You are on page 1of 69

UNESCO-NIGERIA TECHNICAL & VOCATIONAL EDUCATION REVITALISATION PROJECT-PHASE II

NATIONAL DIPLOMA IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY

STRENGTH OF MATERIALS
COURSE CODE: MEC 222

YEAR 2- SEMESTER 2 PRACTICALS

Version 1: December 2008

COURSE: STRENGTH OF MATERIALS COURSE CODE: MEC 222 CONTACT HRS: 4HRS/WK COURSE SPECIFICATION: PRACTICAL CONTENT

TABLE OF CONTENT
Week 1 1. Experiment no.1 Principle of Moments {i} Week 2 2. Experiment no.2 Principle of Moments {ii} Week 3 3 Week 4 4. Week 5 5. Experiment no.5 Complete Torsion test Week 6 6 Week 7 7. Experiment no.7 torsion of shafts (ii) Week 8 8. Experiment no.8 bending of beams (i) Week 9 9. Experiment no.9 bending of beams (ii) Experiment no.6 Torsion of shafts (i) Experiment no.4 Complete Tensile test on a Mild Steel Specimen Experiment no.3 Reaction at Beam supports

Week 10 10. Experiment no.10 Modulus of Rigidity

Week 11 11. Experiment no.11 Modulus of Elasticity Week 12 12.Experiment 12 notched bar impact testing of materials

EXPERIMENT NO.1 PRINCIPLE OF MOMENTS {i} Objective:

To illustrate the principle of moments.

Apparatus:
Metre rule with a hole drilled centrally through it, various weights, thread, a suitable stand, pivot or fulcrum.

Method:
1. Set up metre rule as shown in fig.19, with several weights hanging on each side of the fulcrum. 2. Adjust the weights until the rule is in equilibrium. 3. Note the weights W1,W2,W3,W4,etc.,and their corresponding distance x1,x2,x3,x4,etc., from fulcrum. (N.B.-The distance must be perpendicular to the force in each.) 4. Note which weighs are tending to turn the beam clockwise and which anticlockwise. 5. Multiply each force by its distance from the fulcrum, i.e. calculate the moment of each force about the fulcrum. 4

6. Find the sum of the clockwise moment. 7. Find the sum of the anticlockwise moment.

Observations:
Anticlockwise Moments Weight in N Distance From Fulcrum (m) W1 x1 W2 x2 Moment Clockwise Moments Weight in N Distance From Fulcrum (m) W3 X3 W4 x4 Moment

W1 x1 W2 x2 Sum

W3 X3 W4 X4 Sum

Conclusions:
1. What do you notice about the clockwise moments and the sum of the anticlockwise Moments? 2. State the theorem you set out to illustrate.

EXPERIMENT NO.2 PRINCIPLE OF MOMENTS {2}

Objective: To illustrate the principle of moments.

Apparatus:
Metre rule with a hole drilled centrally through it, various weights, thread, a suitable stand, pivot or fulcrum.

Fig.2

Method:
1. Set up metre rule as shown in fig.2 with several weights hanging on each side of the fulcrum. 2. Adjust the weights until the rule is in equilibrium. 3. Note the weights W1,W2,W3,W4,etc.,and their corresponding distance x1,x2,x3,x4,etc., from fulcrum. (N.B.-The distance must be perpendicular to the force in each.) 4. Note which weighs are tending to turn the beam clockwise and which anticlockwise. 6

5. Multiply each force by its distance from the fulcrum, i.e. calculate the moment of each force about the fulcrum. 6. Find the sum of the clockwise moment. 7. Find the sum of the anticlockwise moment. 8. Repeat the experiment with the apparatus arranged as in fig. above

Observations:
Anticlockwise Moments Weight in N Distance From Fulcrum (m) W1 x1 W2 x2 Moment Clockwise Moments Weight in N Distance From Fulcrum (m) W3 X3 W4 x4 Moment

W1 x1 W2 x2 Sum

W3 X3 W4 X4 Sum

Conclusions:
1. What do you notice about the clockwise moments and the sum of the anticlockwise? moments? 2. State the theorem you set out to illustrate.

EXPERIMENT NO.3 REACTION AT BEAM SUPPORTS

Object:
To measure the reactions on the supports of a loaded beam. Apparatus: Wooden beam, two spring balances, various small weights.

Fig.22 Beam Forces

Method:
1. Suspend the beam from the two spring balances as shown in Fig.21. 2. Before placing any loads on the beam, note the reading on the spring balances. (Let these be P1 and Q1 lb. Respectively.) 3. Place some weights on the beam. 4. Read the spring balances. (These values are P and Q lb.) 5. The differences (P-P1) and (Q-Q1) give the reactions on the supports due to the added weights. 6. Calculate the reactions on the supports. 7. Repeat the experiment for several different loadings.

