Talk:Ground reaction force

Merge with Normal Force?

whadyur think?--Mongreilf (talk) 14:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

It sounds sensible enough to me, if merged into Normal Force as a dedicated section, to which this article would redirect. Go for it if you feel like; I'm not planning to do it soon. Giuliopp (talk) 20:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not good at wiki editing, so I don't know how to write a comment, but I think it should be merged, as this is essentially normal force. Maybe even just a redirect will be fine, deleting the contents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.191.181.85 (talk) 03:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Re-reading the article and in particular the first external link, I now think that Ground reaction force should not be merged into Normal force, since in its most generic formulation, the GRF is a vector with all three components relative to the ground different from 0, so it's not simply a force normal to the surface.

It also appears as though that GRF is a concept used more in Biomechanics than in classical Mechanics, so I'm going to edit the article to reflect that. --Giuliopp (talk) 14:27, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Biomechanics

I think this is actually more of a sports medicine term than a "classical mechanics" one. Perhaps a descriptive link to Normal force would be appropriate? 214.4.238.180 (talk) 18:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)