Differences in kinetic friction coefficents

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the differences in coefficients of kinetic friction observed in an experiment involving a wooden block and a weight. The original poster attempts to understand why there is a significant difference of 0.07 between the coefficients obtained from two different methods of measurement: pulling and pushing the block.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster describes their experimental setup and results, noting the precision of their measurements. They question the significance of the observed difference in coefficients and explore potential reasons for this discrepancy, including the force applied during the push versus the pull.

Discussion Status

Participants have engaged in questioning the assumptions made by the original poster, particularly regarding the angle of the applied force and its effect on the normal force. Some guidance has been offered regarding the calculation of angles to account for the observed differences.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes considerations of the experimental setup, specifically the orientation of the force applied during the experiments, which may not have been perfectly horizontal. This raises questions about the accuracy of the normal force calculations used in determining the coefficients of friction.

jmcmillian
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Is a difference in .07 when it comes to coefficients of kinetic friction for the same object on the same surface significant? I thought it was, but I have yet to determine a reason why. Below is an explanation of my experiment, as brief as possible.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I ran an experiment in which I had a wooden block and a weight.

My objective was to determine the coefficient of kinetic friction for the block and the weight.

I did this using two methods: One in which the block+weight was tied to a sensor box, which was connected through an interface to software. As I diligently pulled the sensor box, the block+weight would move (overcoming static friction) and then both units would slide across the table as I pulled, only facing kinetic friction. I did this four times, and received similar results on each.

The other method I used was with a motion detector apparatus. I took the block+weight and simply gave it a shove towards the detector. I did this five times, and saw similar results.

Now my problem is that my coefficient of kinetic friction for the push is on average .07 more than my value for the pull.

My first attempt to rationalize this is that the force I applied in the shove (push) was much greater than the force for the pull, but I then reasoned that it shouldn't really affect the kinetic friction coefficient, only the static value.

I ruled out a anomaly in the average of each because the results were precise...
< .02 or less difference in each of the 5 trials on the push experiment
< .03 or less difference in each of the 4 trials on the pull experiment.

Any ideas on how to explain this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you pulling the block absolutely horizontally? You may have some force going into lifting or pushing the block down which would cause your normal force to be less/greater than what you calculated, resulting in a different coefficient of friction.
 
hunter151 said:
Are you pulling the block absolutely horizontally? You may have some force going into lifting or pushing the block down which would cause your normal force to be less/greater than what you calculated, resulting in a different coefficient of friction.

hunter, Thanks for the advice. There might have been a slight angle to me holding the rope, resulting in the difference.
 
Try calculating the angle you would have to make to account for the difference in the the coefficients and see if this is a plausable angle.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
48
Views
8K
Replies
61
Views
4K