A head on collision is an easy case because it is 1 dimensional.
m1v1 + m2v2
One of v1 and v2 is positive, the other negative.
2006-12-17 18:23:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Seshagiri 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Assuming a direct head on collision with no loss of momentum to external forces, you would subtract the momentum of each vehicle and the remaining momentum would be in the direction that the vehicle with the most momentum prior to the crash was traveling.
Momentium is a force vector with direction and magnitude. When you add momentum you need to account for its direction and magnitude regardless of the number dimensions.
2006-12-18 14:50:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Brian K² 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The best way to solve out collisions is by adding momentum to it.
If there's no external force in the collision, you can assume that the momentum is conserved, so you can use the equation p(a)=p(b) assuming that p(a)=m1(a)v1(a)+m2(a)v2(a)... and p(b)=m1(b)v1(b)+m2(b)v2(b)... by comparing the differences in masses and/or velocities, you can solve out for energies.
Since I am not sure about what you really asked fod, I cannot really get to a concrete answer, hope that helps tho.
2006-12-18 02:27:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by B*aquero 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think weight is involved as well as speed. If you think about a lorry crashing into a car on the motorway, their momentum is increased because they weigh so much and when the collision occurs, their momentum either crushes the car or pushes it backwards along the carriageway.
2006-12-18 02:29:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
you need to find out which is going faster and bringing more force(momentum) to the collision
2006-12-18 02:20:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
all you have to do is simply add more weight to the moving object and to also increse the velocity of the object.
2006-12-18 02:31:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by john 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Speed...it's all to do with kinetic energy
2006-12-18 02:24:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by snikleback 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Your question is not clear.
Please rephrase it.
2006-12-18 03:27:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by jimmy_siddhartha 4
·
0⤊
1⤋