Na-Me:


If the person dey move at the speed of the bullet hit the stationary bullet, na the same result my brother.

Check the 3rd Law of Motion.

BoboYekini: I concur bros, but remember that the 'Plastic/less tensile steel material' is also for safety considerations.

freecocoa: Are people really arguing this?

I guess y'all haven't seen a moving car that rammed into a stationary car with the moving one sustaining more damage.

I can't even believe the headbutt example, so y'all don't know that if you as a person run into a much stronger person with the intent to cause damage with your head, na you and your head go hear am? Make una dey dey jonse.

freecocoa: Are people really arguing this?

I guess y'all haven't seen a moving car that rammed into a stationary car with the moving one sustaining more damage.

I can't even believe the headbutt example, so y'all don't know that if you as a person run into a much stronger person with the intent to cause damage with your head, na you and your head go hear am? Make una dey dey jonse.

seunajia:
Best way to understand this is to theoretically replace the Honda with another Benz. i.e Mass1 = Mass2, TensileStrength1 = TensileStrength2.

A stationary object has no momentum, but still has it's Weight=Mg=Force.

A moving object has enough force to surmount it's Weight. Thus a greater force.

When the two objects collide, the stationary would lose PE because the moving object has Force=movingforce(an object moves when force applied > it's Weight=Mg=Force) greater than it's own stationary/resisting force = weight. It is this moving force that's the difference between the two object. Hence the stationary object's dent. Thus, the magnitude of dent is dependent on the magnitude of the moving force (subject to the speed of the moving car).

An equivalent Benz still suffered. Now, put back your Honda and clearly, a weaker material = greater dent.

In conclusion the Honda suffered more due to it's composing material, then partly due to it's stationary state and weight.

ziccoit: A moving object rammed into a stationary object. Which would be more damaged?science must have explained this in detail.

ugochukwumaduka:

Dude u re actually on d right track.the material composition is d deciding factor here...although not tensile strength cos dt has to do with endurance n supporting a stretching load..its actually the material's impact test number dat determines it.dt determines hw much force on impact it can withstand without failing.tk snooker balls for example.dey undergo such collisions with ichoda but don't dent like cars do wen dey collide and dts due to der material makeup and shape.

coogar:

you can easily tell apart the people that skipped physics classes in high school to chase grass-cutters in the bush.



the momentum of the moving object would cause extensive damage to the stationary object. it would set it in motion and the force that sets in motion would damage the stationary object. that law applies to any collusion.

plaetton: I dont know why everyone is obsessed with amount of physical damage on the Honda.
When it comes to vehicle safety, physical damage is not directly proportional to passenger injuries or fatality.

Infact, looking at the pictures, and assuming that both collided with the same momentum, the honda car, in this instance would have been safer for the driver and passengers.

How?
Physics.
Modern cars are built with numerous crumple zones in the fronts and rears. The crumple zones are designed to crumple and absorb the force of an impact, thereby dissipating and spreading the residual force throughout the vehicle chasis.
By absorbing much of the force and crumpling, the passenger is somewhat shielded from the destructive force of impact because less of the force of impact is passed through the drive and passengers.

In the case of the the mercedes Benz car, the crumple zones did not fold, so the force of impact would have had more of an effect on the passengers because the crumple zones did not absorb any of the force.

So looking at the pictures,The Honda car would have been a safer vehicle for the passengers.

Up Honda!

coogar:

the damage to both cars cannot be the same - the stationary object would definitely come off worse. what are you telling me? it would absorb most of the impact while waiting like a sitting duck with the windows shattered!




how can you draw inferences from assumptions?
if the honda had rammed into the benz in a stationary position, the benz would come off worse as well.

ziccoit: A moving object rammed into a stationary object. Which would be more damaged?science must have explained this in detail.

Nextworldnx:

Seriously, I just have to comment on this becos of the gross mis-information u guys are passing around. For the love of me, I just can't take it anymore.

1. Newton's First law of motion- A body continues in its State of rest or Motion till a superior force comes in contact with it,to make it move or stop.

2. Newton's Third law of motion- For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

A lot of u quoted these laws but erred greatly in application. Let me explain in simple terms what happened to both cars.


From those laws up there, my physics text-book told me that at a point of impact of any two or more bodies, the force at contact of all bodies involved is thesame(regardless of one body being larger than the other, either d surface area of one body is larger or smaller than the other, or the material of one body is stronger than the other). So long as two bodies makes contact, whether one in motion and the other stationary, it is "thesame" force that is transmitted at "impact" to both bodies.

2. The level of damage(deformation) done to either or both bodies is as a result of the level of resistance the bodies possess to withstand such an impact.
It doesn't matter who is in motion as both bodies in contact experiences equal amount of force at impact, d ability to withstand the impact now determines who gets damaged(deformed) more.

PRACTICAL EXAMPLE:
1. Guy A punches Guy B on the forehead. The full fist misses the head except the last finger. The forehead is stronger than the little last finger. Result: Last finger become swollen.

Verdict: Force at point of contact was thesame on both the Moving benz and stationed Honda. The level deformation on both vehicles is as a result of the different material composition.

