How Do You Calculate Resulting Velocity Vectors in 3D Collisions?

AI Thread Summary
To calculate resulting velocity vectors in 3D collisions, one must consider the normal vectors, masses, and velocities of the colliding objects, as well as their bounciness or stiffness. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding elastic collisions, which can be extended from 1D to 3D by resolving velocities and momenta into three orthogonal directions. While physics problems often simplify collisions to a single plane, real-world scenarios may involve inelastic collisions where objects do not bounce perfectly. For less serious projects, such as games, a simplified approach using random direction changes while maintaining overall momentum can be effective. Understanding these principles provides a solid foundation for tackling complex collision calculations in simulations.
MinatureCook
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey, I've done quite a bit of Mechanics work in the past... But I really don't even know where to start here.

For some work I'm doing, I need to calculate the resulting velocity vectors when 2 objects collide. These 2 objects can be any shape, any mass and going at any velocity independently. (The simulation is in 3D, so x, y, z)

I suppose I'd have to calculate the normal of the two objects, do something with their velocity vectors and masses... And I suppose it would also depend on the objects' bounciness/stiffness etc...

If anyone could give me the names of some equations I can look into? Or any sort of help... Really just a place to start would be great.

Thanks for any help,
Stephen
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Commonly called a Billiard ball collision.
 
I'm Googling that term now, apparently it's also called "Elastic Collision" which is a great help (I had no idea of what to even start searching before) - but all of the equations seem to be confined to a 1D plane of movement.

Would it just be a matter of making the velocity vectors 3D? Here's to hoping so - it's just things rarely are so simple when transferring over to 3 dimensions in Maths :rolleyes:

Edit:
Ahh, actually - I just found this Wikipedia article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_collision
Which explains about 2D and 3D at the bottom. It's not as simple, but neither is it beyond my knowledge - so I'm happy there :P

Thanks a lot for the help; I genuinely wouldn't have known where to start looking without that
 
Last edited:
Perfectly OK to just go to 3 dimensions. Or as many as you like ;-)

You just have to resolve the velocities and momenta into 3 orthogonal directions.

Of course, you rarely have to do that in physics problems because any collision between two particles is only in 1 plane, even when it's a glancing collision.

You might want to consider inelastic collision - in the real world things tend to splat more than they bounce.

If it's not a serious project ( a game for example) you could equally well 'fake it'. Just use random direction changes and keep the total momentum/ energy constant (or lose a bit - inelastic). No need to meticulously work out contact angles.
 
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...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
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...
Back
Top