Skip to main content
Glama

Hertz Contact

hertz_contact
Read-only

Calculates Hertzian contact peak pressure, contact radius, and approach for sphere-on-flat or sphere-sphere geometry, indicating when linear theory is valid or nonlinear FEM is required.

Instructions

Exact Hertzian point-contact peak pressure (NO solver) — the screening twin of a frictional CONTACT PAIR solve. Sphere of radius_mm on a flat (default) or on a second sphere radius2_mm (negative for a conforming socket). Each body's elastics from youngs#_gpa+poisson# or a Materials-DB material#; body 2 defaults to body 1. Reduced modulus 1/E = (1−ν₁²)/E₁ + (1−ν₂²)/E₂, effective radius 1/R = 1/R₁ + 1/R₂; contact radius a = (3FR/4E*)^(1/3), peak pressure p₀ = 3F/(2πa²) = 1.5× mean, approach δ = a²/R. Half-space theory: valid while a ≪ R and p₀ below first sub-surface yield (~1.6·σ_y) — past that escalate to the nonlinear fem_set_nonlinear_material contact path.

Returns {e_star_mpa, effective_radius_mm, contact_radius_mm, peak_pressure_mpa, mean_pressure_mpa, approach_mm, a_over_R, fidelity, band_pct, valid_range_ok, warnings, escalate_to}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
load_nYes
poisson1No
poisson2No
material1No
material2No
radius_mmYes
radius2_mmNo
youngs1_gpaNo
youngs2_gpaNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses the closed-form equations used, effective radius/reduced modulus conventions, half-space validity limits, and the exact return dictionary keys. Since annotations only provide readOnlyHint, this text carries and fully satisfies the transparency burden.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The text is dense but purposeful: identity and scope are front-loaded, formulas carry real information, and the output list saves the agent from guessing return values. It is longer than average, but that length is justified by the tool's physics complexity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the definition still covers inputs, geometry/loading, material selection, governing equations, validity limits, escalation path, and all return keys. The only omissions are minor default/precedence details that do not materially compromise the agent's ability to invoke it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema parameter coverage, the description explains `radius_mm`, negative `radius2_mm` for conforming sockets, `youngs#_gpa`/`poisson#` vs `material#`, and body-2-defaulting-to-body-1. It leaves a small gap: body-1 material defaults and precedence when both elastic property groups are provided are not stated.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence names the exact computation: 'Exact Hertzian point-contact peak pressure' with explicit '(NO solver)', and identifies it as the screening twin of a frictional CONTACT PAIR solve. This clearly distinguishes it from the nonlinear/FEM path and other analysis tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides an explicit validity boundary: valid while a≪R and p0 below first sub-surface yield, and says to 'escalate to the nonlinear fem_set_nonlinear_material contact path' beyond that. This tells an agent when to use the screening tool versus a heavier solver.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools