OT Car crash Physics...

[roclist@accessconsulting.ca (Jason Adams)]

----- Original Message -----
From: "L F" <rocco16v@netzero.net>
To: "Jason Adams" <roclist@accessconsulting.ca>; "0sciroccolist"
<scirocco-l@scirocco.org>; "Jason" <jason@scirocco.org>; "Scirocco-Al"
<scirocco-Al@insight.rr.com>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: OT Car crash Physics...


> eliminate the bike rider's weight from the calculations.  His body had
> virtually nothing to do with moving the Jag's fender.

Bike rider accounts for 1/4 of the kinetic energy!


>   Front of Jag now eight feet back from original location? I don't believe
> it.
>

That's what the skidmarks measured...


Jason

> Larry
> Subject: Re: OT Car crash Physics...
>
>
> > M1 is Jaguar XJS curb weight 4808lbs driver 165lbs ---> 2260kg
> > M2 is Yamaha Motorcycle 360lbs + 125lbs ----->220kg
> >
> > Jaguar is stationary (waiting to turn left) and is struck by motorcycle
> > headlong in the pass front fender.
> >
> > Front of car is displaced 8 feet (2.44m) back remains stationary,
> wheelbase
> > is 102" (2.59m)
> >
> > uK is a coefficient I found on the net.
> >
> > I want to calculate the inital velocity of the motorcycle.
> >
> > and no the motorcycle driver isn't doing so well....
> >
> >
> >
> > Jason Adams
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jason" <jason@scirocco.org>
> > To: "Jason Adams" <roclist@accessconsulting.ca>; "0sciroccolist"
> > <scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
> > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 1:42 PM
> > Subject: Re: OT Car crash Physics...
> >
> >
> > > At 03:57 PM 10/28/2002, Jason Adams wrote:
> > > >With all the wealth of informed people on the list this shouldn't be
> too
> > > >difficult...
> > > >
> > > >If I know the weight of the cars, the skid distance, assume complete
> > > >inelastic collision. how do I work it out...
> > >
> > > I'm confused here -- what are you trying to work out?
> > >
> > > >Vf^2 = Vo^2 + 2a(dS)
> > > >
> > > >is there something wrong with my assumption for 'a' ?
> > >
> > > Well, uK isn't a constant... the value you use is a "typical" value.
> > Every
> > > tire is different, as is every road surface.  And stopping distances
on
> a
> > > car aren't that easy to compute -- you're dealing with 4 tires on an
> > object
> > > that has suspension and that does not have even weight distribution.
> > >
> > > "Typical" deceleration for a modern automobile is between 8.5 and 10
> > > ms^-2.   Of course, some are far below, and a few are above.
> > >
> > > Using the 3 braking distance figures I have for the 16V from magazines
> > (60,
> > > 80mph from Road & Track, 70mph from Car & Driver), we can compute the
> > > average a for the 16v's braking:
> > >
> > > 60mph   150 feet        7.87g
> > > 70mph   196 feet        8.19g
> > > 80mph   257 feet        8.16g
> > >
> > > The average of those 3 stops is 8.08g.  The 8V (158 feet from 60, 271
> feet
> > > from 80), averaged 7.61g.
> > >
> > > Of course, modern tires and brake pads improve those distances:  Two
> years
> > > ago I did 10 consecutive stops from 60 in my16V with Potenza RE71
tires
> > and
> > > Ferodo pads and used my G-Tech Pro to measure the distance.  I
discarded
> 3
> > > runs where the G-Tech did not provide an accurate reading, which left
me
> > > with 7 good runs.  I discarded the best and the worst runs, leaving 5
> > > total.  The average of those 5 runs was 131.8 feet, which is an
average
> of
> > > 8.95g.
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Scirocco-l mailing list
> > Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
> > http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> Introducing NetZero Long Distance
> 1st month Free!
> Sign up today at: www.netzerolongdistance.com
>