Friction - Influence of mass with elastic materials

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on an experiment measuring the coefficient of friction (CoF) between various floor types and metal under different weights. Results indicate that for the sport surface and floor tile, the CoF is higher with lighter weights, while it remains constant with heavier weights. The relationship may relate to Amonton's Second Law, suggesting surface deformation plays a role. However, the experimental setup lacks critical details, such as whether static or dynamic friction was measured and the uniformity of pressure across contact surfaces. To draw meaningful conclusions, controlling additional variables and refining the experimental design is essential.
YeeHaa
Messages
28
Reaction score
4
Hi,

I'm doing some research on friction, and I did some tests with 4 different types of floor.
Now the first of these four floors is a sport surface (it has a polyurethane top coat), the second one is a floor-tile (with fabric on top), the third one a piece of foam and the fourth a piece of wood.

All of these materials were tested against metal.

Now I tested every floor with 3 different weights, and took some measurements (measured the normal force and friction force).
When I look at the Coefficient of Friction, it seems that for the first two floors (sport surface and floor tile), the Coefficient of Friction is LARGER when the weight is SMALLER. As soon as I increase the weight (2nd and 3rd weight), the Coefficient of Friction stays the same (it's the same for both weights).

Could this have to do with Amonton's Second Law? Maybe less weight means the surface deformes little.. (but in my eyes this would mean that friction should be lower), and with a lot of weight more of the surface at microscopic level touches the metal?

Some numbers:
Sport surface - metal:
Weight 1: (about 9 kg): CoF = 0.27
Weight 2: (about 15 kg): CoF = 0.19 (+/-)
Weight 3: (about 25 kg): CoF = 0.19 (+/-)

Floor tile - metal (same as sport surface, guess that's coincidence)
Weight 1: (about 9 kg): CoF = 0.27
Weight 2: (about 15 kg): CoF = 0.19 (+/-)
Weight 3: (about 25 kg): CoF = 0.19 (+/-)

Foam - metal:
Weight 1: (about 9 kg): CoF = 0.42
Weight 2: (about 15 kg): CoF = 0.43 (+/-)
Weight 3: (about 25 kg): CoF = 0.41 (+/-)

Wood - metal:
Weight 1: (about 9 kg): CoF = 0.11
Weight 2: (about 15 kg): CoF = 0.12(+/-)
Weight 3: (about 25 kg): CoF = 0.11(+/-)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone?
 
You haven't given enough about the experimental setup to even speculate about the cause. Some basic missing facts are

* Were you measuring static or dynamic friction?
* What was the geometry of the moving object and how was it loaded with weights? (we don't know if the pressure between the surfaces was uniform across the whole contact area or not).
* How did you apply the force to overcome friction? (i.e. where did you apply the force to the object and were you pushing or pulling? Is it possible it was trying to tip over and "dig into" the floor before it started moving?

But there's no guarantee you will get any useful answers even with that information. The experiment is probably too uncontrolled to "explain" anything in much detail. When you say "a sports floor with a polyurethane top coat" we don't know whether it is newly laid or 10 years old, how smooth it is, how clean it is, whether it has been polished with anything that might act as a lubricant or an adhesive, etc, etc...

If you really want to figure out "exactly" what is happening, you have to control all those types of factors, and/or vary them to investigate what effect they might have.
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?
Back
Top