Crash of two cars: What was the speed of car 1 at imact?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the speed of car 1 at impact after it collided with car 2, which was traveling at 20 mph in the opposite direction. Participants express difficulty in applying conservation of linear momentum due to the resulting 180-degree rotation of car 2 and the complexities of energy transfer during the collision. They highlight the need to consider factors like friction, deformation, and the energy absorbed by the cars, complicating the calculations. One participant shares a personal account of injury sustained during the crash, emphasizing the impact's severity. The conversation underscores the challenges in accurately assessing the dynamics of the collision.
crash37
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Car 1 hits car 2 and sets car 2 into 180 degree rotation. Both cars are of similar dimensions and about the same weight. What was the speed of car 1 at impact?
Assume that car 2 had a speed of 20 mph (29.3 ft/sec) in the opposite direction at impact.

I am stuck in using the conservation of linear momentum because the rotation of car number 2 involves a rotation of 180 degrees.

The kinetic energy of car 1 is converted into the rotational energy of car 2.
Pi rad = 180 degrees. How do I substitute this into omega squared of 1/2 I omega squared?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume that car 1 hit car 2 at an angle of 30 degrees from the horizontal.
 
You'd have to know the amount of traction there was, then estimate how much energy was lost due to friction and deformation of the car bodies. At the end of the collision the car is no longer rotating, so you don't know how much energy was involved, or the rate of rotation of the car during the time it was rotating.

Conservation of momentum would need to include the change in momentum of the Earth (also a tiny bit to the air), otherwise, if the Earth is ignored, then momentum of the 2 cars is not preserved, since I assume they both end up stopped.
 
you're assuming that all energy stays in the 2-car system, which is false.

Instead of trying to look for formulas to plug and chug, try thinking about it first.
 
Curl,

I agree with you. I don't have any skid marks - car 1 hit me so fast that he was not able to react. I don't know how much energy was absorbed by the deformation of cars 1and 2.

I was hit when I was decelerating in car 2. The end of my fibula where it connects to my ankle bone was shattered. The doc said that this was caused by the impact. Perhaps crash data can answer my question.

I appreciate your comment.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top