Can Magnets Really Prevent Car Crashes? Debunking the Myth

In summary, Dave's idea of using magnets to prevent car crashes is flawed because the magnets do not scale up to the real world and would only cause damage to the car and the passengers.
  • #36
You know, I just thought of another giant flaw in the magnetic bumpers concept:

For every repulsive interaction, there is going to be an attractive interaction somewhere else.

Say you give all cars powerful N-poles on their front and rear bumpers. Great. All cars repel each other as long as they are oriented bumper-to-bumper.

But those magnets also have S-poles. One car approaching another from the side will actually be attracted, worsening side-impact accidents!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
DaveC426913 said:
russ_watters said:
Meh - it would just force you to maintain safe following distance. To be effecive, these magnets would only need to have a substantial effect at a distance of perhaps 5-10 feet.

I agree. The trouble is, several feet of your car, both in front and behind, are invisible. "Keeping a safe distance" becomes many times harder when you can't tell where your car ends.
Even at a paltry 20 MPH, the normal recommended safe distance is what... 60 feet, give or take a couple?
 
  • #38
Are head on collisions that common? I think this would just make other kinds of collisions more probable, especially rear end collisions.
 
  • #39
bp_psy said:
I think this would just make other kinds of collisions more probable, especially rear end collisions.
What is "this", and why would it make collisions more common?
 
  • #40
DaveC426913 said:
You know, I just thought of another giant flaw in the magnetic bumpers concept:

For every repulsive interaction, there is going to be an attractive interaction somewhere else.

Say you give all cars powerful N-poles on their front and rear bumpers. Great. All cars repel each other as long as they are oriented bumper-to-bumper.

But those magnets also have S-poles. One car approaching another from the side will actually be attracted, worsening side-impact accidents!

But with a 3D car, you could probably just face all the N-poles out, even on the sides
 
  • #41
And the cost to equip ALL cars like this are what?

Also, don't forget that we would also have to replace the iron-pole parking meters, lest we are unduly attracted.
And, how much environmental ferrous waste material do you want to clean off your car bumper each day?

Just a bad idea.
 
  • #42
pallidin said:
And the cost to equip ALL cars like this are what?

Also, don't forget that we would also have to replace the iron-pole parking meters, lest we are unduly attracted.
And, how much environmental ferrous waste material do you want to clean off your car bumper each day?

Just a bad idea.
With all those S-poles - each, powerful enough to deflect other cars at several feet distance - pointed inward, the car will tear itself apart!
 
  • #43
I like threads like this, where a sophomore high school student can actually understand what's happening.

What I think could happen is that the magnets can be off all the time when driving, but turn on when the relativistic velocity between the car and another car exceed a certain point. This would cause cars driving on the highway to not be bumping off of each other, and it would also cause cars to not attract each other.
 
  • #44
Bringing this thread up as I had a thought about this.

What if, instead of putting an electro-magnet in front of the car, we put one at the four sides of the car, and kept them off until another car gets too close.
The magnet that would be in the right direction would then be turned on, thus a collision
could happen from almost any direction.
It would be possible to calculate the other car's distance using, for example, a laser.

However, I still think that it might be an unecessary cost and that we'd better think
about computer-driven cars, controlled by a master server. But that's another subject ;)
 
  • #45
julz said:
What if, instead of putting an electro-magnet in front of the car, we put one at the four sides of the car, and kept them off until another car gets too close. [..] However, I still think that it might be an unecessary cost and that we'd better think about computer-driven cars, controlled by a master server. But that's another subject ;)
Even if that could work, it would require the other car to have the same system before it could ever prevent collisions. (External airbags don't have that disadvantage.)

The same goes with controlling cars by a master server: aside from having a single point of (total catastrophic) failure, it implies needing to convert every vehicle simultaneously (and still, how will the central system know whether a kid has run onto the road somewhere). Better to start converting cars bit by bit. Today they already have automatic collision-avoidance breaking, and some cars can automatically lock on to the speed limit (until the driver puts an overriding pressure on one of the pedals). A few not only have parking range-finders but completely automated parking (systems that take complete control of steering and forward/reverse speed with awareness in all directions). Add a system to automatically lock onto the center of the lane unless the driver exerts a little steering pressure to override it. Improve the collision-avoidance detection systems. Start connecting these systems together and to the GPS (at first just to more intelligently predict hazards, later to start automatically leading into traffic turns etc), and later add systems to attempt automatic communication with other vehicles (at first just for better hazard management, although this could also be useful for measuring and routing around traffic congestion, but this potentially permits the same crazy traffic negotiations as a centralised system). So at each stage the vehicles can coexist with human driven vehicles, but eventually will build up the statistics to show that minimising human driver involvement minimises road death tolls.. in time you'll find legislators promoting disallowing manual control on public roads. Then, when your car is no controlled by its occupants, you'll have it drop you off at the door and go park itself, and you'll start to lease it out to work as a taxi while-ever you're in one place for a few hours.. The transport paradigm can shift.
 
