Work done by friction when car is breaking

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the work done by friction during the braking of a car, specifically addressing the nuances of the work-energy theorem as applied to a non-skidding scenario. Participants explore the implications of static versus kinetic friction, the definitions of work, and the energy transformations occurring during braking.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the friction force from the ground does no work on the car because the ground is not moving, leading to a zero distance over which the force acts.
  • Others argue that the friction involved is static friction, as the tires do not slip, and thus the instantaneous speed at the contact point is zero, supporting the claim that no work is done by that friction force.
  • There are discussions about the definition of work, with some proposing that work is the transfer of energy by means other than heat, suggesting that since the car's energy does not change, the work done by friction is effectively zero.
  • Some participants question whether the distance traveled during braking should be considered zero or the actual distance traveled by the car's center of mass, indicating a complexity in applying the traditional definition of work.
  • One viewpoint suggests that if the entire car is modeled as a rigid body, work is done on the car by the ground, while another perspective indicates that modeling the wheel separately shows no work done on the wheel by the ground.
  • Some participants highlight that the energy of the car is converted internally into thermal energy in the brake pads, with no energy transfer from the car to the road, reinforcing the idea that no work is done.
  • There are claims that the ground does move slightly as the car decelerates, implying that there is a decelerating force exerted by the pavement over the distance it takes for the car to stop.
  • Some participants note that a significant portion of the work occurs at the boundary between brake pads and rotors, where high friction forces act, suggesting that this should be considered in the discussion of work done during braking.
  • Disagreement exists regarding whether the car's energy changes or remains constant, with some asserting that the car's energy does change as part of a larger system involving the Earth.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the work done by friction during braking, with no consensus reached on the definitions and implications of work in this context.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities of defining work in scenarios involving non-rigid motion and the interactions at the tire-road interface, as well as the implications of different reference frames on the analysis of work done.

  • #31
Vibhor said:
1)Is Work Energy theorem a consequence of Newtons' II Law but not Law of conservation of energy ?
The work energy theorem is a consequence of Newton's 2nd law and the assumption that the body under consideration is rigid. So in Newtonian mechanics the conservation of energy is derived from Newton's laws. However, in Lagrangian mechanics Newton's laws are derived from the conservation of energy. The two formulations are equivalent, but take different starting points.

Vibhor said:
2) Are law of conservation of energy and Newtons II law completely independent from each other?
Not completely independent. Essentially, if you assume one (and some other supporting stuff) you can derive the other.

Vibhor said:
3) Suppose the car starts on a frictionless surface . In this case it does not move Wnet = 0 and ΔKE = 0 as well . What does internal chemical energy convert into ?
Thermal energy. In this case there will not be any thermal energy generated at the frictionless wheel, but only at all of the internal parts of the car.

Vibhor said:
4) Can we compare the movement of a car rolling without slipping on a surface to walking of a person ? In walking also W= 0 ,but ΔKE ≠ 0 ?
Yes.

Vibhor said:
5)If we try to under the physics of walking from force perspective then we can say that friction produces acceleration . And from energy perspective we can say that work done by friction is zero and internal energy in the human body converts into kinetic energy .Is that correct ? But again as I stated above I am a not clear how external force on the system(friction in this case) is in no way related to energy conversions within a system (human body in this case ).
I think that "in no way related" is a little too strong. It certainly is related because without it you will have a very hard time changing your internal chemical energy into kinetic energy. But nonetheless, from an energy transfer standpoint the energy is not transferred but only changed from chemical to kinetic.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
DaleSpam said:
I think that "in no way related" is a little too strong. It certainly is related because without it you will have a very hard time changing your internal chemical energy into kinetic energy.

Can you explain how the external force despite not doing any work is responsible/related for changing our internal chemical energy into kinetic energy ?
 
  • #33
This kind of thing happens all the time. For example, if you roll a ball up a ramp the ball's KE is converted to gravitational PE. The ramp does no work but is required for the ball's change of energy.

The ramp/ground does provide the force that is responsible for the acceleration, but work is about the transfer of energy, not merely the presence of a force. Many forces exist which do not transfer energy.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 163 ·
6
Replies
163
Views
14K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
6K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K