Why rolling is less than kinetic

In summary, rolling is less than kinetic (Sliding) because the velocity of the point of contact is directed at an angle from the surface. When a body rolls, the friction acts at an angle.
  • #1
prasanna
45
0
The order is
rolling < kinetic < Static.

I understand why rolling is less than kinetic(Sliding).
When a body rolls, the velocity of the point of contact is directed at an angle from the surface. Hence, the friction acts at an angle. Hence, rolling < kinetic. Am I right??

Why is kinetic < Static?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Friction is calculated by:

[tex]F_f={\mu}F_N[/tex]
[tex]{\mu}=\frac{F_f}{F_N}[/tex]

Since you need to apply more force to an object to make it start moving than you do to keep it moving, Ff would be larger for a static mu than for a kinetic mu, making the fraction value larger for a calculated static coefficient.
 
  • #3
Why should you need more force to start an object than to keep it moving?
 
  • #4
prasanna said:
Why should you need more force to start an object than to keep it moving?
1) Well, it really is unphysical if it were strictly otherwise:
Think if you pushed a non-moving object with EXACTLY the force maximum static friction can produce (is).
Static friction then yields, and kinetic friction takes over the stage:
But if that force EXCEEDS maximum static friction (and, hence, your own pushing force), the object would start accelerating TOWARDS you rather than AWAY from you.
That doesn't seem likely, or what? :wink:
2) But, you could ask:
Why couldn't maximum static friction be EQUAL in magnitude to kinetic friction?
The answer to that is:
It might well be, and certain material DO have that property almost realized
(I think teflon is one of those material, but beware: I am not sure on that point!)
3) Lastly, let's look at the significance of kinetic friction being almost always strictly less than maximal static friction:
Assume that your pushing force just balances maximal static friction (is greater than it by an ARBITRARILY SMALL quantity if you like!) :
Friction then switches into kinetic, and Newton's 2.law states, in the horizontal, flat contact surface case:
[tex]\mu_{s}mg-\mu_{k}mg=ma_{0}[/tex]
(where [tex]\mu_{s},\mu_{k}[/tex] are friction coefficients, m mass of object, [tex]a_{0}[/tex] (initial) acceleration, and g acceleration of gravity.

That is, given any pushing force strictly GREATER than maximal static friction, the acceleration "a" it produces necessarily obeys the inequality:
[tex]a\geq{a}_{0}=(\mu_{s}-\mu_{k})g>0[/tex]
That is, the object starts moving with a JOLT, not smoothly.
(That can only be realized in the case where the coefficients of friction are EQUAL, where we can get ARBITRARILY SMALL initial accelerations)

If you think about it, that's a fairly good modelling of our experience.
 
Last edited:

1. Why is rolling motion considered less than kinetic motion?

Rolling motion is considered less than kinetic motion because it involves both rotational and translational motion, meaning that the object is moving and rotating simultaneously. This results in a smaller overall velocity compared to an object that is purely translating, which has a larger velocity.

2. How does the radius of an object affect its rolling motion?

The radius of an object affects its rolling motion because it is directly related to the object's linear velocity. As the radius increases, the linear velocity decreases, resulting in a slower rolling motion.

3. Can an object have both rolling and kinetic motion at the same time?

Yes, an object can have both rolling and kinetic motion at the same time. This is known as rolling with slipping, where there is a combination of translational and rotational motion.

4. What is the difference between rolling and sliding motion?

Rolling motion involves both rotational and translational motion, while sliding motion only involves translational motion. In rolling motion, the point of contact between the object and the surface is stationary, while in sliding motion, the point of contact is constantly changing.

5. Why is rolling motion more efficient than sliding motion?

Rolling motion is more efficient than sliding motion because it requires less force to maintain motion. This is because there is less friction between the rolling object and the surface compared to a sliding object, which reduces the amount of energy lost to heat. Additionally, rolling motion allows for smoother movement, which reduces wear and tear on the object and the surface it is moving on.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
535
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Back
Top