Last edited:
  • #46
too bad for anyone with a pacemaker i guess...
 
  • #47
Everyone,

I Always have had some what of a accurate prediction of future events but often, do not follow up on them. Now the magnet idea would not fly as one user had suggested.

One idea that WILL happen in the future is cars WILL be in constant communication with each other. Each car will know the precise location of the next car via GPS location and through the use of physics and trig formulas built into the car computers of the future, the cars will not collide with each other for example, at a intersection. First generation cars will send visual/audio reports to the driver of a impending crash at a intersection then, its up to the driver to avoid the accident. Next generation, will possibly pulse the brakes and then, apply the brakes to avoid accidents.

All this technology, if proven, will substantially reduce car accidents in the future as long as the rf signals are not jammed or compromised.

The technology to a curtain point, has been proven on US army tanks. The driver of one tank can put the tank into follow me mode, and the tank behind him will follow the lead tank on the same path and spacing.
 
  • #48
lortech said:
One idea that WILL happen in the future is cars WILL be in constant communication with each other. Each car will know the precise location of the next car via GPS location and through the use of physics and trig formulas built into the car computers of the future, the cars will not collide with each other for example, at a intersection.
True, but...

lortech said:
First generation cars will send visual/audio reports to the driver of a impending crash at a intersection then, its up to the driver to avoid the accident.

This will not happen. By the time a bona fide risk of collision is identified, it is far too late to warn the driver and expect them to do anything about it. Any collision prevention will have to be computer-controlled.
 
  • #49
pmcleod said:
too bad for anyone with a pacemaker i guess...
Or a credit card or ATM card. Okay, not as bad as for the pacemaker, but annoying nonetheless.
 
  • #50
it would just repel the other car forward into another car causing a chain reaction of cars repelling each other...also, this would in no way save the passengers from sustaining damage, it might save the car but based on the laws of inertia the repulsion of the car would have the same effect on the passenger as an actual accident...


http://awesomeparents.com/blog
 
  • #51
As nice as this discussion is. Why on Earth would we need magnets and GPS to do it?

The S class already has the basic tools to do the job anyway. Adaptive cruise control, Radar sensor and conventional brakes. If it tracks an obect on a collisions course with a relative speed above a certain amount, the brakes will be applied.

It also has a system that mean you slam on it alters the braking force for you on gentle braking, not so much you get rear ended but enough so you don't crash. In the event of 'panic braking' ABS and brake assist systems work to reduce any collision speed.

Not totally foolproof yet but better than magic magnets and expensive satellites.
 
Last edited:
  • #52
Hi, new here.

So let's say a car and truck were on collision courses with these magnetic bumpers equipped, wouldn't the trucks bumper field be higher than the cars? If so i could imagine the car being repeled downward and into a flip, at which point the car would pulled towards the trucks bumper, because once the car goes into a flip it exposes its metal parts to the trucks bumper field.

Did that make any sense? If so, does it work (in theory)?
 
  • #53
Welcome to PF.
MikeCB said:
Hi, new here.

So let's say a car and truck were on collision courses with these magnetic bumpers equipped, wouldn't the trucks bumper field be higher than the cars?
Not necessarily. That would depend on the strength of the magnets, which could be made the same for both cars and trucks.
If so i could imagine the car being repeled downward and into a flip, at which point the car would pulled towards the trucks bumper, because once the car goes into a flip it exposes its metal parts to the trucks bumper field.

Did that make any sense? If so, does it work (in theory)?
It is possible, in theory, that the cars lighter mass would make it prone to doing this.
 
  • #54
wouldn't the trucks bumper field be higher than the cars?
Redbelly98 said:
Not necessarily. That would depend on the strength of the magnets, which could be made the same for both cars and trucks.

He means wouldn't it be physically higher, i.e. as measured from the ground .

i could imagine the car being repeled downward and into a flip, at which point the car would pulled towards the trucks bumper, because once the car goes into a flip it exposes its metal parts to the trucks bumper field.

