Is "friction" completely defined??

We say that f=k.N Where N is the normal reaction and k is a constant. How come? If the root cause of friction is "ATTRACTION AT RANDOM" how do all the factors cancel out to give such a simple relation? Does k have to be a constant for a material, like refractive index? Seems quite implausible because to me, the cause of friction at the atomic level is not very well defined. Your thoughts?

Note by Arshdeep Duggal
4 years, 12 months ago

No vote yet
8 votes

  Easy Math Editor

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold

- bulleted
- list

  • bulleted
  • list

1. numbered
2. list

  1. numbered
  2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1

paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link]( link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
    # 4 spaces, and now they show
    # up as a code block.

    print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 \( 2 \times 3 \)
2^{34} \( 2^{34} \)
a_{i-1} \( a_{i-1} \)
\frac{2}{3} \( \frac{2}{3} \)
\sqrt{2} \( \sqrt{2} \)
\sum_{i=1}^3 \( \sum_{i=1}^3 \)
\sin \theta \( \sin \theta \)
\boxed{123} \( \boxed{123} \)


Sort by:

Top Newest

Yes, friction is completely defined. Friction is a term to cover all of the wide variety of effects that make it difficult for one surface to slide past another.

Well, it should be obvious why frictional force is almost proportional to the normal force. If you have a heavier object pressing against a surface, you'll need more effort (force) to get it moving. In other words, more normal force implies more frictional force.

You'll notice that I used the word 'almost' in the beginning of the last paragraph. This is because the co-efficient of friction \(\mu\) is almost never constant. No surface is absolutely uniformly smooth (or rough). But generally \(\mu\) doesn't change so much that you notice something dramatic. And no, the coefficient of friction is not a constant for a material. It is a constant for a surface (you can have two surfaces made from the same material but they can have different \(\mu\)'s. Normally the rougher surface would have the higher \(\mu\)).

You can experimentally see if the frictional force is proportional to the normal force. If you were to carry out that experiment and graph the frictional force against the normal force, you'd get a straight line. It may not be the best straight line in the world, but it is a straight line nevertheless.

The cause of friction is anything that makes it difficult for two surface to slide past one another, for example :chemical bonds (that's why glue causes friction), electric effects (like the Van der Waals force) and physical barriers (surfaces with 'peaks' and 'valleys'; these are the things that make surfaces rough).

Hope this helps!

Mursalin Habib - 4 years, 12 months ago

Log in to reply

The component of reaction force in horizontal direction is actually known as friction. k takes into account the attraction and bond formations at atomic level. So it depends upon the type of surfaces interacting. Secondly we have to take into account the electromagnetic interaction acting between the two surfaces(this interaction is known as normal reaction). Imagine it like this:- Suppose that there is a box kept on a table and no electromagnetic interaction acts between the box and the table. Then no normal reaction force will act on the box. So the box will not be held by any interaction on the surface and will act like it is in a partially floating state on the surface. So frictional force in this condition will be zero. Greater the interaction, greater will be the hold and hence frictional force is directly proportional to normal reaction.

Shubham Srivastava - 4 years, 12 months ago

Log in to reply


Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...