Conclusions:
1. Do the calculated values agree with the observed values? 2. What do you notice about the sum of the upward forces and the sum of the downward forces?

EXPERIMENT NO.4 COMPLETE TENSILE TEST ON A MILD STEEL SPECIMENT

Object:
To carry out a complete tensile test on a specimen of mild steel and determine the main properties of the material.

Apparatus:
Tensile testing machine and extensometer, mild steel specimen, micrometer, rule and engineers dividers. Make a neat line diagram of the testing machine and extensometer used and write a short note on each. Describe how the specimen was prepared for testing, dimensions of specimen, gauge length, etc.

Theory:
Graph 1: Load against extension (elastic range only) stress Youngs modulus=E = = constant strain W .L L E= = (slope of graph) A A .x Where L=gauge length and A=cross-sectional area Load at yield po int Yield stress = A = N/m2

10

Ultimate stress =

= N/m2

Figure 1 Tensile test of an AlMgSi alloy. The local necking and the cup and cone

fracture surfaces are typical for ductile metals.

11

Graph 3: Elongation against gauge length After fracture the pieces are placed together again and the extension measured on as many gauge lengths as possible over the fracture. From graph (Fig.3), elongation on a B.S.S. gauge length of 5.65A = % reduction in area % reduction in area at fracture = 100 A === %

Method:

12

10. Measure the diameter at fracture and the elongation lf the specimen over several gauge lengths.

Observations:
Original diameter of specimen = m Diameter of fracture =m Gauge length for elastic range = m Gauge length for complete range = m Elastic range: Load W( N)

Extension (m)

Complete range: Length (m) 5.1 5.2 Elongation: Original length (m) 0.5 1.5 2.5 e.t.c.

Extension (m)

Final length (m)

% Elongation

Calculations:
From Graph 1 (Fig.14) Youngs modulus E= (slope of graph) L/A = N/m2 Yield stress = Load at yield point/A = N/m2 From Fig.3 B.S.S. gauge length=5.56A = (m) % elongation on this gauge length= % Also, % reduction in area at fracture = %

Conclusions:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. State the values obtained for Young modulus, yield stress e.t.c. How do these values compare with the generally accepted values for mild steel? Give reasons for any differences in the experimental and reference book values. Sketch the specimen before and after fracture and describe the type of failure. Common on the graphs.

13

EXPERIMENT NO.5 COMPLETE TORSION TEST

Object:
To carry out a torsion test on a mild steel specimen.

Apparatus:
Torsion testing machine, torsion meter, micrometer. Make a neat line diagram of the testing machine and torsion meter used and write a short note on each. Describe how the specimen was prepared for testing, dimensions of the specimen, gauge length, etc.

14

Theory:
The general torsion equation is given by : T G = = J r L .r Therefore T= (Nm) (i) J Where = shear stress at outer surface T .L Also, G = J. 1 = (slope of graph) =N/m2.(ii) J

Method:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Measure the diameter of the specimen. Attach the torsion meter to the specimen. Grip the specimen in the jaws of the torsion machine. Zero the torsion meter. Place a load on the lever arm of the machine. Apply a torque to the specimen until the lever arm is balance. Note the angle of twist. Repeat (5), (6) and (7) for a series of increasing loads until the limit of proportionality is reach.(it will depend on type of torsion meter whether it is removed at the limit of proportionality or whether remains until fracture occurs.) 9. Continue the test until fracture occurs.

Observations:
Diameter of specimen = d (m) Gauge length = L (m) Load W (N) Radius arm R (m) Torque T=W.R Angle of twist

Graphs
Plot the following graphs: 1. Torque against angle of twist up to the limit of proportionality. 2. Torque against angle of twist for the complete test.

15

Calculations:
Shear the stress at the limit of proportionality = N/m2 Modulus of rigidity G = N/m2 Shear stress at fracture = N/m2

Conclusions:
State the results obtained, i.e. modulus of rigidity shear stress at fracture, etc. 1. How do these values compare with the values taken from reference books? 2. Sketch and describe the fracture. 3. Comment on the shape of the graphs.

16

EXPERIMENT NO.6 TORSION OF SHAFTS (i) Object:

To show how the angle of twist of a shaft varies with: (a) the applied torque (length and diameter constant); (b) the length of the shaft (torque and diameter constant); (c) the diameter of the shaft (torque and length constant).

Apparatus:
Norwood or similar torsion testing apparatus, dial gauges. Weights. Micrometer and several specimens each of a different diameter.

