Rolling without slipping: Why point of contact has zero velocity

AI Thread Summary
In rolling without slipping, the point of contact between the rolling object and the ground has zero velocity relative to the ground at the instant of contact, which defines the condition for rolling. However, this point does move along a cycloidal path as the object rolls, indicating it has relative motion to the ground. While the point of contact has zero velocity, it experiences vertical acceleration, similar to a ball reaching its highest point. The concept of a "contact patch" is also discussed, referring to the area of contact between a tire and pavement, which moves as the tire rolls. Overall, the discussion clarifies the dynamics of rolling motion and the behavior of the point of contact.
AlonsoMcLaren
Messages
89
Reaction score
2
In rolling without slipping, why does the point of contact have zero velocity relative to the ground? If so, how can the point of contact move relatively to the ground? (It has to move relative to the ground, otherwise it cannot roll and must stay in its original position)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The point of contact does move relative to the ground. It moves along a curve which is vertical at the point where it touches the ground and lifts off again

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycloid
 
AlephZero said:
The point of contact does move relative to the ground. It moves along a curve which is vertical at the point where it touches the ground and lifts off again

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycloid
Then I found something on the Internet:
http://www.columbia.edu/~crg2133/Files/Physics/8_01/noSlip.pdf

Which claims that "When a body is rolling on a plane without slipping,
the point of contact with the plane does not move".

I am really confused.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Suppose you throw a ball verrtically upwards. When it reaches its highest point, its velocity is 0, so it isn't moving. But the ball still managed to get to its highest point somehow, and then it falls down again.

The explanation is that at the highest point its velocity is 0, but its acceleration is not 0 (it is 9.8m/s^2 downwards, because of gravity).

The same is troe of the point of contact on the wheel. When the point is touchng the ground it's velocity is 0, but it is accelerating vertically upwards. In fact every point on the circumference of the wheel is accelerating towards the center of the wheel, so there is nothing "special" about the fact that the contact point is accelerating.
 
the point of contact always has zero velocity with respect to surface on which it is moving to define the condition of rolling.that's all.It has centripetal acceleration towards centre of curvature.
 
A specific point on an object rolling on the ground has zero velocity relative to the ground during the instant in time that point on the object is touching the ground. For a circular object, a specific point on the surface of the object follows the path of a cycloid, and is only in contact with the ground for one instant for every revolution of the rolling object (so it's only the "point of contact" one instant per revolution).

The term "point of contact" normally means the continuous point of contact between rolling object and ground, where the point of contact moves with respect to the ground as the object rolls (and/or skids).

A common real world term similar to this is "contact patch" which is the area of a tire in contact with pavement. "Contact patch" refers to the area of contact between tire and pavement, even if the tire is rolling and/or sliding along the pavement, so the "contact patch" moves as the tire moves with respect to the pavement.

Getting back to the path followed by specific points on the surface of a rolling object, you can sum up the vectors related to rotation and lateral movement, as shown in this web article in the "rolling motion as combined motion" section:

http://cnx.org/content/m14311/latest
 
Last edited:
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top