|
haveblue posted:How much should I tip the wall after hitting it? 15%
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
How many motorcycles are chained to the wall?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
schmug posted:so inertia is no longer a part of physics? Nope, just regular old ertia.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:31
|
|
|
I still don't understand why we can't just make all of our roads into solar treadmills
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:31
|
|
|
Why don't they just build the whole car out of wall
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:34
|
|
|
The Guardian shared video of a burn over in action. Thankfully, the firetruck that was caught in it had safety devices for such an emergency. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRDM3ir3l5M
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
haveblue posted:How much should I tip the wall after hitting it? hopefully none if it's up to code
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
terrenblade posted:How many motorcycles are chained to the wall? If you are a physics robot, coming to a stop hitting a wall and coming to a stop hitting an equal and opposite car will look very similar. But a car and everything inside it is a soft body so physics robot needs to go back to graduate school and learn soft body physics to understand why delta speed is useful to categorize a crash and expected carnage from it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:45
|
|
|
haveblue posted:How much should I tip the wall after hitting it? At least this much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Not enough of them. I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw it. Speed delta is exponentially more important when you're the smaller car as well, as large mass-differential crashes usually throw the smaller car back some ways. The obvious example is train vs anything, but even a small sedan or a light truck hitting a fully loaded box truck can obliterate the smaller car with physics, which wouldn't happen if it hit a wall even at the full delta speed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
Burt Sexual posted:Ah what’s that again? Did you forget your Quantum Electrodynamics again, Burt?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
Seriously though, a careful application of the impulse-momentum theorem basically shows a huge difference between a soft object hitting a stationary wall and a soft object hitting another soft object or a hard object hitting a stationary wall. It's not even second-quarter lower-division Physics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
40+40mph = 40mph+wall because both cars have crumple zones. The speed is higher but you've got twice as much crumplezone to deal with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
just lower the car? or raise the wall maybe...
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:The Guardian shared video of a burn over in action. Thankfully, the firetruck that was caught in it had safety devices for such an emergency. Every single person in this thread should read Young Men And Fire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
MythBusters tested this one, and the car crumpled up the same amount in the head on test as it did with the wall. That was with two identical cars, not sure what happens if there's a mismatch in size
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
It's worse than that, it's physics Jim
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
terrenblade posted:The OSHA here is vertical filming. This is literally the perfect example of a situation where vertical video is vastly better for the shot. A wide shot would unnecessarily cut off most of the scene. Imagine still complaining about vertical video in 2020
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:37
|
|
|
"WE WIN MOTHERFUCKAAAZXXZXZZZZZZZZXXXXXXXXXADVCARVTI5NEUNT6EW5""!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:45
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:There's no such thing as combined speed. Unless one car keeps going unimpeded, a head on collision with both cars going 40mph is the same as hitting a wall at 40mph. Please don't troll like this. Not everyone knows you're joking
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:49
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:There's no such thing as combined speed. Unless one car keeps going unimpeded, a head on collision with both cars going 40mph is the same as hitting a wall at 40mph. But what if the cars were on treadmills, like planes trying to take off?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:51
|
|
|
Hope many kg of sandbags in the back of the treadmill?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:52
|
|
|
I made a visual to help everyone outcode:code:
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:55
|
|
|
BMan posted:This is the case for cars of the same size of course, if you ram a semi then it pretty much is a wall coming at you at 40mph This is obviously impossible!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 21:56
|
|
|
Potrzebie posted:Nope, just regular old ertia. ertia and inertia mean the same thing, English amirite
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:The Guardian shared video of a burn over in action. Thankfully, the firetruck that was caught in it had safety devices for such an emergency. I'm actually really curious what the oxygen levels are after that flame front runs over you. Does anyone know if they stick to bottles for a bit or something?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 22:24
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Cojawfee posted:There's no such thing as combined speed. Unless one car keeps going unimpeded, a head on collision with both cars going 40mph is the same as hitting a wall at 40mph. No, not really. For one thing, different cars have different masses. And two cars each traveling at 40mph towards each other will each have their own mass and acceleration to bring to the party. Think of it this way - if you're going 40mph and someone rear ends you doing 41mph, that person is not experiencing the same force as if they hit a brick wall at 40mph, are they? Fake edit: you appear to be trolling but it's not obvious so I'm going to still reply to you like you're an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
Yes there are differences in how much force each side will see, but you don't add the speeds together.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
I can make fart noises with my hands!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2020 23:07
|
|
|
imagine two cars on the edge of a cliff
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
If two cars going nearly the speed of light collide, the debris violates causality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:05
|
|
|
fishing with the fam posted:If two cars going nearly the speed of light collide, the debris violates causality. In liquid or a vacuum? this is very important.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:13
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:No, not really. For one thing, different cars have different masses. And two cars each traveling at 40mph towards each other will each have their own mass and acceleration to bring to the party. If the two cars are equal mass and are going at 40mph then he is perfectly correct that the force on each car in a head-on crash is the same as if one of the cars hits a large immovable object at at 40mph.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:25
|
|
|
schmug posted:In liquid or a vacuum? this is very important. Space is a wet/dry vac, you need to be prepared for both.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:29
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:If the two cars are equal mass and are going at 40mph then he is perfectly correct that the force on each car in a head-on crash is the same as if one of the cars hits a large immovable object at at 40mph. What if the groceries are in the front seat in one car and in the back seat in the other?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:31
|
|
|
Sex Skeleton posted:What if the groceries are in the front seat in one car and in the back seat in the other? Where are the groceries from?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:31
|
|
|
Sex Skeleton posted:What if the groceries are in the front seat in one car and in the back seat in the other? That depends. Are there helium balloons in the back seat?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:34
|
|
|
OSHA IV: 400 Cars of equal mass and as many posts about them
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:48
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/eshyISQ.gifv
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 01:19
|
|
