Energy conservation and friction

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a physics problem regarding energy conservation and the impact of mass on initial speed. It clarifies that while a greater mass increases both friction and kinetic energy, these effects cancel each other out, resulting in an initial speed that is independent of mass. Participants emphasize that the coefficient of kinetic friction is determined by the surfaces in contact, not the object's mass or normal force. The coefficient is defined as the ratio of the friction force to the normal force, and it is generally considered independent of normal force and speed. Understanding these principles is crucial for solving energy conservation problems in physics.
otownsend
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I just started learning physics at university and so I'm looking for help on a simple energy conservation problem. On the bottom right-hand of the image I attached below, you should see that it asks whether the initial speed would increase or decrease if the object was of a greater mass... why would the speed not change? In the calculations for initial speed, the co-efficient of static friction is included which varies depending on what surfaces are in contact with each other. I would therefore believe that the initial speed of the larger mass object would be greater, since the co-efficient would also be greater. Can someone please clarify this for me?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20181112_104542.jpg
    IMG_20181112_104542.jpg
    83.5 KB · Views: 361
Physics news on Phys.org
otownsend said:
Hi,

I just started learning physics at university and so I'm looking for help on a simple energy conservation problem. On the bottom right-hand of the image I attached below, you should see that it asks whether the initial speed would increase or decrease if the object was of a greater mass... why would the speed not change? In the calculations for initial speed, the co-efficient of static friction is included which varies depending on what surfaces are in contact with each other. I would therefore believe that the initial speed of the larger mass object would be greater, since the co-efficient would also be greater. Can someone please clarify this for me?
Look at the equation just above "Solve and evaluate." You will notice that the mass enters on both sides of the equation. So yes, the friction will be greater with the greater mass of the vehicle, but so will its kinetic energy. The two cancel out and the result is independent of the mass of the object.
 
DrClaude said:
Look at the equation just above "Solve and evaluate." You will notice that the mass enters on both sides of the equation. So yes, the friction will be greater with the greater mass of the vehicle, but so will its kinetic energy. The two cancel out and the result is independent of the mass of the object.
Oh I think I understand what you mean!

The co-efficient of kinetic friction is just determined by the contacting surfaces (rubber and concrete in this example) and so the mass of the object does not affect this value.

I believe I was under the impression that the co-efficient of kinetic friction was determined by the normal force of the object (which indirectly means the mass of the object), which actually is not the case. The coefficient is merely the relationship between contacting surfaces of the same type and is discovered when comparing the ratio between the normal force and the friction force ... right?
 
otownsend said:
The coefficient is merely the relationship between contacting surfaces of the same type...
They don't have to be of the same type.

otownsend said:
... and is discovered when comparing the ratio between the normal force and the friction force ... right?
It's not "discovered when comparing the ratio", it simply is the ratio.
 
otownsend said:
The coefficient [...] is the ratio between the normal force and the friction force ... right?

Yes, but note that the ratio may or may not depend on the normal force. The usual approach is to adopt the approximation that the ratio is independent of the normal force and also independent of the speed.
 
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...
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?
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top