Solution to the problem contest from the article:

US education is in big trouble and there are no easy or intended real solutions

In the article published on Jan. 29 (see link: https://losalamosreporter.com/2019/01/29/u-

s-education-is-in-deep-trouble-and-there-is-no-easy-solution/ than the contest was
announced https://losalamosreporter.com/2019/02/07/los-alamos-association-of-
scientists-announces-contest/ and a month after that some clues and clarifications have
been added https://losalamosreporter.com/2019/02/17/clarifications-and-hints-on-laas-
math-contest-questions/ )
I have stated that kids have no real incentives to learn something for life, and the actual
learning is superficial, just for the sake of a momentary show of a grade, made without
any passion for that knowledge, which was learned only to show it to teacher to get a
grade and then forget about it, with the highest pleasure.
The reasons are simple, but they represent an inconvenient truth, and nobody wants to
hear or acknowledge it, and therefore their chances of producing meaningful corrections
are practically nullified by this attitude that relies more on speech than on supporting
truths.
The system is not perfect; it was conceived to produce an obedient workforce, compatible
with capitalist exploitation, well-trained, narrowly qualified, with minimal
interdisciplinary knowledge and minimal initiative, able to follow without questioning
what they are told. A kind of servants of the rich.
The dropouts and the kids with bad results have been proven in many cases to be more
successful in life than the nerds, but these cases come out more as exceptions of a
distressed majority.
On the other hand, we Americans like to brag that we are the best of the best, and that
goes in flagrant contradiction with the sad realities of the international tests as Pisa
previously analyzed in detail, Olympiads (Physics, Math, Chem., etc.).
Recently we learned that the rich 10% of population are more prone to cheating, because
their kids are suffering from “affluenza”, and start performing in average worse than
middle-class kids. Looking statistically at the cheating phenomenon in US colleges, the
weight trends to be under few %, but that is a hot issue, and will never be precisely
known.
It has been shown that kids from poor families are distracted and under-perform, and the
only proven solution is to enroll them in a boarding school, one year for free, and then
free based on merit. In essence, a Boarding School is a college preparatory institution
where students and teachers live and study together in a safe and secure campus
environment. The only problem is that it is necessary to lower the admission age to as
low as 6 years old, kindergarten age, in order to assure them a solid early education and
prevent them from being already formed and prone to failure by parents who cannot
handle them.
In an “advanced society” based on speeches and connections, as the US society, the
theorists got the monopoly of education in the last 50 years, and the manuals became very
theoretical, often disconnected from reality and with doubtful practical use, and AP
manuals excel in verbosity. In nowadays learning literature, chemistry, physics or math
learning almost makes no difference, because most of it is addressing the memorization
and reciting mechanism, and very little the judgment and cognitive functions similar to

1
computer games that develop the connection between eye and fingers avoiding the deep
brain.
Moreover, each class syllabus became independent and non-synchronized with other past
or parallel classes; therefore one subject taught now does not relate to subjects taught in
the past. A Physics syllabus is not waiting for a mathematical apparatus to be taught,
understood and used in a math class, therefore students will have difficulties in Physics
classes. More important, there is no correlation between classes and day-by-day realities.
For the sake of nice theoretical expressions, the reality of the nature experiment is lost,
and as some give credit to Einstein for the saying: “When the theory does not match the
experimental data, change that data!” Our school seems to do exactly that.
In support of my statement, I proposed a problem from the daily life, using a property of
nature that accompanies us the entire life – friction! We encounter and use it in order to
walk, crawl, roll, drive, grab objects, touch, etc. from early childhood to death.
The question was: how many educators and students understand these fundamental
manifestations of nature and are able to use them to solve a day by day life problem?
I expected teachers and College students to know that for an entity not relating too much
to other entities. The friction (a) is what generates and limits all the forces for movement.
Then, they should have been able to understand the limits of adhesion (b), that is
friction ellipse: if an object is using all its friction on a direction and is skidding, it also
loses all control and stability on any other direction.
That happened most recently with a Nike sport shoe during a basketball mach when a
sport “celebrity” fell unexpectedly.
Then another notion was about air resistance as aerodynamic force (c) and wind, air
pressure, air density variation (d).
I assembled all these elements in a daily life problem involving high performance cars, to
make it more attractive, and compared an imaginary vehicle with insane power, as Elon
Musk recently proposed for the fun of it, to some real high performance cars, in order to
highlight the differences, and not only the fact that are very expensive, and that’s why
they can do anything they like…(Hi, hi).
My intuition and factual data told me that these elements were not taught in schools well
enough, but I had not anticipated that the reality was so bad, and even the teachers are
strangers to the subject, although they are driving daily without understanding what
happens under their seat. No worries, nowadays the cars are smarter, to compensate for
their drivers.

The very sad result:We have received 3 answers only, in 2 months: one clearly did not
understand the problem and failed from the very beginning, one incomplete, making only
1 question out of 5 but good, and one better, but I had to disqualify it because he was
outside Los Alamos area, (Dr. Mateescu from NJIT), who is also my friend, and is
teaching Physics and Mathematics in New Jersey area. Because he met fully all
conditions to be disqualified, I used his cooperation to elaborate the answer in a more
student-accessible manner.
We awarded an honorable mention only, and no 1-3 prizes as promised and we are now
publishing the solution for the problem, with the associated details in order to clearly
place the border between our approximations and reality.