And pls, whoever is that guy giving example of a guy standing and another running into him. Gush! WTH is wrong with some of u.

Okay let's analyze two bodies of equal mass, and materials:
Between a moving body and a stationary body, who has more momentum?
Moving body, right?
So definatly, d moving body will unbalance(not deform! O) d stationary one.

Now imagine both bodies in motion and they collide, will d damage(whether light or great) done not be dsame on both bodies?
Is it not dsame scenario between two guys of equal body mass, speed and make-up?

I take God beg Una, some of us are Engineers here, make una no use lie,lie scatter our head.

Peace.

Lagusta: Abeg make we bone physics joor, this is practical.... The materials used to make a german machine are more durable, stronger and even more appealing to the eyes than those japanese toys

are u now trying to tell me that if it rammed into a trailer, na the trailer go first spoil baa?

Abeg make una no vex me for here ooo

Lagusta: Abeg make we bone physics joor, this is practical.... The materials used to make a german machine are more durable, stronger and even more appealing to the eyes than those japanese toys

are u now trying to tell me that if it rammed into a trailer, na the trailer go first spoil baa?

Abeg make una no vex me for here ooo

Nextworldnx:

Seriously, I just have to comment on this becos of the gross mis-information u guys are passing around. For the love of me, I just can't take it anymore.

1. Newton's First law of motion- A body continues in its State of rest or Motion till a superior force comes in contact with it,to make it move or stop.

2. Newton's Third law of motion- For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

A lot of u quoted these laws but erred greatly in application. Let me explain in simple terms what happened to both cars.

From those laws up there, my physics text-book told me that at a point of impact of any two or more bodies, the force at contact of all bodies involved is thesame(regardless of one body being larger than the other, either d surface area of one body is larger or smaller than the other, or the material of one body is stronger than the other). So long as two bodies makes contact, whether one in motion and the other stationary, it is "thesame" force that is transmitted at "impact" to both bodies.

2. The level of damage(deformation) done to either or both bodies is as a result of the level of resistance the bodies possess to withstand such an impact.
It doesn't matter who is in motion as both bodies in contact experiences equal amount of force at impact, d ability to withstand the impact now determines who gets damaged(deformed) more.

PRACTICAL EXAMPLE:
1. Guy A punches Guy B on the forehead. The full fist misses the head except the last finger. The forehead is stronger than the little last finger. Result: Last finger become swollen.

Verdict: Force at point of contact was thesame on both the Moving benz and stationed Honda. The level deformation on both vehicles is as a result of the different material composition.

And pls, whoever is that guy giving example of a guy standing and another running into him. Gush! WTH is wrong with some of u.

Okay let's analyze two bodies of equal mass, and materials:
Between a moving body and a stationary body, who has more momentum?
Moving body, right?
So definatly, d moving body will unbalance(not deform! O) d stationary one.

Now imagine both bodies in motion and they collide, will d damage(whether light or great) done not be dsame on both bodies?
Is it not dsame scenario between two guys of equal body mass, speed and make-up?

I take God beg Una, some of us are Engineers here, make una no use lie,lie scatter our head.

Peace.

seunajia:

No one is disputing Newton's 3rdlaw.

BTW, Newton's 3rd law applies only after Collision. The bodies, in this case, don't obviously have the same forces before collision.

Now, what this implies is that when Objects A and B collide, depending on which body has more force before collision, the net force difference causes, as applicable: 1. Motion (acceleration/retardation) 2. Dent 3. Others (heat loss to environ, etc)

2. above, easily calls to question the strength of the Honda's material.
Since A has more force, the objects would normally move in the direction of A after collision.

causewahala: Interesting thread with physics students flossing with their knowledge!

Momentum is the key word here. Ft=M(V2-V1). . . assuming mass is same or Ft=M2V2-M1V1.

For those going contrary to this, lets use something somewhat tinier. . . say a bullet propelled from a gun.

It has little mass but the velocity is great which makes its momentum increase. . . little wonder why it can shatter the human skull even at a distance, no?

Lord reed is prolly an accountant or a lawyer!






PS: this thing na (high school)S.S.1 physics oooh!

Richfella:

Come, na night school you go

Novice1: The repair cost of the Benz is still gonna be higher than that of the Honda

Lord_Reed:

So explain why some materials are considered bulletproof.

apocalypse:

Which do you think will get damaged the more ?

To those saying the Honda was stationary , your explanations are whack. A couple of years ago an Hyundai Accent rammed into my fathers Volvo 940 and the Accent was a total write off , mind you the stationary Volvo wasn't even damaged

Richfella:

I dey tell you.

causewahala: Interesting thread with physics students flossing with their knowledge!

Momentum is the key word here. Ft=M(V2-V1). . . assuming mass is same or Ft=M2V2-M1V1.

For those going contrary to this, lets use something somewhat tinier. . . say a bullet propelled from a gun.

It has little mass but the velocity is great which makes its momentum increase. . . little wonder why it can shatter the human skull even at a distance, no?

Lord reed is prolly an accountant or a lawyer!






PS: this thing na (high school)S.S.1 physics oooh!