Associated Topics || Dr. Math Home || Search Dr. Math

### Stopping Speed and Distance

```
Date: 08/28/2001 at 20:43:01
From: Adam Seaberg
Subject: an 18 wheeler vs. a motorcycle in stopping

t school today I was asked the question "out of a 18-wheel tractor-
trailer and a 2-wheel motorcycle, which would be able to stop faster
or in a shorter distance? I responded with the 18-wheeler because it
has more cubic sq. in. of rubber on the ground compared to weight
or mass than a motorcycle does. I was told that I was wrong but I
don't believe it, so I decided to go to someone who would help me
prove it.

I feel that this is a very very interesting question and I would
really appreciate your help on this

Thank you,
Adam Seaberg
```

```
Date: 08/29/2001 at 14:26:46
From: Doctor Rick
Subject: Re: an 18 wheeler vs. a motorcycle in stopping

Hi, Adam.

Yes, it's an interesting question. My first guess is the opposite of
yours. My brother has driven fairly large trucks, and he complains
about people who pull in front of him while approaching a red light.
He says people don't realize that a truck has a longer stopping
distance.

Let's consider the physics of stopping. A moving vehicle has kinetic
energy equal to half the mass times the velocity squared. If the truck
and motorcycle are moving at the same speed, their kinetic energies
are thus proportional to their masses.

If a constant stopping force is applied to a vehicle, the energy
dissipated is equal to the force times the distance. The kinetic
energy goes to zero (the vehicle stops) in a distance such that the
force times the distance equals the kinetic energy. The stopping
distance is thus the kinetic energy divided by the stopping force.

The maximum stopping force that can be applied without skidding is
equal to the normal force (the force with which the vehicle is pulled
against the road) times the coefficient of static friction for the
tires on the road. If we assume that the truck tires and motorcycle
tires have the same coefficient of static friction, then the maximum
stopping force is proportional to the normal force, which is
proportional to the mass.

Why doesn't the stopping force depend on the number of tires? The
weight of the vehicle is distributed among the tires. If you double
the number of tires, you halve the average weight supported by each
tire. The maximum stopping force is proportional to the weight
supported by the tire; thus the stopping force from each tire is
halved. Half the force from twice as many tires means the same total
stopping force, independent of the number of tires.

The stopping distance is proportional to the kinetic energy divided by
the stopping force, and each of these is proportional to the mass, so
this proportionality cancels out. The stopping distance, according to
my reasoning, is independent of the mass of the vehicle; it should be
about the same for a motorcycle or a tractor-trailer.

Does this mean we were both wrong? I do find it surprising - it goes
against what I had always assumed - so I checked on the Web and I
found this site that supports my reasoning:

Stopping Distance for Auto - Dr. Rod Nave, HyperPhysics,
Georgia State University
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/crstp.html

- Doctor Rick, The Math Forum
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/
```
Associated Topics:
High School Physics/Chemistry

Search the Dr. Math Library:

 Find items containing (put spaces between keywords):   Click only once for faster results: [ Choose "whole words" when searching for a word like age.] all keywords, in any order at least one, that exact phrase parts of words whole words

Submit your own question to Dr. Math
Math Forum Home || Math Library || Quick Reference || Math Forum Search

Ask Dr. MathTM
© 1994- The Math Forum at NCTM. All rights reserved.
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/