Walking: Why Is Friction Necessary?

  • Thread starter Thread starter andyrk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friction
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the necessity of friction for walking, exploring the mechanics of how forces interact during movement. Participants examine the role of friction in enabling forward motion and question the implications of a frictionless surface on walking dynamics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the concept of friction and its role in walking, questioning whether movement is possible on a frictionless surface. They explore the forces involved in walking, including normal force and frictional force, and how these forces interact according to Newton's laws.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants sharing different perspectives on the mechanics of walking and the forces at play. Some have provided insights into free body diagrams (FBDs) and the nature of action-reaction forces, while others are clarifying misconceptions about normal force and its relationship to gravity.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and interactions of forces, particularly in the context of walking on different surfaces. There is an ongoing examination of how friction affects acceleration and the conditions under which steady speed can be maintained.

andyrk
Messages
658
Reaction score
5
Why is friction necessary for walking? For moving/walking ahead we just need that when we push the ground the ground pushes us back. Can't we push the ground if the ground is frictionless?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
andyrk said:
Why is friction necessary for walking? For moving/walking ahead we just need that when we push the ground the ground pushes us back. Can't we push the ground if the ground is frictionless?

Try wrapping your shoes in rags soaked in oil and then see if you can walk on glass.
 
I know I wouldn't be able to but why?
 
andyrk said:
I know I wouldn't be able to but why?

Make an FBD of a person walking
 
darkxponent said:
Make an FBD of a person walking

Ok. Got it.
 
But when I draw the FBD, the force which with which the feet pushes on the ground is inclined at an angle of θ with the vertical. Let the force which we exert be F. There Fcosθ=N(Normal Reaction by the ground) and Fsinθ=f(frictional force)
So the horizontal forces balance then how can we move forward?
 
In response to your original question: without friction, you can jump up and down all you want (courtesy of the normal force) But not move horizontally.

andyrk said:
So the horizontal forces balance then how can we move forward?

'Action' and 'reaction' forces do not 'cancel'. You push on the earth, the Earth pushes on you. result is that you move, relative to the earth, that is.
 
Why don't action reaction forces cancel? Normal reaction cancels weight. So friction should equal the horizontal component of force applied by the man. Shouldn't it?
 
andyrk said:
Why don't action reaction forces cancel? Normal reaction cancels weight. So friction should equal the horizontal component of force applied by the man. Shouldn't it?

Can you show the FBD you draw to us?
 
  • #10
The normal force is not an action reaction pair with gravity! This seems to be a really common misconception; the reaction force of the Earth's gravitational pull on you is simply your pull back on the Earth. Action reaction forces act on two different interacting objects, not on the same object.
 
  • #11
darkxponent said:
Can you show the FBD you draw to us?

Here.
And WannabeNewton, yes that is correct. We generally assume that because of the FBDs we draw. In fact I don't find any difference between what you said? Not a reaction force to gravity but a reaction force for the force by which the Earth is pulling us, i.e the gravitaional force? Aren't gravity and gravitation one and the same thing?

BTW, this is the working I came up with for the use of friction as necessary for walking is this:

When we walk on a rough surface it is the roughness of the surface that makes us go forward. Like think of a rough surface as having many imperfections in it. When we walk we push the earth. Zooming in, we see that parts of our shoes/boots interlock with the imperfection. We now apply force to these imperfections which in turn exert a force on us, so we move forward.

Now had the surface been smooth there would have been nothing that would have been felt by the brunt of the horizontal component of the force we applied. This is because there are no imperfections in the way that meet out horizontal force applied. Is that correct?

So considering this the way as we walk, why don't we keep accelerating then? Because there would always be a force of friction acting on us and as force causes acceleration so we should be always accelerating as long as we walking with he same force being exerted by our foot on the ground?
 

Attachments

  • Fullscreen capture 6272013 95422 AM.bmp.jpg
    Fullscreen capture 6272013 95422 AM.bmp.jpg
    12.2 KB · Views: 996
Last edited:
  • #12
No we never assume that. The normal force is not a reaction force due ro gravity.
 
  • #13
WannabeNewton said:
No we never assume that. The normal force is not a reaction force due to gravity.

Means the same thing? The normal force is not between Earth and us I guess. It is between us and the floor we are standing on. The floor experiences a push downwards because of the force exerted by us due to the earth. The floor comes in between. Actually it is the centre of the Earth that is attracting us due to the gravitational pull and not the whole earth. So the floor comes in between. As a result the floor also experiences the same force of attraction that we are experiencing due to gravity. So it thinks it is us who are applying a force on it. So it exerts a force on us. which is equal and opposite? It was written that Normal reaction is between two surfaces in contact.
 
