Force and Friction: Explaining Intuitively Why 1000N.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sachin Saraogi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Friction
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding the force required to keep an object against a wall when friction is involved. It highlights that the standard equation for friction, F = μN, where N is the normal force, is often misunderstood. When applying a force perpendicular to the direction of friction, a significantly higher force is needed to counteract the weight of the object on a slippery surface. Specifically, for a 10 kg object with a coefficient of friction of 0.1, the required force to keep it against the wall is calculated to be 1000 N, which seems counterintuitive compared to the 100 N needed to lift it without support. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the relationship between normal force, friction, and the orientation of the applied force.
Sachin Saraogi
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
We know that force * coeff. of friction = m * g. . It does not make sense. Pls read details. This is when force is applied perpendicular to the direction of friction. But suppose we say that m = 10 kg, g = 10 m/s2, coeff. of friction is 0.1. Then by formula it says that force required to keep the object against the wall will be 1000 N. How does this make sense? I mean the force required to lift the object without any support is just m*g = 100 N. Pls explain this so that it makes intuitive sense...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sachin Saraogi said:
We know that force * coeff. of friction = m * g. . It does not make sense.
Of course it doesn't, it is nonsense.

This is not correct ... the usual equation is ##F=\mu N## where "N" is the magnitude of the contact force between the surfaces.
Where that is a horizontal flat surface, ##N=mg## ... which is to say it's the weight of the object.

Pls read details. This is when force is applied perpendicular to the direction of friction. But suppose we say that m = 10 kg, g = 10 m/s2, coeff. of friction is 0.1. Then by formula it says that force required to keep the object against the wall will be 1000 N. How does this make sense?
Oh you mean that you are applying the normal force?

If you want friction to hold a box against it's weight, on a wall that slippery, then sure ... you will need a lot of force... especially if you are only applying the force horizontally.

Please see:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/frict.html
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/friction-coefficients-d_778.html
 
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...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
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