Understanding Normal Forces: Explained and Demystified

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ln(
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces Normal
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of normal forces, particularly in the context of climbing or hanging on a vertical rope. Participants explore the definition and implications of normal forces, their relationship to friction, and the dynamics involved in climbing scenarios.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the nature of the normal force when hanging from a rope, questioning whether it can be considered horizontal.
  • Others clarify that the term "normal" refers to forces being orthogonal, but this leads to further debate about the direction of the normal force in relation to the weight force applied downwards.
  • One participant suggests that the normal force is horizontal when squeezing the rope, which can help oppose their weight through friction.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between normal force and friction, with some participants stating that the normal force increases the frictional force necessary for climbing.
  • Mathematical relationships are proposed, including equations involving normal force, frictional force, and gravitational force, with participants exploring how to calculate these forces under different conditions.
  • Some participants question the implications of Newton's Third Law in relation to normal forces and friction, suggesting a connection that remains debated.
  • There is uncertainty about the implications of net force and acceleration, with participants discussing scenarios where the net force could indicate acceleration or simply a greater grip on the rope.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature and direction of the normal force in the context of climbing a rope. Multiple competing views remain regarding the definitions and implications of normal force and friction.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying assumptions about the definitions of normal force and friction, and the discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps related to the calculations of forces involved in climbing.

ln(
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
I thought I understood normal forces but I am confused. Could someone explain them to me?

What is the normal force on you if you are hanging or climbing up a vertical rope? In a definition, it says that the normal force is perpendicular to the surface, but if the surface is the rope, then the normal force is horizontal...?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, horizontal.
The term “normal” is being used here to mean orthogonal or “at right angles to”.
 
Baluncore said:
Yes, horizontal.
The term “normal” is being used here to mean orthogonal or “at right angles to”.

But on a rope, you are applying your weight force downwards, not towards the rope. So it doesn't make sense that the normal force is horizontal, as in away from the rope. When climbing, you want the normal force to be upwards.
 
Ahh, never mind I understand now.

The normal force of the rope when hanging down is horizontal, so if you apply a squeezing force in a horizontal fashion, you are able to oppose your own weight.
 
The normal force is horizontal, but the force opposite to your weight is the force of friction, which is parallel to the rope. If you do not move on the rope, it is static friction, which maximum value is proportional to the normal force.

As you grab the rope and squeeze it, you exert force round it, and the rope exerts normal force to your whole palm outward. The net force on your palm is zero.

ehild
 
ln( said:
But on a rope, you are applying your weight force downwards, not towards the rope. So it doesn't make sense that the normal force is horizontal, as in away from the rope. When climbing, you want the normal force to be upwards.

So all you are saying is that there is NO "normal" force in this situation. No, you do NOT "want the normal force to be upward, you want the resuiltant force to be upward in order to climb a rope.
 
ln( said:
Ahh, never mind I understand now.

The normal force of the rope when hanging down is horizontal, so if you apply a squeezing force in a horizontal fashion, you are able to oppose your own weight.

You got it! Basically, the force that increases the friction force is the normal force, because it increases the intensity of the contact between the two surfaces.
 
Alright I got it now. You want to have a great enough normal force, as in force you squeeze around the rope, to increase the frictional force and be able to climb the rope.

So in a sense, is the normal force similar to Newton's Third Law?

Also, in the rope climbing situation, how do I calculate how much normal force, and therefore frictional force when multiplied by the frictional constant, is required to accelerate a certain amount using the equation N = mg/u when climbing at a constant velocity or simply hanging there?
Do I rearrange the equation to be uN = mg, and subtract mg from uN, and can find the net force that can be able to be utilized to accelerate?
 
Normal force wouldn't be possible without N3, so it's connected.

uN = mg comes from ma = 0 (no acceleration)

you start with F = uN-mg

N2 gives:

ma = uN-mg

for a=0, this becomes uN=mg.

now what if a is not 0?
 
  • #10
Pythagorean said:
Normal force wouldn't be possible without N3, so it's connected.

uN = mg comes from ma = 0 (no acceleration)

you start with F = uN-mg

N2 gives:

ma = uN-mg

for a=0, this becomes uN=mg.

now what if a is not 0?

I would guess that if a is <0, then you will start to fall due to gravity, but if it is >0, you have the friction needed to accelerate, but it does not mean that necessarily you are accelerating. Simply because you have more friction than needed to oppose the force of gravity does not mean you are accelerating, you could simply be grabbing the rope with more force than needed...

However the equation says otherwise. It says that if the net force is over 0, you are accelerating. Which may or may not be true.
 
  • #11
just to find what N is required for a given a, you take:

ma = uN-mg

and solve for N, assuming some constant acceleration, a, you wish to achieve, just as you did when a=0, you just don't lose the 'ma' term this time since a is not 0. Of course, once you're in motion, you only need to maintain velocity, so you can lower the normal force (your grip) back to the a=0 case. In reality, the act of climbing would probably involve a lot of stopping and starting with each hand-over, though.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K