The Traffic Accident Reconstruction Origin -ARnews-
|
Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. From your basic physics courses you know that approximating the area under a complex curve by use of a reasonable average value is a valid way of solving for that area. I grant you that the slope of the acceleration curve is constantly changing and if we were integrating finding the equation that describes that particular line would be daunting. Nonetheless many empirical scientifically controlled tests have shown that the slope of the acceleration curve may be reasonably approximated by a constant (an average friction value).
This statistical mean will allow a close approximation of the area under the curve. (For smaller curves - i.e. shorter distances-like skidding to a stop from some test speed.) It will also allow one to sum up the acceleration over the time period and compute the onset velocity. This method of averaging the area under the curve is used for force and impulse and many other complex aspects of a collision event. However when we move on to areas under a curve like those described by a parabolic function ( e.g. d = 0.5at^2 ) and we are looking at an immense area under the curve (like quarter mile data) then the approximations do poorly for the reasons you suggest the acceleration is changing at such a rate a couple of data points does not approximate the rate well.
Ed
Ed Phillips
edphill@aol.com
For example, to continue this discussion look for a thread titled
Vericom VC2000
If this thread does not exist in the current archive, you can begin another one by using that title.