.8 Article

Creasing in microscale, soft static friction

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-38091-7

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glover et al. investigate the lateral motion of microparticles on a soft, adhesive surface and find that a moving microparticle can induce a cease at the leading front of the surface due to compressive stress buildup. They also discover that the surface forms a self-contacting crease at the leading front, and simulations show that interfacial strength plays a dominant role in the formation of the crease. The crease then propagates through the contact zone in a Schallamach wave-like fashion, facilitated by free slip at the adhesive, self-contacting interface.
Soft friction remains elusive due to the complication at microscales where the elastic forces are comparable to capillarity and adhesion. Glover et al. show that a moving microparticle can induce a cease at the leading front of the underlying soft surface as a result of a build-up of compressive stress. Utilizing colloidal probe, lateral force microscopy and simultaneous confocal microscopy, combined with finite element analysis, we investigate how a microparticle starts moving laterally on a soft, adhesive surface. We find that the surface can form a self-contacting crease at the leading front, which results from a buildup of compressive stress. Experimentally, creases are observed on substrates that exhibit either high or low adhesion when measured in the normal direction, motivating the use of simulations to consider the role of adhesion energy and interfacial strength. Our simulations illustrate that the interfacial strength plays a dominating role in the nucleation of a crease. After the crease forms, it progresses through the contact zone in a Schallamach wave-like fashion. Interestingly, our results suggest that this Schallamach wave-like motion is facilitated by free slip at the adhesive, self-contacting interface within the crease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据