New Road Safety Measures

Transport and new transport: energy, pollution, engine innovations, concept car, hybrid vehicles, prototypes, pollution control, emission standards, tax. not individual transport modes: transport, organization, carsharing or carpooling. Transport without or with less oil.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79287
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11024




by Christophe » 11/03/13, 14:33

Ah yes now I understand everything, thank you Gaston and Fakir :)
0 x
User avatar
gegyx
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6979
Registration: 21/01/05, 11:59
x 2903




by gegyx » 11/03/13, 15:24

Front shock between car and bike ...

http://sports.nouvelobs.com/cyclisme/ar ... ?coverhome

:| Does the cyclist take almost all of the energy from the 2 vehicles?
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79287
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11024




by Christophe » 11/03/13, 15:32

lol gegyx no it's not going "fast enough" to hurt the car ...

While we're at it: how much should an 85 kg bike (all inclusive) go to have the kinetic energy of a 1200 kg car traveling at 40 km / h?

Response: 42 m / s or 150 km / h

Well, I would have thought more ...
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 11/03/13, 15:48

in the case of the bike that fits into an oncoming truck fortunately the cyclist does not absorb the energy of the truck ... the truck will be just a little slowed down by the energy it gives to the cyclist

but the shock does not make it pass from the speed of the cyclist to zero speed: the shock makes it pass from its speed of cyclist to the speed of the truck in the other direction: the sudden change of speed is indeed the addition of 2 speed ... the energy to dissipate for this speed change is to be calculated with this addition of speed
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79287
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11024




by Christophe » 11/03/13, 15:56

chatelot16 wrote:the cyclist does not absorb the energy from the truck ...


Not all but part of the energy from the truck is necessarily transferred to the cyclist ...

It would be interesting to estimate the G taken by the cyclist who goes from 25 km / h to -40 km / h in ... how many seconds and to know if the damage is more during the impact on the ground or against the other vehicle ...

This subject deviates well in "physical sciences of the accident" but I like lol
0 x
User avatar
Macro
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6513
Registration: 04/12/08, 14:34
x 1635




by Macro » 11/03/13, 16:01

I had the 240kg motorcycle experience plus driver from 75 to 15km / h right through a kangoo at speed 0 ... Not good to see the kangoo ... My deformed helmet was on display at the local office of the bikers' mutual for a while ... With the mention: imagine if he hadn't worn it ...
It is well known that on the 75kgs of a biker there is 40% in the head (well what the big mouth is part of the head) 30% in the balls .. (if if the tank of the ninja has tasted at this level). and 20% in the right wrist (only traumatized this time) .. The remaining 10% is the rest of the body ... : Cheesy:

The back of the kangoo has moved about XNUMX cm (according to its driver)
0 x
The only thing safe in the future. It is that there may chance that it conforms to our expectations ...
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 11/03/13, 17:22

we can measure the g in a moderate acceleration or deceleration, when we do not deform: in case of shock the notion of g no longer means much

in the event of impact against a solid wall, the first piece of sheet metal which touches the wall takes an infinite number of g since it passes at zero speed instantaneously

then the more scrap there is to deform the more the number of g is reduced
0 x
User avatar
Gaston
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1910
Registration: 04/10/10, 11:37
x 88




by Gaston » 11/03/13, 17:42

This is why in the event of an impact at 50 km / h against a (large) concrete wall, there is less danger in a sedan than in a Leclerc tank. : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 11/03/13, 22:54

except that with a Leclerc tank the walls are never big enough and the tank passes through without slowing down much!
Last edited by chatelot16 the 11 / 03 / 13, 22: 57, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 12/03/13, 17:48

chatelot16 wrote:then the more scrap there is to deform the more the number of g is reduced


If I remember correctly, g is the deceleration; mathematically, it is the derivative of speed.

So in a car, we try to make the deceleration at the level of the human body as small as possible while knowing that we only have the length of the car in front of the driver to dissipate energy by programmed deformation of the bodywork.

Oo is caught between two extremes: a very thick "shell", so hard that the "infinite" deceleration transmitted by the wall is transmitted entirely to the body. Infinite deceleration for the body = death.

And at the other extreme, a body so deformable that it is the body that ends up against the obstacle ... Same result.

Between these two extremes, there is the programmed deformation, which plays more than the thickness of the sheet itself ... And which may be just enough to slow down the body without exploding the internal organs ...
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "New transport: innovations, engines, pollution, technologies, policies, organization ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 158 guests