  • #14
normal force is not reaction to gravity, it counteracts gravity. Ex: gravity of Earth acts DOWN on YOU. Normal force acts UP on YOU. They act on the SAME object and cancel. another example: You pull EARTH. Earth pulls YOU. Forces act on DIFFERENT objects. Result? YOU smash into EARTH.
 
  • #15
This FBD is not correct. FBD only shows Force acting on the object. Not the forces exerted by the object. Only the forces acting on the object(that is external force) effects the motion of the object. Re-draw the FBD showing only the forces on the object. Remember Newtons second Law, it says about external forces only.
 
  • #16
serllus reuel said:
normal force is not reaction to gravity, it counteracts gravity. Ex: gravity of Earth acts DOWN on YOU. Normal force acts UP on YOU. They act on the SAME object and cancel. another example: You pull EARTH. Earth pulls YOU. Forces act on DIFFERENT objects. Result? YOU smash into EARTH.

Yes that is correct. But where does the normal force arise from? Is it not an action reaction pair of our push and the floor's upward push? Then Why don't we fly up!Because the gravitational pull balances the the floor's push?
 
  • #17
WannabeNewton said:
No we never assume that. The normal force is not a reaction force due ro gravity.

True that. Normal Force is not the reaction Force. The reaction Force on Earth is 'mg'. Whether the object is falling(where there is no Normal) or is placed at surface(where Normal is present). Normal Force is Contact Force.
 
  • #18
So we just act as an isolated body on which gravitational force and normal force act. Right?
 
  • #19
Why don't we accelerate because of frictional force then?
 
  • #20
andyrk said:
Why don't we accelerate because of frictional force then?

We do. A container in trck ses friction to accelerate!
 
  • #21
andyrk said:
So we just act as an isolated body on which gravitational force and normal force act. Right?

The concept of drawing FBD is that only. Isolate a body from a system and show external forces on it.
 
  • #22
darkxponent said:
We do. A container in trck ses friction to accelerate!
So can we never walk at a steady speed on a rough road because friction is always acting so we always keep accelerating?
 
  • #23
andyrk said:
So can we never walk at a steady speed on a rough road because friction is always acting so we always keep accelerating?

and retarding too. So average speed is constant!
 
  • #24
andyrk said:
So can we never walk at a steady speed on a rough road because friction is always acting so we always keep accelerating?

Acceleration occurs when the sum of forces in some direction is not zero. If there are forces tending to slow you down then you will need some other force to balance them if you want to move at constant velocity. Suppose you're walking into a wind. You need to push back on the ground; the reaction from the ground can balance the force from the wind. To get that reaction from the ground you need friction. Your feet, in a sense, are trying to move backwards relative to the ground. Friction opposes relative motion of surfaces in contact. So the friction pushes you forward.
 
  • #25
This is a really general answer...

When a person is walking, he or she pushes backwards on the ground. According to Newton's third law, the ground pushes back on the person which helps him or her accelerate forwards. If you want a real life application, think about an icy ring. It is really hard for the person to move forwards because the frictional force is very small but not necessarily negligible. Therefore, the force that the ice pushes on the person must be very small as well, leading to a minimal acceleration.
 
  • #26
andyrk said:
But when I draw the FBD, the force which with which the feet pushes on the ground is inclined at an angle of θ with the vertical. Let the force which we exert be F. There Fcosθ=N(Normal Reaction by the ground) and Fsinθ=f(frictional force)
So the horizontal forces balance then how can we move forward?

Your FBD only shows the foot. As it stands.. The amputated foot isn't moving (it's not sliding along the ground) so the forces must sum to zero.

You can counter by pointing out that the body is moving but your diagram does not show the body or the other forces acting on it.

If you show all the forces on the whole body it should become clear. For example the reaction force N is behind the centre of gravity.
 

Similar threads

Friction between tractor tyres and the ground
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Why are tension and friction in the same direction?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
How can we model a rolling truck on an incline using rotational motion analysis?
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
What force propels the runner forward?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
Direction of friction on rolling object
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
Why is the direction of kinetic/static friction up a ramp?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
A cylinder rotating on a plane with friction and then moving across a frictionless plane to a collision
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Pushing a block against the wall of an elevator that is accelerating
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Friction problem of a block sandwiched between 2 surfaces
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Forces acting on the person carrying a bucket of water
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K