Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 372

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

An utrasonic study of the area of contact between stationary and sliding surfaces

Kendall, Kevin, Tabor, David·1971·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences

Abstract

This paper describes a novel attempt to determine quantitatively the area of contact between stationary and sliding contacts by means of an ultrasonic technique. The basic idea is to generate an ultrasonic wave in one body and measure the impulse passing into the second body through the interface. Analysis shows that the transmitted pulse depends on the elastic stiffness of the interface. According to theory the stiffness of a single circular contact is pro­portional to the diameter of the contact and not to its area and this has been confirmed by simple scaled-up experiments. Because of this the stiffness of multiple contacts is not determined unequivocally by the true area of contact. The scaled-up experiments show that for widely separated contacts the stiffness is the sum of the stiffnesses of the individual con­tacts; if they are close together it is determined primarily by the size of the embracing circle of contact. Only when the apparent area of contact is more than ten times the true area does the effect of the empty spaces on the stiffness become appreciable. The ultrasonic experiments confirm all these conclusions and the technique has been applied to the static contact between metals, between smooth and rough glass, between rubber and between polymers. In some cases the results are able to distinguish between elastic and plastic deformation in the contact zone. The technique has been extended to sliding contacts and the results show that with ductile materials junction growth may occur. Although the ultrasonic method suffers from the major disadvantage in that it cannot unequivocally distinguish between the true and the apparent area of contact it has the great advantage that, in contrast to electrical resistance measurements, it can be used for non-metals and is scarcely affected by the presence of oxide films. Again in contrast to optical methods, it can be used with opaque materials.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspa.1971.0108

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 372

Metadata

Authors
Kendall, K., & Tabor, D.
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences
Published
1971-06-22
Volume
323
Issue
1554
Pages
321-340
ISSN
  • 0080-4630 (ISSN-L)
  • 2053-9169
OpenAlex
W2143922509
Cited by
372
References
0
FWCI
0.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An utrasonic study of the area of contact between stationary and sliding surfaces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspa.1971.0108
The paper
Kendall, K., & Tabor, D. (1971). An utrasonic study of the area of contact between stationary and sliding surfaces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1971.0108

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.