You raise an excellent point that should have been obvious earlier. The two magnets interacting would only bring the car to a stop if they were properly aligned and the vehicles were constrained to narrow paths. In all other case the magnets will still repel each other, true, but in a highly unstable way, not unlike bouncing a ball on top of another ball. And the momentum will be preserved.

The most dramatic and common effect would be to put the car(s) into a spin and thus completely out-of-control.

And yes, magnets that powerful will strongly attract the metal in the car, meaning the cars will slam back together.


I was foolish to think this idea had some merit. Anyone who has played with a couple of magnets, trying to balance then and bounce them off each other will know that it is a useless feat. They will spin and collide.
 
Last edited:
  • #55
DaveC426913 said:
He means wouldn't it be physically higher, i.e. as measured from the ground.
Oh! Thanks for clearing that up :smile:
 
  • #56
This is clearly not going to work out
 
  • #57
The car magnet idea might not work, but I'm new to this and you all have sure made my brain work. :)
 
  • #58
some mechanism which can measure the speeds of incoming cars, send signals, pulls up breaks and activates some magnetic repulsion, saves the day for two cars onto each other but there are other objects which can be a problem.
but the idea is cool and should be used in the time to come...
 
  • #59
What if we lay out a thin layering of magnets around the bottom portion of the car, said layer would have a positive charge. And the we could modify the magnets by connecting them to the cars power so that the strength of the magnetic would be directly affected by the speed and power exerted by the car. We could also attach small sensors on separate areas of the magnetic layering so that if scrap metal does get attached to a section, then the power to that area would go to 0 and the scrap metal would fall off.
 
  • #60
ElCuabnito said:
What if we lay out a thin layering of magnets around the bottom portion of the car, said layer would have a positive charge. And the we could modify the magnets by connecting them to the cars power so that the strength of the magnetic would be directly affected by the speed and power exerted by the car. We could also attach small sensors on separate areas of the magnetic layering so that if scrap metal does get attached to a section, then the power to that area would go to 0 and the scrap metal would fall off.

I believe page 1 explains the why the basic idea simply isn't feasible. The rest of the thread kind of hammers it in.
 
  • #61
ElCuabnito said:
What if we lay out a thin layering of magnets around the bottom portion of the car, said layer would have a positive charge. And the we could modify the magnets by connecting them to the cars power so that the strength of the magnetic would be directly affected by the speed and power exerted by the car. We could also attach small sensors on separate areas of the magnetic layering so that if scrap metal does get attached to a section, then the power to that area would go to 0 and the scrap metal would fall off.

Oh! I didn't know we had two magnets on car bumper threads.

I missed this one.

But I like your idea of collecting scrap metal with cars. Only I'd turn the magnets off when I got home. Scrap metal is valuable.

The linked thread above contains the calculations I performed on magnetic car bumpers.

And I did solve one of the problems mentioned in both threads with a Halbach array.

Though I still don't think they will prevent car crashes, I have come up with a different use for magnets in bumpers:

Tailgaters. When people insist on tailgating, they are psychologically pushing the car in front of them. Why not let them really do it, safely, with magnets! I'd be getting about 500 mpg if we could get these installed on everyones cars. :smile:
 
  • #62
Obviosly the producers of Top-gear have no previous education in classical physics.


I never saw the episode but, there is no magnet that would offset the potentially huge amount of POTENTIAL ENERGY stored up in the mass x acceleration of the vehicle to offset any magnetic repulsion.

Now, if there was a large NEO magnet underneath the vehicle, that was suspended 1/4 inch off the ground, and the vehicle was at a constant rate of acceleration, then the car would slow down substantially if it were to transition from blacktop to a solid billet of aluminum it was moving over.

In Washington state, Department of Transportation do have trucks that have massive retractable crash boxes that do crumple in the event a car were to hit it. These are there to protect the workers.

BTW does anyone here have a good source of Rare Earth Neo magnets of different sizes that is very competitive in price?
 
  • #63
Spikeywan said:
No question, I just wanted to share a thought...

I saw a very old episode of Top Gear last night, where he put magnets onto the front of two model cars, and drove them at each other. Because the magnets were orientated so that they would repel, the cars couldn't crash.

