In summary, the article discusses a simplified version of conservation of momentum that can be applied to inelastic collisions. The article provides a formula for the reduced mass of a body in a collision, and provides examples of how the reduced mass can be used to solve problems involving inelastic collisions.
  • #1
1,101
615
Introduction
Collisions are very much a stock item in any school physics curriculum and students are generally taught about the use of the principles of conservation of momentum and energy for solving simple collision problems in one dimension. In this article we will be examining a very common type of collision problem: the inelastic collision. (See Note 1 below: a review comment on the definition of an inelastic collision)  However we will be following a somewhat unconventional approach which – notwithstanding – is very much in step with a key underlying physical law namely Newton’s third law upon which conservation of momentum rests. We develop some easy to use formulae for the solution of inelastic collisions and show that these may be easily modified to solve both perfectly elastic and ‘semi-elastic’ collision problems.
Conservation of Momentum re-arranged
The basic equation for conservation of momentum in a straightforward collision between two masses...

Continue reading...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes Erico Romaric, BvU, jedishrfu and 2 others
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
However a much simpler method arises from the recognition that the physics of the above perfectly inelastic collision is mathematically equivalent to a collision between a single body having a mass corresponding to the reduced mass (and velocity equal to the relative velocity Δv) and a wall of infinite mass.

Source https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/an-alternative-approach-to-solving-collision-problems/

Did you mean the reduced mass is equivalent to ##\Delta m## or ##m_2 - m_1## where ##m_2## is mass of body 2 and ##m_1## is mass of body 1?
 
  • #3
bagasme said:
Did you mean the reduced mass is equivalent to ##\Delta m## or ##m_2 - m_1## where ##m_2## is mass of body 2 and ##m_1## is mass of body 1?
No - the formula for "reduced mass" or perhaps "harmonic mass" is given by the formula: ##\frac{m_1m_2}{m_1+m_2}## or ##{\left(\frac{1}{m_1}+\frac{1}{m_2}\right)}^{-1}##
 
  • #4
I think you need a better example to show the advantage of your method: you take 5 steps to get to the solution to 4.4 but the 'classic' solution takes only 2 using only ## \mu = \Sigma mv ##:
  1. Initial momentum (taking East +ve) is ## 1,000 \times 40 - 5,000 \times 20 = 40,000 - 100,000 = -60,000 \mathrm{\ kg\ m\ s^{-1}} ##
  2. Conservation of momentum => final velocity given by ##(1,000 + 5,000) v = -60,000 \implies v = -10 \mathrm{\ m\ s^{-1}} ##

And for 4.5 it's 3 vs 1 using only ## F = ma ## and ## a = \frac{\Delta v}{\Delta t} ##:
  1. The force is given by ## F = ma = m \dfrac{\Delta v}{\Delta t} = 1,000 \dfrac{40 - (-10)}{0.5} = 1,000 \times \dfrac{50}{0.5} = 100,000 \mathrm{\ N} ##

Or am I missing something?
 
  • #5
pbuk said:
I think you need a better example to show the advantage of your method: you take 5 steps to get to the solution to 4.4 but the 'classic' solution takes only 2 using only ## \mu = \Sigma mv ##:
  1. Initial momentum (taking East +ve) is ## 1,000 \times 40 - 5,000 \times 20 = 40,000 - 100,000 = -60,000 \mathrm{\ kg\ m\ s^{-1}} ##
  2. Conservation of momentum => final velocity given by ##(1,000 + 5,000) v = -60,000 \implies v = -10 \mathrm{\ m\ s^{-1}} ##

And for 4.5 it's 3 vs 1 using only ## F = ma ## and ## a = \frac{\Delta v}{\Delta t} ##:
  1. The force is given by ## F = ma = m \dfrac{\Delta v}{\Delta t} = 1,000 \dfrac{40 - (-10)}{0.5} = 1,000 \times \dfrac{50}{0.5} = 100,000 \mathrm{\ N} ##

Or am I missing something?
Thanks for taking a look - the first example was intended to be simple and detailed so as to clearly indicate the steps in the method. Once you are used to it you will solve 4.4 as follows:

$$v_f=\frac{P_1-\Delta P}{m_1} $$
$$ \Delta P=\mu \Delta v= \frac{1000\times5000}{1000+500}\times(40 - (-20))=50000 Ns$$
$$v_f=\frac{40\times1000-50000}{1000}=-10ms^{-1}$$

And for 4.5 $$F_{truck\; on\; car}=\frac{-\Delta P}{\Delta t}=\frac{-50000}{0.5}=-100000N$$

You might like to try the following from an MIT problem set (Physics 8.01 Fall 2012).

MIT Problem 5.jpg

20th Feb 2020: Added above problem as another worked example in the article.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
The use of the reduced mass is restricted to the scenario of frontal approach, that is the reason why this formula is not widely used to explain the phenomenon, since the use of general expressions is in general preferable.
 
  • #7
Not restricted by anything different from conservation of momentum and conservation of energy. Will prepare an example shortly but thanks for the comment all the same. Prompts a bit of work on my part!

You might like to try Problem 6 from the same MIT Collisions Problem set as Problem 5 above. (PS: if anyone from MIT views this, please advise on how I should reference this particular problem set which I downloaded some time ago but can no longer find online. It's Problem Set 7 dated Fall 2012).

Problem 6.jpg

As before I'll eventually get round to adding this as another worked example using the alternate method.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
SergioPL said:
The use of the reduced mass is restricted to the scenario of frontal approach, that is the reason why this formula is not widely used to explain the phenomenon, since the use of general expressions is in general preferable.
See Insights article on 2 dimensional collisions. Eventually decided the topic warranted another article altogether rather than just an additional example here.
 

What is "An Alternative Approach to Solving Collision Problems"?

"An Alternative Approach to Solving Collision Problems" is a scientific concept that proposes a different method for solving collisions between objects. It suggests using conservation laws and vector analysis to determine the outcome of a collision, rather than traditional methods such as momentum and energy equations.

What are the benefits of using this alternative approach?

This alternative approach can provide a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of collisions, as it takes into account factors such as angle of impact and direction of motion. It also allows for a more generalized solution that can be applied to a wider range of collision scenarios.

How does this approach differ from traditional methods?

Traditional methods for solving collisions often rely on simplifying assumptions and equations, which may not accurately represent real-world scenarios. This alternative approach uses more advanced mathematical techniques to analyze the motion of objects and determine the outcome of a collision.

What types of collisions can be solved using this approach?

This approach can be applied to both elastic and inelastic collisions between objects of any shape and size. It can also be used to analyze collisions between multiple objects, rather than just two.

Has this approach been tested and proven to be effective?

Yes, this alternative approach has been extensively tested and has shown to provide more accurate results compared to traditional methods. It has also been validated through experiments and simulations, further supporting its effectiveness in solving collision problems.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
818
Replies
5
Views
773
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
899
  • Mechanics
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • Mechanics
Replies
1
Views
929
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
67
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
2K
Back
Top