Static, kinetic and rolling friction when rounding a flat curve

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the roles of static, kinetic, and rolling friction when a vehicle rounds a flat curve. Participants explore how these types of friction interact under different conditions, such as varying speeds and tire behavior, and their implications for vehicle dynamics and centripetal force.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that without friction, a vehicle cannot make a turn, and questions whether exceeding the allowed speed results in a different trajectory than expected.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of static friction acting when a vehicle is turning slowly, and whether kinetic friction takes over when the speed limit is exceeded.
  • Another participant suggests that both static and kinetic friction can act simultaneously, but questions whether breaking the threshold of maximum static friction causes a transition to kinetic friction.
  • Participants discuss the effects of tire deformation on the actual path radius compared to the geometrical radius, and how this affects the frictional forces involved.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential for a "jerk" at the transition point from static to kinetic friction, particularly in relation to different tire types.
  • There is a query about the direction of rolling friction and whether it is tangential to the circular path or directed towards the center.
  • Participants explore how the direction of friction changes based on the vehicle's motion and the radius of the turn being followed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the interactions between static and kinetic friction, the effects of tire deformation, and the implications for vehicle dynamics. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on several key points.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the behavior of friction is dependent on various factors, including tire construction, speed, and the specific conditions of the turn. There are limitations in the assumptions made regarding the roles of different types of friction and their interactions.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals studying vehicle dynamics, physics of motion, or those involved in automotive engineering and tire design.

Ryker
Messages
1,080
Reaction score
2
Alright, everyone, I have some questions in regards friction when rounding a flat curve and was hoping to get some help with it. For that intent, I've borrowed a couple of posts from another old thread on the topic of centripetal force. Hope the authors don't mind.

ZapperZ said:
If there's no friction, the vehicle cannever make that turn. Or if the frictional force is LESS than the needed centripetal force, the vehicle will slide. Guess which direction it will slide?Zz.
The textbook I'm using actually says the vehicle wouldn't skid, but would just negotiate a turn not as steep as if it would've gone slower. Does that mean that the vehicle will, should it exceed the allowed speed, NOT go out of the turn tangentially, but rather in a curve that will, due to being a part of a circle with a bigger radius, eventually lead it off the road.
Caesar_Rahil said:
also, there is a difference between rolling, static and kinetic friction...
while turning, static friction is acting as the point of application of force is always at rest
i.e it does not RUB or SLIP on the ground.
kinetic friction acts when slipping occurs.
Rolling friction , is suppose is irrelevant as we can assume road is hard
Oh, and could someone shed more light on the difference between those three types of friction in a flat curve. Say you're traveling slowly. Then the only friction involved is static, right? But what happens when you exceed that speed limit and your wheels keep on turning? Is the static friction still the one that's applied? Or does kinetic friction enter the frame here? If yes, does it substitute static friction or just supplement it? And the direction would in any case still be towards the centre of the (bigger) circle, correct?

And one last question. If we suppose rolling friction isn't neglibile, is its direction also towards the centre (because while I suppose the wheels are in fact turning forward, that is tangentially to the circle, the change in their velocity points towards the centre) and not tangential to the circle?

Thanks in advance, guys and girls.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Both static and kintetic (dynamic, skidding) friction will accelerate a car inwards and slightly backwards, depending on the orientation of the tires versus the path the tires are following. Rolling resitance is normally considered to generate a force opposing the path the tires are following, or opposing in the direction the tires are oriented.
 
So rolling friction is tangential to the circle the car is following then? And can static and kinetic act at the same time? Or does breaking the threshold of maximum static friction cause the kinetic friction to step into action since the car is now moving away from the radius of the orbit it was supposed to follow at first? If the latter is true, is there a jerk right at the breaking point since kinetic friction is usually smaller than static?
 
Ryker said:
Or does breaking the threshold of maximum static friction cause the kinetic friction to step into action since the car is now moving away from the radius of the orbit it was supposed to follow at first?
Because of tire deformation, the actual path radius is slightly larger than the geometrical radius calculated from tire orientation. There's usually some combination of both static and dynamic friction within the contact patch between tire and road.

Is there a jerk right at the breaking point since kinetic friction is usually smaller than static?
For most tires, there is is a jerk like loss of traction when the limits of the tire are exceeded. Some bias bly racing slicks minimize this effect. Radial racing tires also try to reduce this effect, but they are not as "forgiving" as the bias play racing slicks. There are other advantages to radial racing tires (less slip angle, and usually more maximum grip).
 
