6.3K views

Uploaded by Nate Bocker

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- SAMPLE PHYSICS LAB REPORT KINEMATICS.doc
- PHY10 E102
- E101 - Resolution of Vectors
- phy10L E103 Projectile Motion
- PHY101
- Experiment 101 RESOLUTION OF FORCES
- Analysis
- Experiment 103 Projectile Motion
- Experiment 203 Fe Anne
- Conclusion E105
- E104 Newton's Second Law of Motion
- Conclusion E106
- Kinematics
- Vector Addition
- Questions Exp 106
- Exp 106 Interpretation
- Experiment 202 Fe Anne
- e103 Projectile
- Experiment 3
- PHY11L Experiment 1

You are on page 1of 24

Lab Report

Kinematics

Introduction For the Module AC-5 Laboratory, Group 2 will attempt to demonstrate the properties of Kinematics, using six experiments covering position at a moment in time, velocity at a moment in time, acceleration from an inclined position, the properties of freefalling objects, determining a distance from a final position over a known amount of time, and the horizontal displacement of an object with a given initial velocity. For these laboratories we used the Data Studio Software to graph the varying properties of Kinematics. We will answer the questions posed at the end of each of the experiments we conducted from the Science Workshop Student Workbook for P01, P02, P03, and P05, and the questions given to us in the Kinematics Lab Student Handout for Part II, and Part III. Theory Using the data gathered from a physics experiment, we can obtain useful information about future properties of an object using Kinematics formulas. The properties of Kinematics are Displacement, Velocity, and Acceleration. The variance of each of these properties will determine the state of another property. Displacement is the vector between the initial and final position of an object. The magnitude of displacement is the shortest distance between the initial and final position. This magnitude is measured in units of distance, which for our purposes will be inches(in) or meters(m) x=x-x0

is the relationship of the time it takes an object to distance. Time is measured as the magnitude between the movement and the final movement or t=t-t0. The units of seconds (s), minutes (min) or hours (hr)

Acceleration is the change in velocity over the elapsed period in time. Since velocity is identified as unit of measurement divided by measurement of time, acceleration is measured as the measurement of distance divided by the measurement of time squared.

Figure 1.

The equipment we used, as well as a brief visual of the experimental concept are as follows, for each experiment. These are directly from the Science Workshop Student Workbook. Activity P01: Position and Time Understanding Motion 1 (Motion Sensor)

Qty 1

Qty 1

T o in rfa e te c

Tb a le

U d rs n in M tio 1 P s na dT e n e ta d g o n : o itio n im

Questions 1. In the Graph, what is the slope of the line of best fit for the middle section of your plot? What is the description of your motion? (Example: Constant speed for 2 seconds followed by no motion for 3 seconds, etc.) What would be the physical meaning of a steeper slope on the graph? What would be different about the motion if the slope were negative?

2.

3.

4.

Qt y 1

Qty 1

T o in rfa e te c

Tb a le

U d rs n in M tio 2 V lo itya dT e n e ta d g o n : e c n im

Question 1. For your best attempt, how well did your plot of motion fit the plot that was already in the Graph?

Equipment Needed

Q t y 1 1 1

Equipment Needed

Qt y 1 1 1

Acceleration Sensor (CI-6558) Angle Indicator (inc. w/ Track) Base and Support Rod (ME-9355)

Dynamics Cart (inc. w/ Track) Meter stick 1.2 m Track System (ME9429A)

Questions 1. What is the percent difference between your measured value for g and the accepted value for g? Remember, percent difference = measured accepted 100% accepted

2.

If the mass of the cart is doubled, how are the results affected? Try it. Activity P05: Acceleration of a Freely Falling Picket Fence (Photogate)

Equipment Needed

Q t y 1

Equipment Needed

Qt y 1

Prediction: Sketch a prediction below of a velocity vs. time graph for a freely falling object.

versus time

acceleration (mean)

Questions 1. How does the slope of your velocity versus time graph compare to the accepted value of the acceleration of a free falling object (g = 9.8 m/s2)?

2.

How does the mean of the acceleration from the table compare to the accepted value of the acceleration of a free falling object (g = 9.8 m/s2)? What factors do you think may cause the experimental value to be different from the accepted value?

3.

