Distance Traveled by a Car Before Stopping

  • Thread starter Thread starter Erin_Sharpe
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions Linear
AI Thread Summary
A car traveling at 18 m/s has a 0.75-second reaction time before the driver begins to brake, during which it covers a distance of 13.5 meters. After the reaction time, the braking distance is described by a quadratic equation, resulting in a total stopping distance of 40.5 meters. The car stops 3.75 seconds after seeing the stop sign, which is insufficient to avoid hitting the bus 40 meters away. The discussion highlights the need for a piecewise function to accurately represent the car's motion during both the reaction and braking phases. Ultimately, the calculations confirm that the car does collide with the bus.
Erin_Sharpe
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Ok... this is a long one, please bear with me!

A car is driving at a constant velocity of 18 m/s. There is a school on the road with the stop sign extended. The car is 40 m away from bus when he sees the sign. There is a time dealy of 0.75 seconds bewtween the time the driver sees the sign ans when the driver can begin to slow down. During the reaction time the distance "d" in meters traveled by the car is given by the equation d= 18t, "t" is time in seconds from when the driver sees the bus.
When the brakes are applied after the 0.75 second reaction time, the equation is: d= -3t^2 + 22.5t - 1.6875.
After the brakes are applied it takes 3 seconds for the car to come to a stop. These 3 seconds plus the 0.75 second driver reaction time means the care stops 3.75 seconds after seeing the school bus.

What is the piecewise-defined function to describe the distance traveled by the car until it stops
How far does the car travel before stopping?
Does the car hit the bus?


I'd appreciate some tips on this one!

Thanks guys!
Erin :smile:
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Your title "piecewise linear functions" is misleading. For the first 0.75 seconds, the function is linear, in fact it is exactly the d= 18t you are given, but after that it is quadratic.

All you need to do is "patch" those two formulas together. The first "piece" is simply 18t for 0< t< 0.75. The second piece is the second formula: for 0.75< t< 3,
d= -3t2+ 22.5t- 1.6875. Write those in the standard for for "piecewise functions".
 
gerben said:
I wonder why the speed during the reaction time (18) is smaller than the speed when starting to apply the brakes (22.5).

The speed "when starting to apply the brakes" is not 22.5.

The speed according to the second formula is given by -6t+ 22.5.
At t= 0.75, that is -6(3/4)+ 22.5= -9/2+ 45/2= 36/2= 18 m/s.
That is, of course, the speed given by the first formula.
 
Ah, I see

but what an unpractical way to express the distance traveled during braking, you will have to subtract -3(0.75)2 + 22.5*0.75 - 1.6875 from the equation to know how much distance is traveled during braking
 
it takes 40.5 m for the car to stop and yes it hits the bus. If you attempt to use the formulas individually it does not work out. If you input the entire piecewise into your TI-83 it should give the right answer.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top