Determining Acceleration Using Kinetic and Static Frictional Force Coefficients

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the acceleration of a block on a floor when a force is applied at an angle, considering both static and kinetic friction coefficients. The block's mass is represented as a variable, and the discussion revolves around how to approach the calculations without specific numerical values for mass.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the necessity of determining the normal force (FN) and how to express it in terms of the mass variable. There are questions about using friction coefficients and how they relate to the acceleration calculation. Some participants express confusion about the application of gravitational force in the context of the problem.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the implications of using variables instead of specific values for mass. There is recognition that the mass will cancel out in the equations, and some guidance has been offered regarding the sequence of using static versus kinetic friction to determine motion and acceleration. However, there is no explicit consensus on the final approach to the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem requires answers in terms of variables, and there is a focus on understanding the relationships between the forces involved without numerical values. The discussion highlights potential confusion regarding the application of gravitational force and the coefficients of friction.

sb13
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



There is an initially stationary block of mass m on a floor. A force of magnitude 0.500mg is then applied at upward angle θ = 20°. What is the magnitude of the acceleration of the block across the floor if (a)μs = 0.630 and μk = 0.540 and (b)μs = 0.400 and μk = 0.330?

Homework Equations


F= ma
Fk= ukFN
Fs= usFN


The Attempt at a Solution


I know that first I must determine FN, but I don't know how when the mass is m. How do I use that if it is not even a specific value? What do I do when the force is not in Newtons?
I know that to the get mg or gravitational force I would multiply the mass by 9.8, but I am confused about that mass just simply being m.
Then the Fnet,y = may
FN- (applied force which is 0.5 mg in this case... 0.5sin20)- Fg=ma
I don't know where to go from there...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since there is no way to calculate the mass with the given numbers, the answer would be in terms of m. There is nothing really confusing about it. Some problems just want the answers in terms of a variable or multiple variables. This happens to be one of those problems.
 
So, I understand that I will just be using variables for the mass, but I don't understand how I use the fk and fs to find the acceleration. Once I get FN= ((9.8)mg)- (0.5(mgsin20)) and then times it by the coefficient of fs then what am I supposed to do with the value of fs?
 
After looking at the problem more, I can see that the masses will cancel, so that is why the mass is given in terms of m.

sb13 said:
Once I get FN= ((9.8)mg)- (0.5(mgsin20)) and then times it by the coefficient of fs then what am I supposed to do with the value of fs?

I do not know how you got to this. It looks like you multiplied by gravity twice in that one part.

The first thing you need to do is to see if the force being applied will move the object at all. This is when you use the coefficient of static friction. If the frictional force is greater than the force being applied, then the object does not move.

If the force being applied is greater, then you will now see how much it accelerates. This is when you use the coefficient of kinetic friction. You now make an equation for Fnet. Remember that the frictional force will be subtracted from the force being applied.

Fnet also equals ma. This will allow you to cancel out all of the masses, leaving you will with an equation for acceleration.
 
Oh. I did multiply by gravity twice. Ok. Thank you!
 

Similar threads

Replies
61
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
18K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K