friction between two surfaces


by jamesyboy1990
Tags: friction, surfaces
jamesyboy1990
jamesyboy1990 is offline
#1
May13-07, 08:02 AM
P: 16
1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known data

hi, i am almost done my lab on the coefficient of friction on an inclined plane. I was attempting to prove that the coefficent of static friction would be the same no matter the weight of the mass that was static on the incline. However, i plotted a coefficient versus mass graph, and the line wasn't horizontal (the coefficient changed). My quick question was whether i still need to find the equation for finding the coefficient based on my results, or if i could just conclude that in my case, the coefficient didn't stay constant, and then move to my conclusion

2. Relevant equations



3. The attempt at a solution
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Better thermal-imaging lens from waste sulfur
Hackathon team's GoogolPlex gives Siri extra powers
Bright points in Sun's atmosphere mark patterns deep in its interior
Hootenanny
Hootenanny is offline
#2
May13-07, 08:07 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Hootenanny's Avatar
P: 9,789
How did you calculate the coefficient of friction for your results?
jamesyboy1990
jamesyboy1990 is offline
#3
May13-07, 08:26 AM
P: 16
i had an incline, measured the weight of the mass, and changed the angle such that if i increased the angle by a little bit, the mass would slide. I did this for several different masses and recorded the angle. I then used a freebody diagram and the equation for static friciton (u = Fmax/R)

Hootenanny
Hootenanny is offline
#4
May13-07, 08:28 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Hootenanny's Avatar
P: 9,789

friction between two surfaces


And how did you calculate the normal reaction force?
jamesyboy1990
jamesyboy1990 is offline
#5
May13-07, 08:34 AM
P: 16
R = mg cosx
F = mg sinx

so in essence, the coefficient was tanx
jamesyboy1990
jamesyboy1990 is offline
#6
May13-07, 08:39 AM
P: 16
technically, all i need to know is whether i would have to process the graph to find a relation between weight and the coefficient (although i know that technicallly the coefficient is independant of mass) if all i wanted to prove in the lab was that the coefficient was independant of mass (and in my case, my experimental data didn't prove it)
Hootenanny
Hootenanny is offline
#7
May13-07, 09:03 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Hootenanny's Avatar
P: 9,789
Your not actually plotting [itex]\mu[/itex] vs. [itex]m[/itex] what your actually plotting is [itex]\tan\theta[/itex] vs. m since;

[tex]\mu = \frac{F}{R} = \frac{mg\sin\theta}{mg\cos\theta} = \tan\theta[/tex]
jamesyboy1990
jamesyboy1990 is offline
#8
May13-07, 11:16 AM
P: 16
but since tanx = u, so why should it matter whether you plot u vs. m or tanx vs m?
Hootenanny
Hootenanny is offline
#9
May13-07, 11:20 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Hootenanny's Avatar
P: 9,789
Quote Quote by jamesyboy1990 View Post
but since tanx = u, so why should it matter whether you plot u vs. m or tanx vs m?
Indeed, [itex]\tan\theta = \mu[/itex], but are you keeping the angle constant?
jamesyboy1990
jamesyboy1990 is offline
#10
May13-07, 11:25 AM
P: 16
no, because the greater mass wouldn't stay static at the certain angle, so it would decrease.

if i am trying to prove that the coefficient should stay the same, and it doesn't in my experiment, do i have to do more, or can i just stop once the graph shows that the coefficient changed?
david1701
david1701 is offline
#11
May13-07, 05:03 PM
P: 4
i thought that: Frict max=mu R
so for your experiments to prove mu is irrespective of mass the particle has to be on the point of slipping
that may be too simple i am only doing as physics and you guys might be talking about something higher tho from mechanics mu is >= to R/Frict max
(sorry about symbols ect)
jamesyboy1990
jamesyboy1990 is offline
#12
May13-07, 07:38 PM
P: 16
honestly, the only question i wanted answered was in respect to the set up to the lab. Once you process enough data to prove/disprove the purpose of the lab, do you have to do any more processing, or can you just go straight to conclusion/evaluation?


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Rotating 2D coordinate geometry/conic sections into 3D - how? General Math 7
Intersection between surfaces Calculus & Beyond Homework 2
Smoothness of surfaces Calculus 5
Smoothness of surfaces Calculus 0
nodal surfaces? Chemistry 5