Calculating Initial Velocity in a Simple Car Braking Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xeonicus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Braking Car
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating a car's initial velocity after the wheels lock up during braking. Key points include the braking distance of 20 feet, a final velocity of 50 m/s, a vehicle mass of 2000 kg, and a tire-asphalt coefficient of friction of 0.6. Initial calculations included a deceleration rate of -8.5 m/s², which was later questioned. Participants clarified that only the friction force should be considered for braking, leading to a deceleration of -5.88 m/s². The distinction between static and sliding friction was emphasized, with static friction being relevant when brakes are applied without skidding. The conversation highlighted the misconception of rolling friction's role in braking, ultimately confirming that only static friction applies when the wheels are locked.
Xeonicus
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
The problem is simple, its a matter of finding a car's initial velocity after locking up the wheels while braking. Here is what I know:

The braking distance (skid marks) go for 20 feet, the final velocity is 50m/s, the mass of the vehicle is 2000kg, and the coefficient of friction of the tire and asphalt is 0.6. What is the initial velocity?

Here is how I did it first:
1) force friction = 0.6 * 2000 * 9.8 = 11760N
2) m * a = 2000 * a = -force friction + ( 2000 * -8.5 )
2000 * a = -11760 - 17000
a = 14.38 m/s^2
3) Then I go on to solve for the intial velocity after getting the deceleration.

In step 2, I used -8.5 for a typical deceleration rate of a vehicle when it slams on the brakes. What I'm told though, is that I don't need to add this force for braking and I only need to put in the friction force (0.6 * normal). So I'd just have "m * a = -force friction" and the deceleration would be -5.88 m/s^2. It seems to me though, that a vehicle would deceleration more quickly if the brakes were applied, more so than just slowed down by the force of rolling friction the road applies.

So can anyone clear this up for me? Something to do with internal/external forces?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1.) Lock up wheels with brakes = coefficient of sliding friction

2.) Brake as hard as possible without skidding = coefficient of static friction

In an emergency-if you like your car, use #2.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"In step 2, I used -8.5 for a typical deceleration rate of a vehicle when it slams on the brakes. What I'm told though, is that I don't need to add this force for braking and I only need to put in the friction force (0.6 * normal). "

I was wondering where that "8.5" came from! The only force causing the car to decelerate IS the friction of the tires sliding on the road.

As long as the wheels are rolling, the road does not supply ANY "rolling friction".
 
HallsofIvy said: "As long as the wheels are rolling, the road does not supply ANY "rolling friction"."

If it doesn't when the wheels are rolling, then when does it?

Don't you really mean that since rolling friction is much less than static friction, that during breaking, if the wheels are rolling, the frictional force applied by the road to the car is nearly equal to the static friction?
 
jdavel said:
HallsofIvy said: "As long as the wheels are rolling, the road does not supply ANY "rolling friction"."

If it doesn't when the wheels are rolling, then when does it?

Don't you really mean that since rolling friction is much less than static friction, that during breaking, if the wheels are rolling, the frictional force applied by the road to the car is nearly equal to the static friction?

Sorry, this is my fault, my original post said "rolling friction". I should not have
mentioned rolling friction at all. The rolling friction is not a factor in this problem, only the static friction or the sliding friction. I edited it so as not to cause confusion for anyone else. I must have been on crack when I wrote that! -Mike
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top