Kinetic Energy of Cars: Does 4x Energy Needed for 0-20kph?

AI Thread Summary
When a car accelerates from 0 to 10 kph, it generates 50,000 joules of kinetic energy, while accelerating to 20 kph results in 200,000 joules, indicating that four times the energy is needed for the higher speed. This energy requirement is not exponential but quadratic, as the energy increase relates to the square of the velocity change. The discussion emphasizes that the kinetic energy generated is a direct result of acceleration, and mass is a critical factor in the kinetic energy formula. The derivation of the kinetic energy equation is based on the conservation of energy principle, linking work done to changes in kinetic energy. Overall, understanding these relationships is essential for analyzing vehicle dynamics and energy consumption.
deanbo
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
For example if a car accelerates from 0 to 10 kph it creates 50,000 joules of kinetic energy? If a car acclerates from 0 to 20 kph it creates 200,000 joules of energy. Does this mean that four times the amount of energy is required from the cars engine to go from 0 to 20 kph instead of 0 to 10 kph? Or is this kinetic energy the result of some other type of conversion?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Not exponentially, just quadratically. And the energy obviously comes from however you doubled the car's velocity (people pushing, the engine, an explosion, etc.).
 
And you'll notice this manifesting in a car accelerating from 30-60 much slower than from 0-30.
 
Nabeshin said:
Not exponentially, just quadratically. And the energy obviously comes from however you doubled the car's velocity (people pushing, the engine, an explosion, etc.).

Thanks! What I am also trying to determine is all the kinetic energy that is generated by the cars movement simply a result of the acceleration (velocity) itself. I'm guessing not otherwise mass would not be part of the formula for working out the amount of kinetic energy produced?
 
Last edited:
The formula for KE comes from assuming that conservation of energy will be obeyed, so the work done to accelerate the car will be equal to its change in KE. Begin with this equation from kinematics: vf^2 - vi^2 = 2ax, where vi is initial velocity, vf is final velocity, a is acceleration, x is displacement. Multiply each term by the object's mass m. Replace ma by force F. Change the 2 on one side to a (1/2) on the other side. Replace Fx by work W. Now, if you define the term (1/2)mv^2 to be something called KE, your equation will say this: work done = final KE - initial KE. This was just derived only for the case where the force was constant over the displacement, making it legal to say work W = Fx instead of using calculus, but since conservation of energy is a general law, the expression for KE is general also.
 
Last edited:
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
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?
Back
Top