2
The problem challenge and competition announced on Jan. 29, 2019 see link:
https://losalamosreporter.com/2019/01/29/u-s-education-is-in-deep-trouble-and-there-is-
no-easy-solution/
“
As a proof of my statement, I challenge the science teachers, students and community
members to solve the problem in the picture below, taken from normal life, because I
believe that very few of them understand it and can solve it, and therefore it is not
possible to transmit this knowledge to students.

For those most advanced there are two extra questions:

4 If the Cy=0.5, the lateral surface is 5 m2 and cross wind is 20 m/s, in Los Alamos, what
will be the movement of the vehicle accelerating forward on the x direction?
Cx, Cy are the aerodynamic coefficients for movement of air, x is forward, y is lateral
and z is upwards, g=10 m/s2.
5 What power is reasonable for the vehicle and how does it have to be applied in order to
minimize the acceleration time?

A competition will be organized, and a $200 will be paid for the first place, $100 second
place, $50 third place, and 5 honorable mentions (gift cards) will be given to first
qualified participants (K-12 students and educators only).
Please send your solution by e-mail at laaos@laaos.org with title “Car movement, insane
acceleration, solution” no later than 1 mo. after publication, the results and prizes will be
given after 2 weeks from deadline, and will be published.
“

3
Hints and clarifications given on Feb. 17, and extending the deadline for March 18:
https://losalamosreporter.com/2019/02/17/clarifications-and-hints-on-laas-math-contest-
questions/
“
The problem is as follows:
1a – find the acceleration, speed and space variation with time for the vehicle as seen on vehicle’s regular
speedometer, and as seen from outside the vehicle, (or, say, indications of a smart GPS onboard), without
considering any aerodynamic drag force.
1b – the same problem with drag force

2. – Was improper, because it created a disadvantage for girls, who had a different education and are not so
interested in high performance vehicles’ science; the students would waste their time with identifying
vehicles. We switched to finding the performance – power, speed, acceleration, mass to put into equations.

The vehicle is Lamborghini Evo and can be easy found by a goggle search:
but here it is:
https://www.lamborghinipalmbeach.com/blog/performance-specs-for-the-lamborghini-huracan-evo/
“The Evo features a 5.2-liter 10-cylinder engine that outputs a massive 640 horsepower (470 kW)
and 443 pound-feet (600 Nm) of torque. These come at 8,000 and 6,500 rpm respectively and
push a vehicle whose dry weight is a mere 3,135 lb (1,422 kg) – that's about 4.9 pounds per
horsepower. The boosting and lightweight components of the engine come thanks in part to a
titanium intake and lightweight exhaust.
Power still comes from a 5.0-liter V10 in the Performance, but Lamborghini has managed to free
up another 38 hp (28 kW) over the standard car for peak power of 640 hp (477 kW) and peak
torque of 600 Nm. The 100 km/h (62 mph) sprint takes just 2.9 seconds, and the car doesn't stop
pulling until the needle is north of 325 km/h (202 mph).”

The intended question may be reformulated like that:

2. Use the data from Evo and calculate acceleration, speed, space variation and explain the differences
obtained with and without aerodynamic drag force.

3. Same as 2 but for another car: Aston Martin’s Valkyrie:

“The car contains a 6.5-litre naturally-aspirated V12 engine tailored by Cosworth, which was
initially planned to produce around 1,000 hp (746 kW; 1,014 PS), but it was later announced in
June 2017 that the engine would produce 1,130 hp (843 kW; 1,146 PS) @ 10,500 rpm with a
redline of 11,000 rpm. At the same time the power output was released, the weight was also
mentioned, at 1,030 kg (2,271 lb), which surpasses the intended 1:1 power-to-weight ratio, with
1,097 hp (818 kW; 1,112 PS) per ton, achieving a zero to 60 mph (97 km/h) time of 2.5
seconds; speed 250 mph = 402 km/h = 112 m/s” The emphasis
was on aerodynamics as presented in the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfuGE9sI18U
but updated and customized to our problem

Question 4: “If the Cy=0.5, the lateral surface is 5 m2 and cross wind is 20 m/s, in Los Alamos, what will
be the movement of the vehicle accelerating forward after x direction? Cx, Cy are the aerodynamic
coefficients for movement of air, x is forward, y is lateral and z is upwards, g=10 m/s2.”
Apply this to point 1a and 1b; one needs to analyze the lateral stability and behavior.
“

