Problem with inelastic collision

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of kinetic energy loss in an inelastic collision involving two masses, m_1 and m_2, with respective speeds v_1 and v_2. Participants explore the application of conservation of momentum and the coefficient of restitution, while addressing potential errors in the setup of relative speeds and their implications on the results.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a calculation for kinetic energy loss using center of mass coordinates and conservation of momentum, leading to a formula for Q that appears problematic when m_1 equals m_2.
  • Another participant points out inconsistencies in the conventions used for relative speeds and suggests that the relative speed should be defined as vr = v2 - v1 and ur = u2 - u1.
  • Some participants highlight the confusion arising from using absolute values for relative speeds while treating momentum as vectors, indicating a need for consistency in approach.
  • A later reply acknowledges the potential misunderstanding of basic concepts related to relative speeds and their vector nature.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the correct formulation of relative speeds and their application in the calculations. There is no consensus on the resolution of the initial problem presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of consistent conventions in defining speeds and velocities, indicating that the choice of absolute versus vector representation can significantly affect the outcomes of the calculations.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
Two masses m_1 and m_2 are closing each other with speeds v_1 and v_2. The coefficient of restitution is e. Calculate the amount of kinetic energy loss after caused by the collision.
I solved it in the center of mass coordinates(v_{cm}=u_{cm}=0). The relative speed before and after the collision are v_r=-(v_1+v_2) and u_r=u_1+u_2 respectively. Using conservation of momentum, we know that m_1v_1=-m_2v_2 and m_1u_1=-m_2u_2. Solving these equations for v_1,v_2,u_1,u_2, we'll have:
<br /> v_1=-\frac{m_2}{m_2-m_1}v_r\\<br /> v_2=\frac{m_1}{m_2-m_1}v_r\\<br /> u_1=\frac{m_2}{m_2-m_1}u_r\\<br /> u_2=-\frac{m_1}{m_2-m_1}u_r<br />
Substituting the above results into m_1v_1^2+m_2v_2^2=m_1u_1^2+m_2u_2^2+2Q and using u_r=e v_r, We'll have:
Q=\frac{m_1m_2}{2} \frac{m_1+m_2}{(m_1-m_2)^2} (1-e^2) v_r^2
But as you can see, this is saying that for m_1=m_2 , Q becomes infinite which has no meaning and so something must be wrong. But I can't find what is that. What is it?
Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You use two different conventions for the speeds/velocities - for the relative speed, you use them as absolute values to add them, but in the conservation of momentum, you use them as vectors (which can be negative).

It is easier to use them as velocity, then your relative speed is wrong.
 
Your relative speeds are wrong. They should be vr = v2 - v1, and ur = u2 - u1 respectively

EDIT: I see that mfb beat me to the punch
 
mfb said:
You use two different conventions for the speeds/velocities - for the relative speed, you use them as absolute values to add them, but in the conservation of momentum, you use them as vectors (which can be negative).

It is easier to use them as velocity, then your relative speed is wrong.
Ohh...yeah...thanks man.
Sometimes I really think I have some problems in the basics!

dauto said:
Your relative speeds are wrong. They should be vr = v2 - v1, and ur = u2 - u1 respectively
That's when you're dealing them as vectors. When you're dealing with their components, negative signs may appear which may alter that formula.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
920
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
Replies
27
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K