frictional coefficient 예문

예문모바일

Substituting in the frictional coefficient of a perfect sphere from Stokes law yields
Bentonite, a form of clay, exhibits a low frictional coefficient when wet, i . e . it becomes slippery.
So in order to stand any reasonable chance to calculate the consequences, we need to know : The frictional coefficient of hair ( or perhaps bald head ) against hat brim.
Where \ eta is the liquid's viscosity, s is the sphere's ionic mobility \ mu is directly proportional to drift speed, it is inversely proportional to the frictional coefficient:
For more accurate information, the height of the highest point, or the max pressure, to surpass the static friction would be proportional to the frictional coefficient and the slop going back down to the normal pressure would be the same as an isothermal process if the temperature was increased at a slow enough rate.
This is true because the solvated ion moving at a constant drift velocity s is subject to two equal and opposite forces : an electrical force zeE and a frictional force F _ { drag } = fs = ( 6 \ pi \ eta a ) s, where f is the frictional coefficient, \ eta is the solution viscosity.
See Friction # Coefficient of friction : " The'coefficient of friction'( COF ), also known as a'frictional coefficient'or'friction coefficient'and symbolized by the Greek letter ? is a dimensionless scalar value which describes the ratio of the force of friction between two bodies and the force pressing them together ".
So what is needed is a more honest approximation for the friction force-that perhaps multiplies the frictional coefficient by the normal force and then multiplies THAT by the contact area raised to the power of some number that ranges from 0 to 1 depending on the material . . . then, for objects like sheets of paper and car tires where the frictional force is roughly proportional to the area, you'd have this new constant be close to 1.0 and for objects that behave more like the traditional equation, the constant would be close to zero-but sadly, it would leave the equation dimensionally incorrect . . . so . . . no . talk ) 23 : 47, 13 March 2009 ( UTC)