4
SOLUTION to Problem questions:
1a. Find acceleration, speed and space without any drag force:
Note: accurate arithmetic was not a priority; that is why the parameter values have been
given approximated to nearest integer.
Data:
P=10 MW,
g=10 m/s2 instead of 9.80665 m/s2
m=1000 Kg,
μ=1; instead of 0.8 –0.7 for dry asphalt/tire
Wheel perimeter= pw=1m
Note:
1. Power is delivered by the engine to the wheels of the car that has integral
traction, with all differential gears locked. (that to prevent differential allowed
skidding)
2. What is difference between slip and skid?
slip is more or less the same thing but its never used in terms of a car tire. Skid is the
usual term used when a car tire slips or slides. ... Skid comes after a slip, when one
or more wheel slips causes the other wheels to loose traction and thus cause the
vehicle to go off or when you are braking and wheels lock up
m ⎡ m ⎤ ⎡m⎤
From the power formula: P[W ] = F [ N ] × v[ ] = m[kg ] × a ⎢ 2 ⎥ × v ⎢ ⎥
s ⎣s ⎦ ⎣ s ⎦
one may easily see that a v=0 the force at the wheel is infinite giving an infinite initial
acceleration, but in the wheel rotation only.
The wheel sits on the ground and the maximum force ground may oppose and push the
⎡m⎤
car is the friction force that is: F f = m[kg ]× g ⎢ 2 ⎥ × μ and that limits the wheel’s speed.
⎣s ⎦
Here was expected a fundamental knowledge and understanding: “Any entity having its
thrust by interacting
with the ground, has its
maximum propulsion
force limited by this
interaction – in case of
friction the maximum
thrust is equal with the
static friction force.

The reality as shown in

curves nearby is
considered tire
engineering, a kind of
“rocket science” and
was graciously ignored
in schools, although it
Fig. 1 – Tire/ground friction coefficient details applies to any car, and
when one ignores or not

5
understands it, they happen to pay dearly for that.
This shows that in real life friction coefficient “μ” is a function of many parameters and
is not a constant, as physics classes approximate.
In our case, situation is even worse: we set that coefficient μ = 1 just to simplify the
calculations.
No matter how big the torque in the wheel is, the force pushing the car forward is the
force of (static) friction, which is as follows:
The friction force is the coefficient of friction multiplied by the normal force;
and the normal force is equal to the weight on horizontal surfaces:
⎡m⎤
F f = μN = μmg = 1 × 10 ⎢ 2 ⎥ × 1,000[kg ] = 10,000[N ] = 10[kN ]
⎣s ⎦
All other dynamics considerations that are in play in real cases (tire/street drag force,
anti-portance (anti-lift) wings, etc.), are ignored at this point.
In the same time the force opposing to wheel movement is approximated with friction
force “ Ff ” only.
The power is integrally applied to the wheel at t(0)=0 [s]and it is opposed by the
vehicle’s friction force, and because has no kinetic momentum after a short instance of
infinite acceleration the wheel speed sets at 1000 m/s being inside speedometer’s speed
7
⎡ m ⎤ P[W ] 10 ⎡m⎤
indication, given by the formula: v ⎢ ⎥ = = 4 = 1,000⎢ ⎥
⎣ s ⎦ F [ N ] 10 ⎣s⎦

Fig. 2 – Details on specific speed-acceleration power correlations with examples

6
Fig. 2 shows in double logarithmic scale (because in linear scale a right hyperbola was
difficult to visualize in such detail) the normalized power, as functions of acceleration
and speed and was populated with information on actual speed records. No matter the
wheel speed the vehicle will be pushed forward by a force equal with the friction force of
the driving wheels (all wheels in our case) and the acceleration will be g as resulted from
F μmg ⎡m⎤
the formula: a = = = μg = 10⎢ 2 ⎥ and v = g × t s
m m ⎣s ⎦
Therefore the vehicle will accelerate with g until reaches the wheels’ speed, and then will
2P
Î v(t ) =
P dv dv
have a milder acceleration a = = from: P = Fv = mv t and
vm dt dt m
that is true after ts when wheel is not skidding anymore.
Table 1 – Synthesis of the results up to now
slip Slip Slip speed
Machine Power (w) µ g mass time speed km/h
Insane 10000000 1 10 1000 100 1000 3600
Lamborghini 470000 1 10 1422 3.3 33.05 119
Valkyrie 843000 1 10 1030 8.2 81.84 294.6

There are two operating regimes: before the slip time and after the slip time, defined as
the moment when the tire tangential speed is equal with car speed and slip disappears
because the excess power is consumed, P = Fv and all power is used to support a
reasonable force which does not breaks tire/ground adhesion at a certain speed.

The slip time ts= t1 is the moment when car’s speed equals the tire’s slip speed and relative
speed difference between tire and road disappears.
Conversely, we define the slip speed v1 and the skid space x1 .
P
v1 = . Obviously, x1 = μ gt12 / 2 .
μg
1) Speed
It is easier to start with the speed in order to calculate the acceleration and the
space as a function of time.
For t ≤ t1 , we have a pure motion (F= friction force): v = μ gt .
Fir t > t1 , the speed will be the solution of the differential equation
dv
P = mv , with the “initial” condition v(t1 ) = v1 .
dt
2P
The variables are separable, and the solution will be v 2 (t ) = t + K . After applying the
m
initial condition and substituting the convenient constant observables, we reach the
formula for the speed:

⎧⎪ μ gt , t ≤ t1 ⎧⎪ μ gt , t ≤ t1
v (t ) = ⎨ or v (t ) = ⎨
⎪⎩ P / m 2t − t1 , t > t1 ⎪⎩ μ gt1 2t − t1 , t > t1

7
2) Acceleration 

Now it is easier to calculate the acceleration, after we have the speed.