17

Theory:
Let W = weight on the bar R= radius of torque arm W W Torque on the shaft= ( X R )+( X R ) 2 2 T = W. R.. (1) To determine the angle of twist: Let x = length of deflection arm 1= deflection of dial gauge 1 2= deflection of dial gauge 2 Hence, since is small, 1= 1/x and 2=2/x Therefore angle of twist on length L = = (1- 2) = I/x (1-2) (2)
PART A: Length and diameter constant

Method:
1.Put a specimen in the apparatus and firmly fix the end remote from the weight. 2. Attach the torque arm to the other end of the specimen. 3.Attach the two deflection arms to the specimen and adjust the distance between them to the gauge length, l. (Make sure the arms are horizontal.) 4.Measure the radius of the torque arm and length of the deflection arms. 5.Apply a load W to the torque arm. 6.Note the deflections on the dial gauges. 7.Calculate the angle of twist, . 8.Repeat (5), (6) and (7) for a series of increasing loads. 9.Check the deflections when unloading to ensure that the specimen has not been loaded beyond the elastic limit. 10. Plot the torque against angle of twist graph. 18

Observations:
W (N) R (m) T (Nm)
1 2

Conclusions:
Comment on the shape of the graph and state the relationship between the torque and angle of twist.

PART B: Torque and diameter constant

Method:
Use same specimen as for part A. 1. Adjust the deflection arms until gauge length is 3m. 2. Place a load on the hanger that will give a reasonable angle of twist. 3. Calculate the angle of twist. 4. Remove the load and increase the gauge length by 3m. 5. Replace the same load and again calculate the angle of twist. 6. Repeat (4) and (5) for several different gauge lengths. 7. Plot a graph of length against angle of twist.

Observations:
Load = N L(m)
1 2

Conclusions:
Comment on the shape of the graph and state the relationship between the gauge length and angle of twist.
PART C: Torque and length constant

Method:
1.Place a shaft in the apparatus. 2.Set the deflection arms at chosen gauge length. 3.Place a load on the hanger and calculate the angle of twist. 4.Repeat (1), (2) and (3) for several specimens of the same material, each with a different diameter but using the same gauge length and load

19

EXPERIMENT NO.7 TORSION OF SHAFTS (ii) Object:

To determine the modulus of rigidity of a material by means of a torsion test.

Apparatus:
As in previous experiment; specimens of different materials, e.g. mild steel, brass, bronze, aluminium, etc.

20

Theory:
The general torsion equation is given by : T G = = J r L .r (Nm) (i) Therefore T= J Where = shear stress at outer surface T .L Also, G = J. 1 (slope of graph) =N/m2.(ii) = J (Where J = d4/32 m4 = polar moment of inertia of shaft) If J and L are kept constant as in Part A of the previous experiment, then T= K, where K= a constant From the graph of T against , as in part A of the previous experiment, the slope of the Graph= K G. J Slope K = L Slope x L G= (N/m2) J

Method:
As for Part A of previous experiment, for each material. Observations Diameter of the shaft = d(mm) Gauge length of the shaft = 25.4mm

Conclusions:
1.State the value of the modulus of rigidity for each material. 2.How do these compare with the values stated in reference books? 3.Try to give 4 reasons for any difference between the experimental values and the values from reference books.

21

EXPERIMENT NO.8 BENDING OF BEAMS (i) Object:

To determine the value of Youngs modulus for the material of the beam.

Apparatus:
A beam about 1 m long, knife edge supports, W Dial gauge W

Fig.9

Theory:
The beam is arranged on the knife edge supports so that it has equal overhanging ends. This gives a constant bending moment between the knife edges. Let M = bending moment = W.x (Nm) I = second moment of area of the cross-section of the beam = BD3 for a rectangular section B = breadth of beam D = depth of beam = deflection of the beam at mid-span R = radius of curvature of deflected beam L = distance between the knife edge From the theory of simple bending, M E = I R M R E= L Since E, M and I are constants, R will be constant and the beam will bend in a circular arc between the supports.

L/2 ( 2R) Fig.9a 22

L/

By property of intersection chords, 2(R-) = (L/2)2 2R-2=L2/4 2 is negligible if is small Therefore 2R=L2/4 R=L2/8 MR WxL2 Hence E= /I= /8I xL2 = /8I (slope of graph)

Method:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Measure the breadth and depth of the beam. Place the beam on the knife edges so that there are equal overhanging ends. Place the dial gauge on the top of the beam mid-way between the supports. Adjust the dial gauge to zero. Place equal loads on the overhanging ends. Note the deflection on the clock gauge. Repeat (5) and (6) for a series of increasing loads. Plot the graph of load against deflection. Calculate the value of Youngs modulus.

Observations:
Breadth of beam = B = mm Depth of beam = D = mm Distance between knife edges = L = mm Overhang = x = mm

Conclusion:
1. State the value found for Youngs modulus. 2. How does the value compare with that given in textbooks? 3. Comment on the shape of the graph.

23

EXPERIMENT NO.9 BENDING OF BEAMS (ii) Object:

To show how the deflection of a beam varies with (a) the load (span, breadth, and depth, constant); (b) the span (load, breadth and depth constant); (c) the breadth (load, span and depth constant); (d) the depth (load, span and depth constant).

Apparatus:
Set of 6 beams of the same material each 76.2mm long, 24.6mm wide and the depths varying in increments of 3.175mm from 9.144mm to 24.6mm. Knife edge Supports, weights and vernier or dial gauge.

Beam Forces
PART A: Deflection against load (span, breadth and depth constant)

24

Method:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Place the beam on the knife edge supports. Measure the span of the beam. Zero the dial gauge. Place a central load on the beam and note the deflection. Note the deflection for each of a series of increasing loads. (Be careful not to exceed the elastic limit of the wood.) 6. Note the deflection readings when unloading and record the mean deflection for each load. 7. Plot a graph of load against deflection.

Observations:

Conclusion:
1. Comment on the shape of the graph. 2. When do you learn from this regarding the formula for deflection?
PART B: Deflection against span (load, breadth and depth constant)

Method:
1. Use the maximum load employed in Part A and notes the deflection due to the central load. 2. Decrease the span 76.2mm. 3. Make the load central. 4. Note the span and deflection. 5. Repeat (2), (3) & (4) for a series of spans, each decreasing by 76.2mm. 6. Plot the deflection against span graph. 7. Plot the deflection against span3 graph.

Observations:
Load = 1N Span, in l (span)3 Deflection, mm

25

Conclusions:
1. Comment on the shape of the deflection against span graph. 2. Comment on the shape of the deflection against span3 graph. 3. What do you learn from these regarding the formula for deflection?
PART C: Deflection against depth (load, span and breadth constant)

Method:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Place the 9.14mm deep beam on the knife edge supports. Place a load on the beam at mid-span and note the deflection. Repeat with each beam in turn, using the same load span and breadth each time. Plot the deflection against depth graph. Plot the deflection against I/depth3 graph.

Observations:

Conclusion:
1. Comment on the shape of the deflection against depth graph. 2. Comment on the shape of the deflection against I/depth3 3. What do you learn from this graph regarding the formula for deflection? PART D: Deflection against breadth (load span and depth constant)

Method:
Repeat as in Part C but varying the breadth. Plot a graph of deflection against breadth, b. Plot a graph of deflection against 1/b.

Observations:

Conclusions:
1. Comment on the shape of the deflection against breadth graph. 2. Comment on the shape of the deflection I/breadth against graph. 3. What do you learn from this graph regarding the formula for deflection?

General Conclusion of Experiment:

From the conclusions to Parts A, B and C give a formula relating the deflection of a beam with the load W, the span l, the breadth b and the depth d, and compare this with the formula obtained from theory.

26

Experiment No.10 Modulus of Rigidity

Objective:
To determine the modulus of rigidity of rubber.

Apparatus:
Rubber block, vernier gauge, weights

Theory:
The Modulus of rigidity, G, is the ratio of the shear stress to shear strain:

27

Method:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Measure (in mm) the length L, depth l and thickness t of the block. Apply a small load to the specimen as shown in Fig. Adjust vernier to zero. Add a small load and note the vernier reading. Calculate the deformation. Repeat for various loads. Plot a graph of load (N) against extension (mm). From the graph select a load W and its corresponding extension x. Calculate G.

Conclusions:
1. What is the shape of the load- deformation graph? 2. What value of did you obtain for G? 3. Is your result within the range 70 220 N/m2.

28

Experiment No.11 Modulus of Elasticity Objective:

To determine the Youngs modulus of Elasticity for Steel.

Apparatus:
Long steel wire secure to a rigid hook; vernier scale suspended near the base of wire, with the sliding vernier scale attached to the wire; a micrometer; weights and hanger.

Method:
The apparatus is assemble as shown in Fig below:

Fig. Determining Modulus of Elasticity

Theory:
To calculate the Youngs Modulus for the steel wire, select a point A on the graph. At A, load = N, Extension = x mm, Load Stress = = Area of cross sec tion Extension Strain = = Original Lenght

29

Youngs Modulus E =

Stress = Strain

Method:
10. Measure (in mm) the length L,. 11. Apply a small load to the specimen as shown in Fig. 12. Adjust vernier to zero. 13. Add a small load and note the vernier reading. 14. