Car Crash: Wall vs. Identical Vehicle - Which Does More Damage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shane
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Car
AI Thread Summary
A discussion on the damage caused by a car crash into a wall versus a head-on collision with an identical vehicle reveals that the relative velocity plays a crucial role in the outcome. When a car hits a wall at 40 km/h, the impact is equivalent to a collision with another car traveling at 80 km/h due to the combined speeds. This suggests that the damage in the latter scenario would be greater, as both vehicles absorb the impact. Some argue that the wall collision may involve momentum loss due to recoil, but this is countered by the principle that two colliding vehicles share the impact forces. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding physics principles in analyzing crash dynamics.
Shane
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
okay bringing up an old topic but

a car (lets just say 2000 kg) drives into a concrete wall (essentially immovable) at 40 km/h.
the same vehicle (make and model not the product of the colliision!) drives head on into another identical vehicle traveling in the opposite direction; both at 40 km/h.

Which does more damage?

They are equal no? Argue me if I am wrong but also couldn't you argue that the vehicle crashing into the wall has momentum lost to recoil, rolling away from the wall after it has hit? All of course depending on the construction of the car right? those cars in demolition derbies are built (impracticably for the transfer of momentum and safety's sake) to withstand heavy blows, so couldn't that vehicle lose some momentum to recoil on colliding with the wall?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Also quoting this website: http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cfm?articleID=00042194-68C4-1C71-9EB7809EC588F2D7

"You will do less damage to your car and yourself by hitting a fixed object. The reason is that the damage done is a function of the relative velocity of the objects. If you are traveling at 35 miles per hour and hit a large tree, the relative velocity is 35 miles per hour. However, if you hit a car coming toward you at 35 miles per hour, the relative velocity is twice that. The effect of hitting the other car is therefore roughly the same as of driving into the tree at 70 miles per hour."

Is that true? I had an extremely long argument with my physics teacher agreeing with the above quotation, but my physics teacher argued that even though the relative momentum is twice as much, there are two cars and the momentum is transferred as such with each vehicle taking half of the momentum during the crash.
 
I swear we had this same thread twice in the last two months. Why don't you do a google search for it? Hell, I did it for you. https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=97485 There's one.

Did you read the next two paragraphs of the Scientific American link. The next two said why your quoted explanation was wrong.
 
Please do NOT start the same thread again! Respond to the existing thread that you have started already. Multiposting of the same topic is not allowed on PF.

Zz.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top