⎧ μ g , t ≤ t1 ⎧ μ g , t ≤ t1
⎪ ⎪
a(t ) = ⎨ P or a(t ) = ⎨ v1
⎪ mv(t ) , t > t1 ⎪ μ g v(t ) , t > t1
⎩ ⎩
3) The space or distance x(t)
The only long part is calculating x(t) after the slip threshold.

3
1
x(t ) = ∫ v(t )dt = μ g t1 (2t − t1 ) 2 + K , where the integration constant is given by the
3
condition x(t1 ) = x1

After all the substitutions, we have

⎧ gt 2
⎪⎪ μ , t ≤ t1
x(t ) = ⎨ 2
⎪ 1 μ gt 2 + 1 μ g t (2t − t )3/ 2 , t > t
⎪⎩ 6 1
3
1 1 1

Table 2 - The vehicle acceleration calculated and measured:

Vehicle Type Insane Lamborghini Aston Martin
power Evo Valkyrie
Power 10 MW 470 kW 847kW
Mass [kg] 1000 1422 1030
T(0-100 km/h) /acc 2.77 s/ 10 2.9/9.55 2.5??/10.72
ts – slip time calculated 100 s 3.7 8
Max speed in air 1 bar 90.3* 112*
* measured with air drag force at sea level.
From the table 2, one may easy see that the slip time is proportional with the engine
power. When looking at the 0-100 km/s (which is about 27.7 m/s) some anomalous
behavior is observed. First in our case we got 2.77 s as we considered a higher g about 10
instead 9.8065 m/s2 and μ =1 instead 0.8 or 0.9 in the best cases. With the right g we got
2.82 s, and with a little bit smaller friction coefficient by only 5% we get about 3 seconds
or more.
The real reasons for obtaining this short time acceleration is the use of aerodynamic wing
/ground effect that increases the normal force with the speed increase. In studies, at
nominal speed Aston Martin showed the normal force for Valkyrie is about 2.7 its weight
with benefic effect in shortening the breaking space and increased road stability.
This is only a qualitative explanation; the formulae are complicated, and only numeric
solutions may benchmark successfully the reality.
Time evolution is given by the formula:
a(t) =1g t:= 0 to Tskidding
=P/mv t > Tskidding

8
The formula for speed is: v=g t for a=g (skidding wheel) and
2P P
v= t − t1G for a<g where t1G = -
m 2mg 2
such as the straight line v=gt comes tangent to the curve v ≈ k t .
The equations for space as function of t are the following:

9
 This function is important when one wants to set a speed record on a limited track, such
as Bonneville, UT, where the salt flats are about 12 miles long and 5 miles wide with
total area coverage of just over 46 square miles. Therefore, one has to accelerate,
maintain speed for about 1 mile and decelerate, in order for the pilot to end the test in one
piece.
Great Salt Lake averages approximately 75 miles long by 35 miles wide at a surface
elevation of about 4,200 feet. (gSLC=9.79787 +/−0.00002)m/s2 μ=0.45-0.5
temperature = 13.3 deg c
relative humidity = 28%
uncorrected barometer* = 877.71 hPa
corrected barometer* = 1023.43 hPa
wind speed = 8.77 kph
wind direction* = NE (67°)
• dew point = 24 deg c
• saturation pressure = 15.302 hPa
• vapor pressure = 4.285 hPa
• grains = 21.4
• air density (w/o water vapor) = 87%
• air density (w water vapor) = 87%
• density altitude = 1444.61 m
- track elevation: 4212.6 ft
p
- -track lat, long: 40.7776, -113.8646 therefore ρ=
RSP T
where: p is the absolute pressure in Pa,
T is the absolute temperature of air in K, and
Rsp = 287.052 J·kg-¹·K-¹ is the specific gas constant.
Note that because we consider air as an ideal gas, and only dry air, the result of
calculations is only an approximation. The most accurate results can be obtained at low
temperature and pressure values (at high altitudes!).
g
⎡ T ⎤ 0M
P = Pb ⎢ b ⎥ e RLb In these equations all values with index b are used from Table 1:
⎣ TM ⎦
Pb is the base static pressure of the layer b in Pa
Tb is the base temperature of the layer b in K
Lb is the base temperature lapse rate of the layer b in K/m
Hb is the base geopotential height of the layer b in m
H is the geopotential height above sea level in m
R = 8.31432·10³ N m kmol-¹ K-¹ is the universal gas constant
g0 = 9.80665 m/s² is the gravitational acceleration

For the moment seems strange to you why I came with these details, but soon in the cross
wind question and reasonable application of power question, the student will understand
that in order to prepare a successful test one have to consider all these details and their
potential change with exceptional attention, for the time frame of less than 3 min. such a
test requires.