This was given as a way of preventing accidents. :rolleyes:

However, if this was done with real cars, although the cars wouldn't touch each other, they would sustain just as much damage as if they had hit.
It would be pretty hard to drive east or west with 500kg neodymium magnets in the front :eek:

Instead, use a 1 meter thick block of EPP foam :approve:

Vidar
 
  • #64
My initial thought was... wouldn't giant magnets like that mess with cell phones and heart monitors anyway?
 
  • #65
Low-Q said:
It would be pretty hard to drive east or west with 500kg neodymium magnets in the front :eek:

Instead, use a 1 meter thick block of EPP foam :approve:

Vidar

500 kg!

By my calculations, from my $800 6" diameter x 2" thick magnet, that would cost roughly $400,000!

Calculations on how to fit all those magnets(500!) on a vehicle not attempted.

56.5 cubic inches for a 6" x 2" magnet
7.00 specific gravity of neodymium
0.0164 weight of 1 cubic inch of water in kg
6.49 kg of $800 magnet
500 kg of magnets on Vidars car
506 magnets
$405,189 never mind
 
  • #66
Did anyone consider the extra MASS that would be involved for a strong enough magnet?
If this idea was on TV it must have been April 1st, I think.
 
  • #67
Permanent magnets won't do. But, how about an electromagnet that turns on when a crash is occurring? But, it would require a pulsed energy supply with an energy comparable to a car crash, over a few milliseconds. Then some dude decides to hack the energy systems into a railgun power source...
 
  • #68
Khashishi said:
Permanent magnets won't do. But, how about an electromagnet that turns on when a crash is occurring? But, it would require a pulsed energy supply with an energy comparable to a car crash, over a few milliseconds. Then some dude decides to hack the energy systems into a railgun power source...

No, the entire idea of using magnets to make an accident safer is completely bogus. Other than the fact that it isn't going to work, for the cost, weight, and complexity of such a system you could simply add passive features that would actually save lives.
 
  • #69
I know. I was just playing around with the idea of having railgun power sources on every car.
 
  • #70
Stop behaving like small kids you don't have a very simple idea
you all mean that if we place a net of magnet over the cars then due to the force of repulsion the cars will not collide but on the same hand the another pole exposed to the another side will attract the different pole and that could be a cause for the accident but my sweet companions if you place two magnets in such a way that their same pole (south pole) will face to every internal face and due to this all the cars will only have the north pole exposed to the outer and that will only prevent accident not it'll going to cause it :-)
 
<h2>1. Can magnets really prevent car crashes?</h2><p>No, magnets cannot prevent car crashes. While they may have some impact on the car's performance, they do not have the ability to prevent collisions.</p><h2>2. What is the myth surrounding magnets and car crashes?</h2><p>The myth is that placing magnets on a car can somehow create a force field that will protect the car from collisions.</p><h2>3. Is there any scientific evidence to support this myth?</h2><p>No, there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that magnets can prevent car crashes. In fact, studies have shown that magnets have little to no effect on the performance of a car.</p><h2>4. Are there any potential dangers associated with using magnets on a car?</h2><p>Yes, there are potential dangers associated with using magnets on a car. Magnets can interfere with the car's electronic systems and cause malfunctions, which could actually increase the risk of a car crash.</p><h2>5. What is the best way to prevent car crashes?</h2><p>The best way to prevent car crashes is to follow safe driving practices, such as obeying traffic laws, avoiding distractions while driving, and maintaining a safe distance from other vehicles. It is also important to regularly maintain your car to ensure it is in good working condition.</p>

1. Can magnets really prevent car crashes?

No, magnets cannot prevent car crashes. While they may have some impact on the car's performance, they do not have the ability to prevent collisions.

2. What is the myth surrounding magnets and car crashes?

The myth is that placing magnets on a car can somehow create a force field that will protect the car from collisions.

3. Is there any scientific evidence to support this myth?

No, there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that magnets can prevent car crashes. In fact, studies have shown that magnets have little to no effect on the performance of a car.

4. Are there any potential dangers associated with using magnets on a car?

Yes, there are potential dangers associated with using magnets on a car. Magnets can interfere with the car's electronic systems and cause malfunctions, which could actually increase the risk of a car crash.

5. What is the best way to prevent car crashes?

The best way to prevent car crashes is to follow safe driving practices, such as obeying traffic laws, avoiding distractions while driving, and maintaining a safe distance from other vehicles. It is also important to regularly maintain your car to ensure it is in good working condition.

Similar threads

  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Engineering
Replies
19
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
877
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
33
Views
13K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
13
Views
4K
Back
Top