Part II Determine the time it takes a dune buggy to move a specified distance. Construct a graph of the data (position vs. time), with time as the independent variable. Calculate the slope. Is the slope positive or negative? Why? How can the sign of the slope be altered? Describe the motion of the tractor. Does the positive or negative slope indicate the tractors speed is increasing or decreasing? Using the graph, would a steeper slope indicate faster or slower motion? Repeat using a motion sensor, and record the graph with the slopes included. Develop an equation that best fits the motion of the tractor.

Part III Using the knowledge we have gained, we will calculate the horizontal displacement of an object, given an initial velocity. We will also verify our calculations by selecting an impact point for the object and by testing the calculations we made from the given velocity. Equipment needed: Computer, Data Studio Software, Photogate, Ball Bearing, launch track, yardsticks, ruler, target. Questions 1. Did the ball bearing land where you expected? Why or why not? Explain where the differences between the actual and calculated impact point may occur in your system.

Results P01 Position and Time The graph from Data Source, below, shows the results of trying to match the velocity of an object to a benchmark. We attempted this four times, with the closest match being the last attempt. The graph shows us an objects change in position over a period of time, using the equation for velocity, v=x/t. The answer posed in question 1. was In the Graph, what is the slope of the line of best fit for the middle section of your plot? The formula for finding a slope is m=(y-b)/x. Thus, using the

graph we can say that the slope is .194 for our closest match. Question 2. asks What is the description of your motion? (Example: Constant speed for 2 seconds followed by no motion for 3 seconds, etc.) We can use the graph to gather that there was constant speed for more than 4 seconds, and that since the motion continued past the benchmarked time, the distance continued to increase between the sensor and the object, for an unknown amount of time (the screenshot of the graph cut off the continued motion). In question 3. We are asked What would be the physical meaning of a steeper slope on the graph? We know that a steeper slope would indicate a greater change in distance over a smaller period of time. This would indicate a greater velocity. We answer question 4., What would be different about the motion if the slope were negative? by pointing out that when the direction of the slope changes, it indicates that there is a change in direction, since time is always represented as a positive magnitude. Using the graph from the benchmark we can see that a negative slope indicates the object moves closer to the sensor.

P02 Acceleration The results from the second experiment demonstrate our attempt to match acceleration, the change in velocity over a change in time, which is the equation a=v/t. Our closest match was the second run, shown as the red line on the graph (not the red benchmark line). For our best attempt,we can answer question 1. How well did your plot of motion fit the plot that was already in the Graph? with Our plot was a close match in acceleration, with the closes match being the change in velocity, and the match in time being off further. The graph shows the velocity changed at slightly different times than the bench mark.

P03 Acceleration on an Incline Our results from experiment three indicate that the angle of incline that an object moves directly affects the velocity it moves on that incline, and inversely affects the time it takes to move that distance. It also becomes apparent that gravity, or 9.8m/s2 , remains consistent along the change in hight, independent of how far an object moves along the x axis. By lowering a 117.6cm track 4cm each attempt, with the height moving from 22.5cm to 4cm, and the angles decreasing from 11 to 1, respectively, we can decrease the velocity of the object while increasing the time it takes for the object to move, showing that gravity in the downward is in fact a constant. The equation for gravity can be shown as gsin=a/t, with =arcsin(hight/length). We can show that g=a/tsin. For the accepted changes we can show with the following table how gravity remains constant. Data was only gathered for two angles, due to a malfunction in the sensor. Even so, we can demonstrate that g is a constant.

i g

t h

l e

r u

. 5

. 6

. 3

. 7

. 7

r u

. 5

. 6

. 6

. 2

We answered question 1. What is the percent difference between your measured value for g and the accepted value for g? by using the formula below to show that there was a 7% difference for the first run and a 9% difference for the second.

measured accepted 100% accepted

percent difference =

When we did as suggested in question 2., If the mass of the cart is doubled, how are the results affected? we further demonstrated that while the velocity may increase with added weight, and the time decrease, gravity remains a constant.

