Friction between 2 masses and maximum acceleration

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves two masses, m1 and m2, where m1 is on top of m2. The question seeks to determine the maximum acceleration of m2 such that m1 does not fall off, considering the coefficients of static and kinetic friction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss free body diagrams (FBDs) and the forces acting on both masses. There are attempts to relate the accelerations of m1 and m2, with some questioning the necessity of including the kinetic friction coefficient in their calculations.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring different interpretations of the problem and the relationships between the forces acting on the masses. Some guidance has been offered regarding the simplification of the problem by focusing on m1 alone, as both masses share the same acceleration.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of confusion regarding the role of the kinetic friction coefficient and whether it is necessary for solving the problem. Participants are also reflecting on their initial assumptions and the complexity of their approaches.

12thString
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



2 masses, m1 and m2, m1 being on top of m2 and m2 is heavier than m1. [tex]\mu[/tex]s is the coefficient of static friction anywhere and [tex]\mu[/tex]k is the coefficient of kinetic friction between the floor and m2. What is the maximum acceleration m2 can have for m1 not to fall off?

Homework Equations



just FBDs.

The Attempt at a Solution



for m1

N1=m1g from [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fy


for m2

N2=(m1+m2)g



so for [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx=Fapp-[tex]\mu[/tex]k(m1+m2)g

I included a Fapp variable there. But i have the feeling that it doesn't really matter. Anyway, tinkering with m1 [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx

[tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx=m1a2-[tex]\mu[/tex]sm1g

which you can see that i equated m1 with the acceleration of m2.

which when manipulated will give (I assumed that m1's [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx=0 for it not to move)

a2=[tex]\mu[/tex]sg

but this is incredibly wrong. I'm quite lost now.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
12thString said:

Homework Statement



2 masses, m1 and m2, m1 being on top of m2 and m2 is heavier than m1. [tex]\mu[/tex]s is the coefficient of static friction anywhere and [tex]\mu[/tex]k is the coefficient of kinetic friction between the floor and m2. What is the maximum acceleration m2 can have for m1 not to fall off?

Homework Equations



just FBDs.

The Attempt at a Solution



for m1

N1=m1g from [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fy


for m2

N2=(m1+m2)g



so for [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx=Fapp-[tex]\mu[/tex]k(m1+m2)g

I included a Fapp variable there. But i have the feeling that it doesn't really matter. Anyway, tinkering with m1 [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx

[tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx=m1a2-[tex]\mu[/tex]sm1g

which you can see that i equated m1 with the acceleration of m2.

which when manipulated will give (I assumed that m1's [tex]\Sigma[/tex]Fx=0 for it not to move)

a2=[tex]\mu[/tex]sg

but this is incredibly wrong. I'm quite lost now.

Why do you say it is wrong? Unless I'm reading the question incorrectly it looks like the right answer to me.


I would interpret some of your work differently. For m1, I would say:

[tex] \begin{align}<br /> \sum F_x = m_1 a_x\nonumber\\<br /> \mu_s m g = m_1 a\nonumber\<br /> \end{align}[/tex]

In other words, it's not that the forces go to zero, there is only one horizontal force and it equals m1 a. But it gives the same answer.
 
i thought it was wrong because it didn't used the [tex]\mu[/tex]k variable. and it seemed too simple.

but upon thinking, does this mean that i don't even have to deal with m2 at all?
 
12thString said:
i thought it was wrong because it didn't used the [tex]\mu[/tex]k variable. and it seemed too simple.

but upon thinking, does this mean that i don't even have to deal with m2 at all?

That's right. They both have the same acceleration because they move together, and since there are fewer forces acting on m1 I think it's easier to work with.
 
oh, so i was just complicating things. i thought it was weird that the only component of m1's horizontal force was the frictional force. thank you very much for the help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
12K