2208.11685
Analysis of point-contact models of the bounce of a hard spinning ball on a compliant frictional surface
Stanislaw W. Biber, Alan R. Champneys, Robert Szalai
correcthigh confidence
- Category
- Not specified
- Journal tier
- Specialist/Solid
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper proves that the lift‑off–while–rolling point s is a visible two‑fold (σ1=+1, σ2=−1) and derives ν1ν2 = 1 + (20/7)(∂X′υ·X′)/(∂Y′ΛN·Y′) g ε^3 + O(ε^4), which is <1 under their hypotheses, implying a saddle in the reduced sliding dynamics and a codimension‑one rolling lift‑off set; almost all trajectories lift off under slip. These steps and conclusions match the candidate solution’s four-part outline, including the use of H = X′+Ω, the Filippov normal form on z1=0 with matrix [[ν2, −1], [−1, ν1]], the sign reasoning (Y′(s)>0; ∂YΛN<0), and the physical interpretation separating topspin/backspin at lift-off. See the paper’s equations for (17)–(21), (42)–(50), and especially (51)–(54) for the key signs and ν1ν2 formula, and the discussion that only a single trajectory passes through s in the visible case ν1ν2<1 . The restitution-phase requirement Y′(s)>0 is also established earlier for the roll–slip tangencies .
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} specialist/solid \textbf{Justification:} The analysis convincingly applies Filippov two-fold normal-form theory to a realistic compliant-contact bounce model. The visibility, the ν1ν2 expansion, and the saddle classification are consistent and well justified. A small number of derivations are condensed; expanding them would improve accessibility without altering the main conclusions.