MythBusters: Testing Impact Velocity Error

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter danielatha4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mistake
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the methodology and calculations used by the Mythbusters in their experiment comparing the impact of two cars colliding at 50 mph each to one car hitting a solid wall at 100 mph. Participants critique the angles and heights used in the pendulum setup to simulate these velocities, focusing on the energy principles involved.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that the height change for the "x" velocity test should be calculated differently, suggesting that 90 degrees should represent "2x" velocity and 60 degrees should represent "x" velocity.
  • Another participant points out that a downward swinging pendulum will already have an x-direction acceleration due to circular motion, which could affect the force measured against the wall analogue.
  • A participant emphasizes that the relationship between velocity and height means that to halve the velocity, the height must be reduced to one-fourth, prompting a question about the angle corresponding to this height reduction.
  • One participant provides a formula for the perpendicular velocity of a pendulum at its aphelion and calculates the ratio of velocities for the angles discussed, suggesting that the discrepancy is not as large as initially claimed.
  • Another participant calculates that the angle for "half velocity" should be about 41 degrees, aligning with their mathematical approach.
  • A participant notes that the precision of the small-scale models used by Mythbusters is often lacking, although they argue that precision may not be the primary goal of the show.
  • One participant points out that the angles used in the show are labeled differently than initially thought, indicating that the "1x" angle is actually 49 degrees.
  • A later reply acknowledges the angle discrepancy and expresses relief that the show did not use 45 degrees as initially assumed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the accuracy of the angles and calculations used in the Mythbusters experiment. Multiple competing views on the correct angles and their implications for the experiment remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the precision of the small-scale models and the rough calculations employed in the experiment, which may affect the validity of the comparisons being made.

danielatha4
Messages
113
Reaction score
0
Mythbusters mistake:

They are currently testing that two cars impacting each other at 50mph each is similar to one hitting a solid wall at 100mph.

Regardless of this possible result, their small scale is bugging me.

The rig consists of a swinging arm, like a pendulum, and they are measuring the force exerted by the hammer coming down completely vertical and hitting a solid steel rod as an analogue for a solid wall. However, to compare what they say as “x” velocity and “2x” velocity they are starting the hammer at 45 degrees above the down/vertical to simulate “x” velocity and 90 degrees from the down/vertical to simulate the “2x” velocity.

Does anyone else realize that the change in height for the “x” velocity test will be sqrt(2)/2 and NOT 1/2 of the 90 degree, “2x” velocity, drop? Basic energy principle calculations will show that the 90 degree drop will not generate 2 times the velocity as the 45 degree drop. Thus, they should have used 90 degrees as “2x” velocity and 60 degrees as the “x” velocity.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Oh yeah, also that a downward swing pendulum will already be accelerating in the x direction due to circular motion. Taking away from the force exerted by the wall analogue.
 
Ok sorry, I have to beat a dead horse here.

Not only is 45 degrees not half the height but it also won't yield what was thought to be half the velocity due to the energy principle relation.

v^2 is proportional to h

so in order to half the velocity we would have to find 1/4 h (if h=1 for V and we're trying to find (1/2)V)

does anyone know at what degrees would make the hammer 1/4 of the full height up?
 
Well, I also think their calculations are wrong, but not quite in the way that you are implying.

The perpendicular velocity of a pendulum at its aphelion is given by

\sqrt{k(1-cos\theta)}

where k is a constant and theta is the maximum angle. So for your case you need to set up the ratio:

\frac{v_{90}}{v_{45}}=\sqrt{\frac{1-cos(90)}{1-cos(45)}}}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{2-\sqrt{2}}}~=1.847

So it is definitely too far off for their purposes IMO, but not by as much as you are implying.
 
Last edited:
Right, I calculated that the "half velocity" angle to drop from should be about 41 degrees. Which works with the equations...

This has annoyed me.
 
They often aren't particularly precise with the small-scale models, although you could argue that being precise isn't the point of small scale. (Usually, it isn't even the point of the show)

But it would be nice to mention that they're only using a rough calculation in a case like this.
 
Watch more closely the 2x angle is labeled 90 degrees and the 1x angle is clearly labled 49 degrees which is close to Arcsin(.75)~48.59037789... as desired.
 
Yeah, I just noticed this:
http://scienceblogs.com/dotphysics/2010/05/mythbusters_and_double_the_spe.php
(I haven't seen the episode yet... clearly I need to get on that)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right! 41 from the bottom, 49 from the top. Touche Mythbusters. I'm just glad they didn't just put it at 45 like I initially thought they did.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K