P05 Acceleration of a Freely Falling Object In the fourth experiment we conducted, we further showed that gravity is a constant force, accelerating objects downwards. We showed in the third experiment that gravity is a constant acceleration of 9.8m/s2. When an object in freefall, or is moving along the y axis, with no movement along the x axis, the only acceleration is gravity. There is zero acceleration in the x direction. Therefore, the slope of the graph showing a change in velocity over a period of time (v/t) should always equal 9.8m/s2, because the distance directly proportional to time

squared (d t2). We showed with the graphs that the answer to question 1. How does the slope of your velocity versus time graph compare to the accepted value of the acceleration of a free falling object (g = 9.8 m/s2)? and question 2. How does the mean of the acceleration from the table compare to the accepted value of the acceleration of a free falling object (g = 9.8 m/s2)? was that velocity increased directly to 9.8t (v=9.8t, so long as it did not move on the x axis. The variations were as small as +/- .01, or 9%. We determined that using the below formula.

accepted value - exp erimental value x100% accepted value Reminder: percent difference =

The answer we arrived at for question 3. What factors do you think may cause the experimental value to be different from the accepted value? is that due to outside forces, such as aerodynamics of the object, as well as the slightest variations in wind speed along the x axis could have influenced the falling gate.

Prediction: Sketch a prediction below of a velocity vs. time graph for a freely falling object.

Data Table

Part II In part two of the experiment we determined the time it took a dune buggy to move a specified distance. We constructed a graph of the data (position vs. time), with time as an independent variable. We calculated the slope as .312m/s. The slope was positive because we moved the object from the 0 end of a yard stick toward the 36 end, thus giving us an increasing direction away from the observed starting point. Had we moved the object toward the observed start point of 0 from the 36 point, we would have had a negative angle. The tractors speed remained consistent throughout the time it moved, thus, the slope of the graph would be a straight line. The steepness of the graph would indicate a higher velocity, regarles of wether it was positive or negative. We repeated the experiment, this time using the sensor and Data Studio software. To demonstrate how variance in speed influances the angle, we used a different cart, and mover it towards the sensor. The equation that best fits this second movement is .05m/s. This indicates a lower velocity.

Part III The final part of the Kinematics lab had us move an object down a track in order to calculate the horizontal displacement of an object. Our object was a 1 diameter ball bearing, with a starting point on a launch track of 9.25 inches above a table that was 29.8 inches off the ground. The distance covered from the start of movement to the end of the track was 17.4 inches. Taking the data we gathered from the first part, we know that gravity acts on an object at 32.2 ft/s2. Since we determined the average velocity of the object was 42.5 in/s, we could then determine how far the object would move along the x axis, once the bearing entered free fall, at the end of the table. We learned from the lecture on kinematics that the formula for determining time was t=2s/a. We can begin to plug in our data and solve for t. Since the table was 29.8 off the ground, we can determine that the ball will be in free fall for exactly . 392 seconds. We also know from our data, from the computer, that the ball was moving in the x direction at 42.55in/s. The formula for finding the displacement of an object is x=.5(v+v0)t. When we plug in our data into the formula we get x=.5(42.55+42.55) (.392), which gives us x=16.67 inches. We then placed a target

on the ground to predict where the bearing would impact, .392 seconds after leaving the table. When the experiment was conducted again, with the target in place, the impact point was 15.67 inches from the table. We realized that the time the bearing was in free fall was actually shorter than .329 seconds. If we enter our results back into the equation, we can determine that the ball was only in free fall for t=2(15.67)/ (42.55+42.55)or .368 seconds. This means that the table could only have been 26.2 inches above the ground, or the velocity must have been slower than the 42.55 the computer gave us, when the bearing left the table. This variance could be caused by several things, such as friction or air currents. Our accuracy was 15%. We looked again at where our target was placed and determined that the target had actually been off by an inch, from where it was supposed to be. It is our conclusion that the error was human, and the data can speak for itself.

Conclusion During these six experiments, we verified the properties of kinematics, to include the equations being accurate. We determined that there is a strict relationship between distance and time, which gives us velocity, and between velocity and time, which gives us acceleration. If given different pieces of information, we can therefore determine the future of an object, provided it is not acted on by outside net forces. This lab

proved several tools that we can use as a basis in future applications of physics.

