By the end of this section, you will be able to:
It is far more common for collisions to occur in two dimensions; that is, the angle between the initial velocity vectors is neither zero nor . Let’s see what complications arise from this.
The first idea we need is that momentum is a vector; like all vectors, it can be expressed as a sum of perpendicular components (usually, though not always, an x-component and a y-component, and a z-component if necessary). Thus, when we write down the statement of conservation of momentum for a problem, our momentum vectors can be, and usually will be, expressed in component form.
The second idea we need comes from the fact that momentum is related to force:
Expressing both the force and the momentum in component form,
Remember, these equations are simply Newton’s second law, in vector form and in component form. We know that Newton’s second law is true in each direction, independently of the others. It follows therefore (via Newton’s third law) that conservation of momentum is also true in each direction independently.
These two ideas motivate the solution to two-dimensional problems: We write down the expression for conservation of momentum twice: once in the x-direction and once in the y-direction.
This procedure is shown graphically in Figure 9.22.
We solve each of these two component equations independently to obtain the x- and y-components of the desired velocity vector:
(Here, m represents the total mass of the system.) Finally, combine these components using the Pythagorean theorem,
The method for solving a two-dimensional (or even three-dimensional) conservation of momentum problem is generally the same as the method for solving a one-dimensional problem, except that you have to conserve momentum in both (or all three) dimensions simultaneously:
Since there are two directions involved, we do conservation of momentum twice: once in the x-direction and once in the y-direction.
After the collision, the wreckage has momentum
Since the system is closed, momentum must be conserved, so we have
We have to be careful; the two initial momenta are not parallel. We must add vectorially (Figure 9.24).
If we define the +x-direction to point east and the +y-direction to point north, as in the figure, then (conveniently),
Therefore, in the x-direction:
and in the y-direction:
Applying the Pythagorean theorem gives
As for its direction, using the angle shown in the figure,
This angle is east of north, or counterclockwise from the +x-direction.
Suppose the initial velocities were not at right angles to each other. How would this change both the physical result and the mathematical analysis of the collision?
We choose a coordinate system where all the motion happens in the xy-plane. We then write down the equations for conservation of momentum in each direction, thus obtaining the x- and y-components of the momentum of the third piece, from which we obtain its magnitude (via the Pythagorean theorem) and its direction. Finally, dividing this momentum by the mass of the third piece gives us the velocity.
Now apply conservation of momentum in each direction.
x-direction:
y-direction:
From our chosen coordinate system, we write the x-components as
For the y-direction, we have
This gives the magnitude of :
The velocity of the third piece is therefore
The direction of its velocity vector is the same as the direction of its momentum vector:
Because is below the -axis, the actual angle is from the +x-direction.
Notice that the mass of the air in the tank was neglected in the analysis and solution. How would the solution method changed if the air was included? How large a difference do you think it would make in the final answer?