Elastic collision COR problem.

AI Thread Summary
In a perfectly elastic collision, the coefficient of restitution (e) equals 1, indicating that the relative speed of separation is equal to the relative speed of approach. This relationship is derived from the conservation of kinetic energy and momentum, where the total kinetic energy remains constant throughout the collision. The analysis shows that the velocities of the colliding objects revert to their original magnitudes post-collision, demonstrating that kinetic energy is converted to potential energy and back without loss. The mathematical derivations confirm that the changes in velocity for both objects are equal in magnitude but opposite in direction. Thus, the principle of conservation leads to the conclusion that e = 1 for perfectly elastic collisions.
arteelibunao
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Why is e=1 for perfectly elastic collision?

How did they arrive with that? Any derivations? Thanks.

-Artee Libunao
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The coefficient of restitution is defined as
C_{R} = \frac{v_{2} - v_{1}}{u_{1} - u_{2}}

For elastic collisions, it can shown from conservation of kinetic energy and conservation of momentum that relative speed of approach = relative speed of separation for the two objects colliding. Hence v_{2} - v_{1} = u_{1} - u_{2}
 
arteelibunao said:
Why is e=1 for perfectly elastic collision?

How did they arrive with that? Any derivations?

If you think of the two colliding objects as a system, you realize that, in the absence of external forces (and the force arising in a collision is an internal one of the system), the system cannot accelerate: in any frame, the velocity of the center of mass must remain constant.

v_{CM} = \frac{{V_o M}}<br /> {{m + M}} + \frac{{v_o m}}<br /> {{m + M}} = \frac{{V_f M}}<br /> {{m + M}} + \frac{{v_f m}}<br /> {{m + M}}

Another expression of the same is conservation of momentum:

p_o = V_o M + v_o m = V_f M + v_f m = p_f

Or Newton's Third Law:

\begin{gathered}<br /> V_o M + v_o m = V_f M + v_f m_f \hfill \\<br /> v_o m - v_f m_f = V_f M - V_o M \hfill \\<br /> m(v_o - v_f ) = M(V_f - V_o ) \hfill \\<br /> m(v_f - v_o ) = - M(V_f - V_o ) \hfill \\<br /> m\Delta v = - M\Delta V \hfill \\ <br /> \end{gathered}

and since collision time is the same for both objects:

\begin{gathered}<br /> m\Delta v/\Delta t = - M\Delta V/\Delta t \hfill \\<br /> ma = - MA \hfill \\ <br /> \end{gathered}

But all this only tells you how the total effect, the total acceleration, is distributed between the two objects, not its magnitude (the equality would still be true if you multiply both sides by n). To learn this, you must rely on conservation of energy and distinguish different cases depending on the characterstics of the materials involved.

In a perfectly elastic collision (an almost ideal situation), the materials may deform but recover their original size thanks to restoring forces. Another way to say it: KE turns into Potential Energy ad back again into KE. Thus the total KE of the system is conserved:

<br /> \begin{gathered}<br /> V_o ^2 M + v_o ^2 m = V_f ^2 M + v_f ^2 m \hfill \\<br /> V_o ^2 M - V_f ^2 M = v_f ^2 m - v_o ^2 m \hfill \\<br /> M(V_o ^2 - V_f ^2 ) = m(v_f ^2 - v_o ^2 ) \hfill \\<br /> M(V_f ^2 - V_o ^2 ) = - m(v_f ^2 - v_o ^2 ) \hfill \\<br /> M(V_f - V_o )(V_f + V_o ) = - m(v_f - v_o )(v_f + v_o ) \hfill \\<br /> M\Delta V(V_f + V_o ) = - m\Delta v(v_f + v_o ) \hfill \\ <br /> \end{gathered} <br />

If you look back to conservation of momentum, you realize that the left-hand terms of each side are the same and so you are left with:

\begin{gathered}<br /> V_f + V_o = v_f + v_o \hfill \\<br /> V_f - v_f = v_o - V_o \hfill \\<br /> V_f - v_f = - (V_o - v_o ) \hfill \\<br /> v_{rel}^{final} = - v_{rel}^{original} \hfill \\ <br /> \end{gathered} <br />

So in an elastic collision the relative velocity of separation is of the same module as the relative velocity of approach, just a different sign. In other words, the collision has "restituted" both objects to their original velocities, in terms of magnitude, i.e. the coefficient of restitution is 1:

v_{rel}^{final} = ev_{rel}^{original} \to CR = e = \frac{{v_{rel}^{final} }}<br /> {{v_{rel}^{original} }} = 1
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?
Back
Top