- SAMPLE PHYSICS LAB REPORT KINEMATICS.docUploaded bySara Sosoo
- PHY10 E102Uploaded byRisha Santiago
- E101 - Resolution of VectorsUploaded byJanssen Alejo
- phy10L E103 Projectile MotionUploaded byKenneth Llantos
- PHY101Uploaded byDaniel Catolico
- Experiment 101 RESOLUTION OF FORCESUploaded byL.a. Ladores
- AnalysisUploaded bydannamay
- Experiment 103 Projectile MotionUploaded byAllen Madrazo
- Experiment 203 Fe AnneUploaded byZairel Allen Austria Santander
- Conclusion E105Uploaded byJan Ebenezer Moriones
- E104 Newton's Second Law of MotionUploaded byKenneth Llantos
- Conclusion E106Uploaded byJan Ebenezer Moriones
- KinematicsUploaded byJennifer Whalen
- Vector AdditionUploaded byMan Dejelo
- Questions Exp 106Uploaded bymajetislove
- Exp 106 InterpretationUploaded bymajetislove
- Experiment 202 Fe AnneUploaded byZairel Allen Austria Santander
- e103 ProjectileUploaded bySteven Ace Galedo
- Experiment 3Uploaded byApril Roman
- PHY11L Experiment 1Uploaded byRhon Antonio
- Experiment 105 - QUESTIONSUploaded bymajetislove
- Physics Lab Report Experiment 3Uploaded bykiiiinnn
- Exp301 Linear ExpansionUploaded byJhenz Santos Bayadas
- E 201- Work, Energy and PowerUploaded byEmpress Vanessa Tutica
- e202Uploaded byGiaÜ ÜEntrolizo
- FINAL F1Uploaded byMichael Eriko Bernabe
- PLANE AND SPHERICAL MIRRORSUploaded bychinkayaby16
- PHY10 E101Uploaded byRisha Santiago

- The OmenUploaded byShameem Reza
- BE1012 & BE1275 Proposal Quick Guide 2015Uploaded byindikuma
- An Outlaw's Christmas by Linda Lael Miller - chapter samplerUploaded byHarlequinAustralia
- 100326 Summers CrisisUploaded byalfredo_ley@yahoocouk
- holly wibbeler - dominion dungeon business proposal - 3954524Uploaded byapi-461147207
- FikriUploaded byHasan Ali Mahbubi
- Jeffrey Tagaro CV Final Version DOC 2018Uploaded byJeffrey Tagaro
- Kano Model (1)Uploaded byShri Harsh
- Dsp Notes B.techUploaded byChristopher Garcia
- Important Points in SurveyingUploaded byAnand Boss
- Handicap Date LineUploaded byapi-3707924
- NCA Canadian Constitutional Law OutlineUploaded byRuel Mugot
- Mechanical-Transmissions.info - Design Manual Poly Chain GT2 - Drive Calculation GuideUploaded byjuanki20
- T-02 SP MM Annisa Marlin Masbar Rus 1006660680Uploaded byAnnisa Marlin
- 52 Questions in 52 WeeksUploaded byTanyaTTT
- Concerning SubudUploaded byjohnnyzero64
- IC-33 Aug 2014 [eBook]Uploaded byJayachandra Reddy Annavaram
- Financial and Cost AccountingUploaded byRajendran Kajananthan
- Elattar ThesisUploaded byMustafa A. Elattar
- Different Models Used in the Assessment of Specific Learning Disabilities FinalUploaded byLuisa Fernanda Hernandez
- Product Mix NotesUploaded byAA
- George R. Eulo v. Deval Aerodynamics, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation, Deval Aerodynamics, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Josephine Russo, Individually, and as Administratrix of the Estate of Charles A. Russo, Deceased and John A. Baldinger, 430 F.2d 325, 3rd Cir. (1970)Uploaded byScribd Government Docs
- Configuring a Cisco ASA 5505 - Rob DenneyUploaded bynevynscribd
- vani 27.11.09Uploaded byv_raviraj
- People vs. CatbaganUploaded byBantogen Babantogen
- Identify and Classify Vibration Fault Based on Artificial Intelligence Techniques - ProquestUploaded bySanda Pyae Sone
- Bryandale News Vol 014 - 2006 08 17Uploaded byapi-3718598
- Rucho v. Common CauseUploaded byAnonymous LGS4Ky
- Father GoriotUploaded byDavid Potter
- poison txUploaded byAmy Wu