B Why is static friction necessary for pure rolling?

AI Thread Summary
Static friction is essential for pure rolling because it allows the object to maintain a condition of no relative motion between the contact points and the surface. Initially, when a cylinder is launched with translational velocity but no angular velocity, kinetic friction acts to adjust the angular velocity until the condition for pure rolling (V=RW) is met. Once this condition is satisfied, static friction takes over, preventing further changes in translational and angular velocities. While kinetic friction is necessary to transition to pure rolling, static friction is crucial for sustaining that state. If the frictional force exceeds the static friction limit, slipping will occur, disrupting pure rolling.
tbn032
Messages
34
Reaction score
7
Suppose a cylinder is launched on a horizontal frictional surface such that it has initial translational velocity v and zero angular velocity .the kinetic friction would be applied between the contact points of the cylinder and the surface, opposite to the direction of the translational motion. This kinetic frictional force will simultaneously apply torque on the cylinder (which will increase its angular velocity) and decrease the translational velocity till the cylinder satisfy the condition for pure rolling(V=RW).when the condition for pure rolling is satisfied, the relative velocity between the contact points and surface would be zero and this there would be static friction between the contact points and the surface.

My confusion is that why is static friction necessary for pure rolling instead of kinetic friction. Static friction is applied when the object satisfies the condition for pure rolling(V=RW). The static friction does not increase or decrease, both translational and angular velocity. Kinetic friction on the other hand ensures that the object follows the condition for pure rolling on a horizontal frictional surface.

According to my understanding, if an object is launched on a frictionless surface such that it initially satisfies the condition for pure rolling, then the object would continue to be in pure rolling motion even in the absence of static friction(static friction=0 because µ=0), thus the static friction is not necessary for pure rolling. But if an object is launched on a frictionless surface such that it initially does not satisfy the condition for pure rolling, then the motion of the object would not be transformed into pure rolling due to absence of kinetic friction. Can you explain that why is the static friction is called to be necessary for pure rolling of an object instead of kinetic friction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tbn032 said:
Suppose a cylinder is launched on a horizontal frictional surface such that it has initial translational velocity v and zero angular velocity .the kinetic friction would be applied between the contact points of the cylinder and the surface, opposite to the direction of the translational motion. This kinetic frictional force will simultaneously apply torque on the cylinder (which will increase its angular velocity) and decrease the translational velocity till the cylinder satisfy the condition for pure rolling(V=RW).
Yes.
tbn032 said:
when the condition for pure rolling is satisfied, the relative velocity between the contact points and surface would be zero and this there would be static friction between the contact points and the surface.
There is no need for friction when pure rolling is achieved.
 
  • Like
Likes Kashmir and topsquark
tbn032 said:
Can you explain that why is the static friction is called to be necessary for pure rolling of an object instead of kinetic friction?
If the object is starting from zero velocity respect to the surface, static friction should accelerate it quicker than kinetic friction.
Think of a car doing a burn out: acceleration is greater without smoke.
 
Lnewqban said:
If the object is starting from zero velocity respect to the surface, static friction should accelerate it quicker than kinetic friction.
Think of a car doing a burn out: acceleration is greater without smoke.
I don't see how this is relevant.
 
tbn032 said:
Can you explain that why is the static friction is called to be necessary for pure rolling of an object instead of kinetic friction?
It is not "necessary". But once rolling without slipping has been achieved, the surfaces will (ideally) have zero relative motion within the contact patch. Static friction is then a more apt description of the interaction between the two surfaces. If the frictional force across the interface subsequently exceeds the maximum imposed by the coefficient of static friction then the two surfaces will "break loose" and slipping will resume.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/

Similar threads

Back
Top