enter image description here

Suppose A and B experience friction with each other but they move on a smooth floor. A is given a force F which is not enough to overcome friction; a frictional force equal to F, thus, acts on B. Now, one would expect both the objects to move together with a common acceleration, due to this friction. In which case, it can be said that


But this would imply that the accelerations of A and B are zero as $F=f$ for $F<{f_L}$. So does that mean that a force exerted on A that is less than the limiting value of static friction, will not result in collective acceleration of A and B?

This seems to contradict empirical behavior. For example, in case of a sufficiently heavy object on top of another, the application of a force that is not sufficient for the top object to overcome friction against the bottom object, still results in a collective acceleration.

I have attached a photo containing diagrams for reference.


1 Answer 1


Your mistake is assuming that the frictional force that acts on B, which is $f$, is equal to the force $F$ exerted on A. Since A exerts a force $f$ on B, then by Newton's 3rd Law, B exerts an equal and opposite force on A. If $f=F$ then the net force on A is zero and A will not accelerate. But we know that A does accelerate, so we must have $f < F$.

The net force on A is $F-f$, so the acceleration of A is $a_A = \frac {F-f} {m_a}$. Similarly, the net force on B is $f$ and the acceleration of B is $a_B = \frac f {m_B}$. If the blocks move together then they must have equal acceleration so

$a_A=a_B \\ \Rightarrow \displaystyle \frac {F-f} {m_A} = \frac f {m_B} \\ \Rightarrow (F-f)m_B = f m_A \\ \Rightarrow \displaystyle F m_B = f(m_A + m_B) \\ \Rightarrow \displaystyle a_A = a_B = \frac f {m_B} = \frac F {m_A + m_B}$

  • $\begingroup$ If the force applied is less than the limiting friction, then won't the friction basically act to stop the motion of A? I assumed that A "accelerates" only because it is affixed to B due to resistance from friction, while the reaction to that frictional force pulls B forward. $\endgroup$ Oct 4, 2022 at 5:00
  • $\begingroup$ @SashankSriram A accelerates because the force $F$ is applied to it. B accelerates because the friction force $f$ acts so as to reduce relative motion between A and B. The reaction $-f$ to the friction force acts on A to reduce its acceleration. But if B moves faster than A then friction would act in the opposite direction, to accelerate A and decelerate B. $\endgroup$
    – gandalf61
    Oct 4, 2022 at 8:10
  • $\begingroup$ My question is, won't f basically stop the relative motion between A and B due to F, as F is lesser than the limiting value of static friction (refer diagram where I have specificed F < $f_L$)? Your explanation makes sense if the friction acting is kinetic, but in this case it is static. So it is going to increase with F until the limit, and any relative motion between A and B is only going to happen beyond this point. $\endgroup$ Oct 4, 2022 at 10:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @SashankSriram Yes, $f$ will stop any relative motion between A and B. And if there is no relative motion between A and B then they must have the same acceleration, which is $\frac F {m_A+m_B}$. $\endgroup$
    – gandalf61
    Oct 4, 2022 at 11:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @SashankSriram No, no, no. I think you are misunderstanding the term "relative motion". No relative motion between A and B just means that each is stationary relative to the other. They can - and they do - both still accelerate, as long as they both accelerate at the same rate. Since A is accelerating then $f$ is not equal to $F$. $\endgroup$
    – gandalf61
    Oct 4, 2022 at 13:39

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.