Are Seatbelts Strong Enough to Protect Us During a Car Crash?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dingoz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Impulse Physics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effectiveness of seatbelts in protecting occupants during car crashes, focusing on the physics of deceleration and forces involved in collisions. Participants explore calculations related to acceleration, force, and the implications of deceleration on human safety, comparing theoretical models and real-world scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents calculations for a car crash scenario, attempting to derive the deceleration and impact force experienced by a driver weighing 75 kg in a collision at 50 km/h.
  • Another participant suggests that the initial time interval calculation is incorrect due to the non-constant velocity during deceleration, recommending the use of a different formula to find acceleration.
  • A subsequent post provides an alternative calculation for acceleration, arriving at a value of approximately 321.5 m/s², which is noted to correspond to about 33 g's of deceleration.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of this level of deceleration, suggesting that modern cars are designed to mitigate such forces through features like collapsible front ends.
  • One participant compares the forces experienced in a car crash to those experienced from falling from a height of 9 meters, arguing that seatbelts absorb some energy and reduce the risk of severe injury.
  • Another participant emphasizes that while 33 g's is significant, the actual deceleration experienced during a crash may be less due to factors like the distance traveled during deceleration and the elasticity of the human body.
  • There is a mention of the differences in collision dynamics when hitting a wall versus another vehicle, with a note that the collision time is shorter in the latter case.
  • Some participants express that the forces experienced in a crash can be survivable, citing that very few fatal accidents occur at 50 km/h, which is a common speed limit in urban areas.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the calculations and implications of deceleration forces in car crashes. While there are some shared understandings about the role of seatbelts and vehicle design, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact calculations and their interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants' calculations depend on various assumptions, including the constancy of acceleration and the distance over which deceleration occurs. The discussion highlights the complexity of real-world crash dynamics and the limitations of simplified models.

Dingoz
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ive been trying to get my head around an equation for seatbelts. Hyperphysics has an auto calculator and I've been trying to do it algebraically and still cannot get the same answer.

Here is what i have done...

In relation to a car traveling at 50kmph with a driver which weighs 75kg and stops with in 1 foot.
Car Crash Example

m = 75 kg, initially traveling at 50kmph = 13.88888889m/s d= 30 cm
Distance time interval =
dt = 0.3 m / 13.88888889 m/s = 0.022 s

During this 220th’s of a second it is decelerated from 13.88888889 m/s to zero, so
a = dv/dt = 13.88888889 m/s / 0.022 s = 631 m/s^2

So the impact force is
F = m x a = 75 kg x 631 m/s^2 = 47348N ...

But it is completely different answer, i believe my acelleration calculation is wrong BUT cannot seem to find out how
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Notice that the velocity over the 1 foot is not constant, so the time interval you calculated is incorrect. In fact, you should use the v^2 = v0^2 - 2ax formula to calculate the acceleration (assumed to be constant here), and then the force.

Hope that gives you the right answer.
 
0 = 192.9 + 2*A*0.3

so do i...

0 =192.9 + 2*A*0.3 -2*A*0.3
- 2*A*0.3 = 192.9
-2*A*0.3/0.3 = 192.9/0.3
-2*A = 643

-2*A/-2*A = 643/-2*A
0 = 643 / -2*A/A
0/A = 643 /-2
A = 643/-2

A = 643 / -2
A = 321.5 ms^2 (- Negative due to deceleration... )
 
A/g = 321.5/9.81 = ~33 g's. This deceleration would be pretty rough on anyone. This is why modern cars have collapsible front ends, so perhaps d -> 100 cm and the deceration is reduced to ~10 g's.
 
Well, even so, it would be for hitting a wall, which would really hurt. Compared to hitting another car, the collision time is a lot shorter.
 
Dropping dead on the a concrete floor will produce a lot more G's than that, and no drunkard die on me for just that. 33 G is quite reasonable as seatbelts absorb some energy before stopping you. The energy from a 50 Km/h collision should be like a drop from a 9 m height.

Seatbelts use the fact that you have a certain elasticity in your body, so broken bones or strained muscles are acceptable. Without them you would hit the dashboard which has little elasticity so much of the energy from the impact goes to your vitals (brain etc.)
 
Yay seatbelts!

9 m = 3+ stories. Add to that the fact that your centre of mass will travel further than 0.3 m over the deceleration, the deceleration is less than 33 G's. Since a 3 storey fall is likely to break something or another, 33 G's is too much to get through without significant injury.
 
jix said:
Yay seatbelts!

9 m = 3+ stories. Add to that the fact that your centre of mass will travel further than 0.3 m over the deceleration, the deceleration is less than 33 G's. Since a 3 storey fall is likely to break something or another, 33 G's is too much to get through without significant injury.

0.3 m is about right for a seatbelt but dropping on concrete or hitting the dashboard will decelerate you in only a few cm ( 2 - 5 maybe ) that means a 6-15 fold increase in G force experienced, and people still tend to survive 450 G's. There are very few fatal accidents at 50 Km/h that is why it's the European city speed limit.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
10K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
41K
Replies
1
Views
2K