How friction and adhesion affect the mechanics of deep penetration in soft solids
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanics of puncture and soft solid penetration is commonly explored with the assumption of frictionless contact between the needle (penetrator) and the specimen. This leads to the hypothesis of a constant penetration force. Experimental observations, however, report a linear increment of penetration force with needle tip depth. This force increment is due to friction and adhesion, and this paper provides its correlation with the properties of the cut material. Specifically, the force-depth slope depends on the rigidity and toughness of the soft material, the radius of the penetrator and the interfacial properties (friction and adhesion) between the two. We observe that adhesion prevails at relatively low toughness, while friction is dominant at high toughness. Finally, we compare our results with experiments and observe good agreement. Our model provides a valuable tool to predict the evolution of penetration force with depth and to measure the friction and adhesion characteristics at the needle-specimen interface from puncture experiments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it