Effect of motion in friction calculation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the effect of motion on friction calculations, specifically regarding the angle at which a block will slide down a ramp. The initial formula, tanθ=µ, applies when the ramp is stationary. When both the ramp and block are moving at a constant velocity, the dynamics change, potentially altering the effective coefficient of friction. Participants are exploring how the equations governing friction and motion would adapt under these conditions. Understanding these changes is crucial for accurate calculations in physics problems involving motion and friction.
bretthydra
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
In fig.1 (attached), the formula for calculating the angle at which the block will slide down the ramp is tanθ=µ where µ = coefficient of friction.
Will this change if the ramp and block where moving at a constant velocity(V) in the direction shown as per fig.2 (attached)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You didn't attach any figures, but what do you think? How would the equations that lead to the answer you quoted change under constant velocity motion?
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Modeling Coulomb Friction for a Moving Point Mass in a Circular Bowl
Replies
20
Views
1K
B Normal Force Discrepancy for Wedge Vs. Ramp
Replies
9
Views
3K
I Determine if the block will slide or flip over after contact
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Coefficient of rolling friction for a lab cart
Replies
8
Views
5K
Work done by friction and change in mechanical energy
Replies
3
Views
3K
Non-conservative work energy theorem and potential energy
Replies
3
Views
2K
B Rotational Dynamics: Confused about the tension in this string pulling a mass up an incline
Replies
2
Views
1K
What happens when a car turns?
Replies
16
Views
2K
Work done by varying friction against a constantly moving surface
Replies
1
Views
1K
Why Does Friction Provide Centripetal Acceleration in Circular Motion?
Replies
37
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top