If Kinetic friction is a constant can I accelerate forever?

AI Thread Summary
Kinetic friction is constant at 5 N, but the limiting friction of 10 N means that once the object is in motion, the applied force must exceed this to maintain acceleration. If a continuous force of 20 N is applied, the net force acting on the object will be 10 N, leading to acceleration. Reducing the applied force to 6 N results in a net force of 1 N, allowing for continued acceleration, albeit at a slower rate. The discussion highlights the relationship between force, friction, and the resulting heat generated from motion. Ultimately, understanding these dynamics is crucial for analyzing motion and energy in physics.
sameeralord
Messages
659
Reaction score
3
If a limiting friction of an object is 10N and the kinetic friction is 5 N.

If I apply a force of 20 N continuosly would I be accelerating with a 5 N force forever.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sameeralord said:
If a limiting friction of an object is 10N and the kinetic friction is 5 N.

If I apply a force of 20 N continuosly would I be accelerating with a 5 N force forever.

Hi sameeralord! :smile:

(limiting friction is the maximum value of static friction)

No … you would be accelerating with a 10 N force forever …

once the object has started moving, you can forget the static friction completely (and you can reduce the applied force).

So if you apply a force of 6 N continuously, you will be accelerating with a 1 N force forever. :wink:
 
tiny-tim said:
you would be accelerating with a 10 N force forever
You meant 15 N. Right?
 
DaleSpam said:
You meant 15 N. Right?

Right! :smile:
 
You do need more and more power to overcome friction. The heat produced will become a problem too.
 
Now this is a "work" problem. Are you familiar with "work"?

Work is a measurement of energy, and is equal to force X distance.

In this case, 15N (the force of friction) times the distance the object slides = the heat energy given off (in "joules").

So, when the object is moving faster, it covers more distance per unit time, so it also generates more heat per unit time.
 
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...
Back
Top