Alright, thanks for the answers. And if anyone else wants to add anything, please do so :smile:
 
rcgldr said:
Both static and kintetic (dynamic, skidding) friction will accelerate a car inwards and slightly backwards, depending on the orientation of the tires versus the path the tires are following. Rolling resitance is normally considered to generate a force opposing the path the tires are following, or opposing in the direction the tires are oriented.

rcgldr said:
There's usually some combination of both static and dynamic friction within the contact patch between tire and road.
Oh, forgot to ask one more thing, just to make it clear. Static and kinetic friction, regardless of whether they are both acting at the same time, then have the exact same direction? Am I getting this right? Say that your wheels jam and you start skidding. Does kinetic friction then still accelerate you towards the centre of the circle, whose radius is dependent upon the magnitude of said friction? And if you have to make a bigger turn because there isn't enough friction, does friction point toward the center of the smaller circle, which you want to be following, or the center of the bigger one, which you in fact will be going to follow?

Sorry, I know it's a lot of questions, but I really want to get this figured out.
 
Ryker said:
Static and kinetic friction, regardless of whether they are both acting at the same time, then have the exact same direction?
The contact patch will have a net direction, but the static and kinetic components will have different directions.

Does kinetic friction then still accelerate you towards the centre of the circle
The kinetic component just opposes the path the car is moving in. Unless you lock up the tires with the brakes, or spin out, as long as the tires are rolling, there's some amount of static friction where the tire deforms at the contact patch, so that even in a 4 wheel drift, the car will still turn but the radius of the turn will be larger if the tires are sliding a lot.

whose radius is dependent upon the magnitude of said friction?
The radius is related to the centripetal acceleration produced by the tires and the speed2 of the car.

does friction point toward the center of the smaller circle, which you want to be following, or the center of the bigger one, which you in fact will be going to follow?
Friction force divided by mass determines the acceleration. The steering force ends up pointing a bit behind the center of the circle of the path a car is moving. If not for the engine resulting in a forwards force at the tires, a coasting car would slow down as it turns. The energy loss is related to the amount of deformation of the tires due to slip angle as well as rolling resistance, the speed of the car, and other factors related to tire construction.
 
rcgldr said:
The contact patch will have a net direction, but the static and kinetic components will have different directions.

The kinetic component just opposes the path the car is moving in. Unless you lock up the tires with the brakes, or spin out, as long as the tires are rolling, there's some amount of static friction where the tire deforms at the contact patch, so that even in a 4 wheel drift, the car will still turn but the radius of the turn will be larger if the tires are sliding a lot.
So kinetic friction then has the same direction as rolling friction, that is tangential to whatever circular path the vehicle is following or, in other words, in the opposite direction of instantaneous velocity in every such instant?

rcgldr said:
The radius is related to the centripetal acceleration produced by the tires and the speed2 of the car.

Friction force divided by mass determines the acceleration. The steering force ends up pointing a bit behind the center of the circle of the path a car is moving. If not for the engine resulting in a forwards force at the tires, a coasting car would slow down as it turns. The energy loss is related to the amount of deformation of the tires due to slip angle as well as rolling resistance, the speed of the car, and other factors related to tire construction.
Hmm, sorry, but I didn't quite get that. Behind the center of what circle does the steering force point? The "original" one, if we can call it that, or the bigger one that results from the speed being too high and the vehicle not being able to follow the set-out path?
 
Ryker said:
So kinetic friction then has the same direction as rolling friction.
Rolling friction is due to non-elastic deformation of a tire (the force causing the deformation is greater than the force that occurs during recovery, due to hysteresis). The difference between these forces times speed equals the power consumed. Kinetic friction losses are related to energy converted into heat by sliding surfaces. Rolling friction would be in the direction the tire is rolling (not sure if slip angle is considered as part of rolling friction), while kinetic friction opposes the path the tire is taking.

Behind the center of what circle does the steering force point?
The larger, or actual circular path. Take the case of a car coasting and cornering. The path will be a spiral with decreasing radius, because there is a backwards (drag) force as well as an inwards force when cornering. A forwards force has to counter the backwards force from conering in order to maintain a circular path. Because of slip angle deformation when cornering, the tires (front and rear) are angled inwards of the actual path the tires are traveling, so the actual path is a circle with a larger radius than the distance between car and the point where the lines through front and rear axles cross.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
11K