10
1b. Introducing the air resistance, we are given the following information:

Table 3 – Review of known data on the vehicles:

Vehicle Type Insane Power Lamborghini Aston Martin
Evo Valkerie
Power 10 MW 470 kW 847kW
Mass [kg] 1000 1422 1030
T(0-100 km/h) /acc 2.77 s/ 10 2.9/9.55 2.5??/10.72
Tskidding 100 s 3.7 8
Max speed in air 1 bar 197.64 90.3* 112*
2
Syz -effective 2m
Cx- aerodynamic coeficient 0.2 0.15 0.15
Max speed at los Alamos = ? 223.61 100.96 125.22
We see that the “Insane power” given in the problem is 20 times to 10 times greater than
the power used on high performance vehicles, and now is the time for the students to
understand why.
The acceleration time for the real vehicles is slipping outside of just gravity and friction,
and previously it was explained that constructors use aerodynamics laws to help with that
and obtain practical accelerations a little bit bigger than what was really permitted by
friction.
Car skidding is not seen as a positive thing, because it triggers high tire wear and loss of
control, and the power level of real vehicles does not facilitate this for too long, that is 3
seconds and respectively 8 seconds in our study case, while insane power delivers insane
long skidding time, which can not be sustained in reality, and hasn’t got any practicality.
Aerodynamic coefficient is made as low as possible, and the maximum speed in Los
Alamos might be a few percent higher, because atmosphere is less dense, more exactly
being 80% from the sea level, aside from weather fluctuations.
The traction force is balanced by the aerodynamic drag, but what is the traction force? In
the case of “insane power”, up to the slope speed limit (1000 [m/s]) friction force is in
fact the maximum possible traction force that can be applied on vehicle:
1 1
Ft = μMg = 10kN = C x S yz ρ (h)v 2 = 0.2 × 2 × 1.28 × p (h) × v 2 at sea level p(h) =1, while
2 2
at Los Alamos which is at 7200 ft altitude p(7200’)=0.8 ; ρ= 1[kg/m3]
2μmg 20000 ⎡m⎤
v(7200' ;273K ) = = = 100 5 = 223.6⎢ ⎥ =805 km/h=503 mph;
ρSC .4 ⎣s⎦
instead of 197 [m/s]=445 mph at sea level.
Attention: During all this time the wheels are skidding with 1000 [m/s]=3600[km/h]=
=2,250 mph = 2.95 Mach, an insane rotation speed that sets them on fire in few seconds,
but in the problem we chose to ignore all these aspects.
At this moment, one may have an answer of: What means sane, super-high power?
Is such power that when the aerodynamic speed limit occurs the wheels not to slip.
Set: v=250 [m/s]; F=10 kN and get P=F*v=2.5 MW at Maximum maximorum.
Because the power of the other vehicles mentioned is lower, the traction force is given by
dv
the maximum power curve (right hyperbola) given by equation: P = Mav = Mv and
dt

11
for a pressure of 1 bar we got a complicated solution, and we prefer to do this estimation
first:
As we do not know, all the details, we assumed the cross section about 2 m2 and the
aerodynamic coefficient about 0.2 in spite it might as low as 0.15 by expert guess and we
calculated the aerodynamic drag force, and compared with the traction force resulted
from Power limitation formula above.
Table 4 – Real cars force estimation
Evo AMV
Traction force: 5,204.87 7,562.5
Friction force 14,220 10,300
Aerodynamic f. 2087.45 3211.26
Ratio 40% 42%
We observe that available traction force is by a factor of 2.5 bigger than the power that
goes into non-aerodynamic components of the drag force or in other words the street
curve has tire-street friction dominate over aerodynamics.
If the same ratio may apply to the imaginary vehicle “a”, the nominal speed will remain
the same, but the tire spinning and skidding speed will decrease from 1000 m/s down to
625 m/s. A reasonable maximum power for this circumstance will be 3.3 MW instead of
10 MW, because all the excess of power is simply useless, but we may put as much as
5MW with similar aerodynamics improvements as real car have, and get higher speed,
thanks to an aerodynamic down force that can be 4 times bigger than the car’s weight.
For the students, we detail here as we talked about street curve, and here are some details
on that also named RLR.
>Î> For the record: The formula for Road Load Resistance may be reduced to:

where: RLR = Road Load Resistance force

R0 = Residual force due to adhesion, sticking phenomena occurring at rest to movement transition
usually small and neglected
R1 = R rolling=Cr*W=Rolling Coefficient * Vehicle weight
Nf*b/r=Normal force*rolling resistance coefficient (coefficient of rolling friction)/ wheel radius

R2 = R viscous + R air +R rolling (viscous-plastic term)

12
R air = ½* air density (at certain altitude)*Sp (velocity vector perpendicular section)* Cd
(drag coefficient)

R3 = R air turbo-dynamics and vortexes

Facc = Acceleration force limited by the maximal power - RLP /v, or Maximal torque –
Resistive already used torque, or generically called force at wheel.
Fs/r = Force on slopes and ramps
<Í<
After we got a flavor on what means a more complete calculation let’s try to solve the
movement equations for the real vehicles:
1
With aerodynamic resistance and no wind Ft = C x S yz ρ (h, T )v 2 and considering again
2
that traction force remain constant with no power limiting, in the insane power condition,
1 dv
Newton’s second law gives: μmg − C x S yz ρ (h)v 2 = m ; with the initial condition
2 dt
v(0) = 0 ; good only for the case when wheels slip and friction is the traction force.
1
To simplify, we define α = ρ (h, T )S yz C x . Then μ g − α v 2 = dv / dt with solution:
2m
⎛ ρ (h, T ) S yz C x ⎞
v(t )h ,T =
μg
α
(
tanh t αμg = )
2μgm
S yz C x ρ (h, T )
tanh⎜ t
⎜ 2m
μg ⎟ .  
⎟
⎝ ⎠
Obviously, there is an asymptotic behavior, where the aerodynamic drag force, v2 term,
balances completely the friction force acting as thrust force, and the limit speed will be
1 μ
given by the equation: μ mg − ρ ACv 2 = 0 with the solution vlim = lim v(t ) =
2 t →∞ α

2μgm ⎛ ρ (h, T ) S yz C x ⎞ 2μgm

v(t )h ,T = lim v(t ) = tanh⎜ t μg ⎟ = ;
t →∞ S yz C x ρ (h, T ) ⎜
⎝ 2m ⎟
⎠ S yz C x ρ (h, T )

and this is true for insane power car only and was already calculated above.
We now need to calculate the aerodynamic behavior for the real cars in idealized
conditions where from the forces we apply only the aerodynamic viscous force.

13
In this case we need to know the values for the slip disappearance speed vs and for the
time it takes to reach that speed ts. and in order to do this we have to use the inverse of
P
tanh in both terms of the time of speed equation in slip speed point v s = and we get:
μmg

1 ⎡ 1+ x ⎤ P S yz Cx ρ ρ S yz Cx
ts = ⎢ ln ⎥ ; Inv Tanh[ ]=t μg
2 ⎣ 1− x ⎦ μ mg 2μ mg 2m

⎡ P S yz C x ρ ⎤
⎢ 1+ ⎥
2m 1⎢ μmg 2μmg ⎥
ts = ln ; which will be longer than previously
ρS yz C x μg 2 ⎢ S yz C x ρ ⎥
⎢ 1− P ⎥
⎢⎣ μmg 2μmg ⎥⎦
calculated times.
From this moment (ts; vs ) the thrust force changes due to power limitations and the
P 1 dv
Newton’s equation becomes: − ρ (h, T )C x S yz v x2 = m ; where v=vx becomes:
v 2 dt
P ρSC 2 dv
− v = in terms of accelerations or unitary mass, and for the sake of simple
mv 2m dt
ρSC P
expression we use notation change: α = ;K β = and the integrand may be written
2m m
as:
v A A2 v + A3
= 1 1 1 + 2 ; where A1, A2, A3, will be found by
β −αv 3 1 1 2
β 3 − α 3 v β 3 + β 3α 3 v + α 3 v 2

identification in the equation coefficients after bringing to the same denominator.

Students will recognize easily the partial fractions method of integration.
After integration the solution is:
⎡ ⎛ α ⎞ ⎤
⎜1+ 2 ⎟
1
⎢
⎢ ⎜ β ⎟ ⎛ 3 2 1
⎞ ⎛ 32 1 1 2
⎞⎥
2 ⎥
t+K = 2 3 arctan v + 2 ln⎜⎜ β − α v ⎟⎟ − ln⎜⎜ β + β α v + α v ⎟⎟ ;
3 3 3 3

63 βα 2 ⎢ ⎜ 3 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎥⎥
⎢ ⎜ ⎟
⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦
now we calculate the integration constant K in the slip disappearance moment [ts ; vs ]
previously calculated:
⎡ ⎛ α ⎞ ⎤
⎢ ⎜1+ 2 ⎟ ⎥
1 ⎢ ⎜ β ⎟ ⎛ 3 2 1
⎞ ⎛ 3 2 1 1 2
2 ⎞⎥
ts + K = 2 3 arctan ⎜ 3 ⎟ ⎜
v s + 2 ln⎜ β − α v s ⎟ − ln⎜ β + β α v s + α v s ⎟
3 3 3 ⎟
63 βα 2 ⎢ ⎜ 3 ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠⎥⎥
⎢ ⎜ ⎟
⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦
as one may see it still is an analytical solution, but starts to be rather complicated, and it
is much easer to obtain the movement laws a(t), v(t), d(t) and v(d) numerically, using
MS-Excel or other equivalent code.

14
The evolution of the movement parameters in Los Alamos at 7200 ft altitude and
In Bonneville salt track at 4212 ft altitude with 0.5 friction coefficient.

It is observed that the maximum speed of the manufacturer (dashed lines) is smaller than
these theoretical speeds, because we have ignored all the other drag forces.

15
3. Lateral wind :
Data given: V wind = 20 m/s acting perpendicular as cross wind along axes y
Cy=0.5; Sxz=5 m2
Solution:
The critical knowledge is the ellipse of adhesion/friction, from which one finds that when
the friction force is completely used on one direction for traction or skidding sometimes
during a hard break as for example: F i = F fri = μ i mg than on every other direction the
object is instable and behaves as being floating on an air cushion.
Therefore, on the skidding duration the tires will not oppose to wind and the force
pushing the car aside along perpendicular axis will be:
1
( )
Fy = C y S xz ρ (h ) v wind − v y = Ma y
2
2

In the case of the vehicle from our problem, this action will take place for 100 seconds
without air frontal resistance and all the time with air frontal resistance.
For Evo only 3.7 seconds and for Valkyrie only 8 seconds the following charts are giving
Lateral acceleration, lateral speed, lateral displacement as function of time for each
vehicle as well the lateral speed as function of longitudinal speed and bearing angle,
where along x axis is bearing=0, and Sxz is
along x (rolling direction) and z (up/down
direction) perpendicular on y (lateral direction).
Again a flavor of reality:
The circle of forces, traction circle, friction
circle, or friction ellipse is a useful way to think
about the dynamic interaction between a
vehicle's tire and the road surface. The diagram
below shows the tire from above, so that the
road surface lies in the x-y plane. The vehicle to
which the tire is attached is moving in the
positive y direction.

FRICTION CIRCLE (The Basic Theory)

The friction circle concept was made popular in the 1960s and it is still important today
as a diagnostic tool. This tool can be used with any type of car (or truck) to graphically
represent traction capacity or help identify why your car has lost traction.
If you are a race driver, the friction circle theory can help you understand the traction
limits of your race car. If you are the crew chief or set-up man, the friction circle theory
can help you understand what items need to
be adjusted on the race car.
Background Science
The maximum traction that a tire generates
can be described by the simple equation
F = L x Cf (where F is the traction force, L is
the load or weight on the tire and Cf is the
coefficient of friction for the rubber on the
ground surface).

16
The illustration above shows the traction force to the front or rear; however, the traction
force can be generated to the side or any other direction in the horizontal plane. Because
the tire can develop the force in any direction on the horizontal plane, it provides the
basis for the friction circle theory.
Another View
Rather than looking at the traction force from the side view of the tire, the friction circle
looks at the traction force at the contact patch. The illustration below shows a force
arrow to the right indicating that the traction force is being used to resist lateral motion.

If all of the available traction were to be used in the rearward direction, as during
acceleration, then the traction force arrow would be pointing to the rear as seen below.
Because the tire's traction force can be in any direction, the force arrow can also point in
any direction. So now imagine the force arrow was to sweep 360 degrees, like the hands
on a clock. The limit of the arrow would then describe a circle (see example below).

This is the basis of the friction circle theory. The circle is simply a graphic means of
illustrating that the tire's maximum traction can be developed in any direction.

17
Basic Application Of The Theory
Now, imagine that you are driving your car in a straight line and you slam on the brakes
to the point that the wheels almost lock up. The tires are now at the limit of their traction
and the arrow on the friction circle would be pointing to the front and at the limit of the
circle.
If you try to turn the steering wheel in this condition, the tires will start to slide because
there is no lateral force available. However, if less brake was applied so that the force
arrow did not reach the limit of the circle, then some traction force would be available
for turning (see example below).
As long as the combination of forces (braking and turning or acceleration and turning)
creates a resulting force that is inside the friction circle, then the tire will have traction.
If the resulting force tries to exceed the friction circle, then the tire will break traction
and start to slide
Now back to our problem:
At the very beginning a question appears reasonable: What happened first?
(a) Cross Wind or the
(b) Insane acceleration?
In a normal life, wind and
acceleration are applied
randomly and work
together sharing the
adhesion ellipse (circle).
Let’s consider at t=0 that a
20 m/s wind is present,
acting perpendicular on the
vehicle’s Sxz surface with a
Cy=0.5, as problem asked.
We call it Fy.
Vehicle is at rest, so vy=0
and the lateral wind
pushing force is maximum
as green arrow shows. The driver releases the “insane” power into the wheel and the
wheel start spinning and slipping opposing a friction force Fx where:
Fx (t ) = ( μmg ) 2 − Fy2 (t ) which sets the slipping speed at a value v s (t ) =
P
,
Fx (t )
because vy varies in time. Makes vslip vary and that makes Fx vary, up to an upper limit
P
where the power limit is reached and v slip final
= = v slip
initial
2

(μmg )2 − ⎛⎜ 1 C y S xz ρ (h, T )vwind

2 ⎞
⎟
⎝2 ⎠
This produces a transitory behavior where the vehicle drifts lateral and accelerates
forward, with a variable friction force.
We presented the solutions for Evo and Insane power, in order to compare them on
Bonneville salt track. In the case of Insane 10 MW power, the wheel will continuously be
slipping at a speed of 2000 m/s, leaving the car laterally unstable, therefore the wind was
pushing it until the cars lateral drift speed vy equals the wind speed and goes reaching the

18
forward speed limit of 150 m/s forward and 20 m/s lateral. Different is Lamborghini
Evo’s behavior that drifts laterally only when the car was skidding, and after that it slows
down and stabilizes, at 500 m parallel with the speed track continuing to accelerate
forward until reaching the speed limit of 130 m/s.

Both behaviors are deeply unacceptable for a speed track that is 100 m wide only.
We did not show the Valkyrie, because due to higher power, and same weight, the
behavior on salt track is almost similar to insane power, fact that shows that a power
above 1 MW is completely useless in this case with 0.5 friction coefficient, and higher
mass, as Evo has may be helpful to reach higher speed.
For the problem solution, for us it was enough that the professor and student to
understand that there is a dynamic equilibrium among all forces applied on a vehicle, that
in the end are compensated from the friction force, and whenever this is not enough
vehicle slips and loses control on any other direction, can be easy skidded in any
direction. We accepted solutions like this:
1. For the insane power vehicle without frontal aerodynamic force, the vehicle will
slip for about 100 seconds and this time it will drift laterally pushed by the wind. When
skidding stops, the vehicle will break with all the friction force, at maximum with an
acceleration g from about 20 m/s taking more than 20 m and 2 s to come to rest on y
direction at second 102 while moving forward with over 1000 m/s (3 times the speed of
sound = very unrealistic)
2. With aerodynamic resistance, as was previously shown, the speed is limited at
about 200+ m/s, while the wheels spin with 1000 m/s and the drift speed reaches the wind
speed and never stops from that.
3. For Evo, this drift skidding takes about 3+ seconds, and after 4+ seconds the
vehicle is stabilized, while for Valkyrie the process takes about 9-10+ seconds, and the
drift and speed may be calculated.
Note: “+” means something more because with modifications in traction force and
acceleration the slip time is increasing.
4. What is to take home from here as basic knowledge for all using tires is that when
one has another force acting on the vehicle, it loses the reserve force at the wheel, and
breaking, stirring and acceleration are affected. If one knows about this in advance and
applies it, they lose the opportunity to learn about it after an accident…
5. To understand that weight of the car matters improving traction and maximum speed
against wind and aerodynamic drag force, if the car has enough power to compensate for
the other drag forces. As we have seen in simulations for Bonneville salt track, Valkyrie,

19
a 1 ton car at about 1MW performs about the same as 1 ton car with 10 MW power,
because the excess in weight improved traction against aerodynamic drag force.
5. 4 Reasonable power and power application
Starting with the adhesion ellipse, we start to build the forces inside in the order of
occurrence from center to
circumference.
The ellipse has the axis x
determined by the forward
adhesion or friction force
with the wheels locked, and
the lateral force y as given by
the vehicle’s weight times the
lateral friction coefficient.

Suppose a cross wind from

left comes first, and takes
from adhesion forces a force
called wind force:
1
( )
Fy = C y S xz ρ (h ) v wind − v y
2
2

where the vehicle is at rest

with respect to the y direction
displacement.
The adhesion reserve force or
available force will be
calculated, as seen on the
chart, and this is dimmed by a few percent in order to assure the stability, and that is the
traction force that can be applied, from where one may calculate the propulsion torque in
the wheel, and one has to estimate the rest of the forces that adds in the wheel in order to
be able to deliver the maximum reasonable traction force, in order to prevent skidding
and loss of stability on the desired trajectory. Turning forces are also dynamically added
to the perpendicular forces, that may not be
wind only, but a lateral slope also. That is
what adhesion control system does, called
ABS (Anti-Blocking System) for breaking and
ATS/F (Adhesion/Automatic Traction
System/Force) for acceleration.
With a power from 2 to 3.3 MW one may
reach a speed and acceleration given in the
chart supposing a 20 m/s cross wind and
without wind, and supposing that about 40%
of the power is going to balance aerodynamic
force at nominal speed.
The subject was previously clarified before, where the maximum power still useful might
be about 5 MW, but that attracts a lot of other technologic complications, so I’ll skip.

20
Previous Expectations:
What is presented here represents the maximum level of work for this problem, because
that might be about the limits of decent public knowledge on the subject, and further
details are bound to a specialization in automotive technology.
From professors:
1. Pct. 1 – Know that any object crawling or rolling on ground does not have a thrust
bigger than the skidding/slip friction force.
2. At pct. 2, please observe that with just wheel propulsion speed of sound can not be
reached and a higher force than friction is needed – turbines or rockets have to be used.
3. Understand performances of high-performance vehicles through adhesion ellipse
properties and go above and beyond with explanations in other important current
applications and normal life incidents from grip on objects to various movement in
contact with other objects.
4. Be able to develop analytical equations as much as reasonable augmented by digital
simulations, as for the case of movement with aerodynamic force and lateral wind.
5. Know all the students were expected to know in more detail.
From students:
1. Know that the maximum traction force is friction force and
2. Positively identify the vehicles and collect their parameters of interest
3. Be able to calculate the movement laws in vacuum
4. Be able to write Newton’s law for aerodynamic resistance
5. Be able to calculate the maximum speed in air
6. Know barometric formula and apply it for air density change
7. Know at qualitative level the adhesion ellipse and
8. be able to give a qualitative interpretation on what happens on cross winds or
lateral tilted roads
9. Produce reasoning for maximum power and power applications while driving.

We are sorry to inform you that only the honorary mention funds have been released as
prize for solving this problem. We also understand that allocating about $20-$50/pg. was
not a challenge good enough to tempt the young generation from Los Alamos to compete
for it, and that’s worrisome, because they put first their “peace of mind”..
I appreciate so much those who had the necessary patience to read up to this point, and I
want to let you knew that the old joke we did when writing government research reports,
where we wrote: “If you, the reader, had the patience to read up to this sentence, you may
claim a $20 beer or wine at your choice”, was not included as feedback of the reading
intensity. (by the way do not try now to read all LANL reports, because they are
management-redacted, and “beer allusions” become classified subject (is a Joke?))
Thank you, for your interest and attention!

Acknowledgement: I have to thank and give all my consideration to Dr. Mateescu from
C,2 who found the challenge amusing and had the time and pleasure to elaborate on
some solutions, make corrections and charts and have a lot of useful talks on education
and this subject.

21