Is the Coefficient of Static Friction Always Higher than Kinetic Friction?

AI Thread Summary
The coefficient of static friction is generally higher than that of kinetic friction due to the bonding between surfaces. However, there are exceptions, such as when an oxide layer reduces bonding during sliding, potentially allowing kinetic friction to exceed static friction. Teflon on Teflon exhibits nearly equal static and kinetic friction coefficients. Additionally, systems that inject fluid to increase drag can create scenarios where kinetic friction, combined with drag, surpasses static friction. Ultimately, any change in surface chemistry during sliding complicates the comparison of friction coefficients between two materials.
flatmaster
Messages
497
Reaction score
2
One of our new labs states that the coefficient of static friction is USUALLY higher than the coefficient of kenitic friction. Is this true? If so, for what types of materials is the coefficient of static friction less than the coefficient of kenitic friction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Static friction is caused by bonds forming between the two surfaces - sliding friction is both making/breaking bonds as the surfaces move and partly breaking off high points on the surfaces as the rub against the other.

I can't immediately think of a case where sliding friction is higher but I could imagine for example where there is an oxide coating that forms on the surface reducing the bonds and this layer is rubbed off in sliding friction allowing surface-surface bonds to form.
 
I'm not aware of any solid to solid interface where dynamic friction is less than static friction, but teflon on teflon has about the same static and dynamic friction.

By injecting a fluid into ports on a rail, a slideway (do a web search) uses the fluid to increase drag associated with any movement. This creates a situation where kinetic friction + drag is higher than static, and one where the drag increases with speed. It's useful for smooth control of movements.
 
Ok, so you might say that the only way that kenitic friction could be higher is if the surfaces themselves change chemically as a result of the sliding? I'm talking about a single surface to surface contact. Not with any intermediate lubrication as Jeff Reid suggested.
 
flatmaster said:
Ok, so you might say that the only way that kenitic friction could be higher is if the surfaces themselves change chemically as a result of the sliding? I'm talking about a single surface to surface contact. Not with any intermediate lubrication as Jeff Reid suggested.

But if the chemical composition changes, then the question has no value because the coeffecient of friction is between the two surfaces, and a surface has changed. ie. all you would be saying is that the kinetic friction is higher between these two surfaces than the static friction between these two surfaces.

... like saying the kinetic coeff. between steel on steel is higher than the static coeff. between teflon on teflon.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'average velocity as a weighted mean'

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
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

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?
View full post »

Similar threads

I Question about friction in situation where interface slip occurs
Replies
4
Views
1K
I If frictional force in system is <= us*N then there is no slipping
Replies
7
Views
2K
Why is rolling easier than sliding?
2
Replies
71
Views
10K
B Are frictional forces action forces or reaction forces?
Replies
14
Views
1K
B Friction and Newton's laws in car braking systems
Replies
10
Views
2K
What determines the direction of static friction forces?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Difference between static and kinetic friction
Replies
10
Views
3K
I Direction of friction of each wheel and total moment when a car turns
Replies
6
Views
2K
I Modeling Coulomb Friction for a Moving Point Mass in a Circular Bowl
Replies
20
Views
1K
Understanding Friction and Tension in Static vs. Dynamic Scenarios
Replies
18
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top