I asked this question about friction and slip ratio and now I still don't understand it
As the below graph of wheel friction vs slip ratio shows that in order for the car to has acceleration, its driving wheels must slip. No slip means no acceleration. Almost all graph I searched showed the similar concept
But then there is this question which says that a train is only accelerated by static friction, which means a non-slip wheel still can accelerate the vehicle.
My understanding of physics favors this later model for car as well. But this model is completely wrong: no slip means no (kinetic) friction and no acceleration
But why can't a tire accelerate a car when there is no slip, via static friction?
Let say a car moving at a constant speed, the tire has no slip. Now the engine accelerates the tire, the tire will roll faster. If this accelerated force is under the static friction limit, then the tire will not slip, but it still can accelerate the car. But according to reality, a la every friction vs slip ratio graph, this model is completely wrong. No slip or a very low slip ratio means no acceleration at all
Could anyone explain it for me?
And is there any difference between steel wheel and rubber tire? IMO, there isn't any from physical point of view. Two models above, one must wrong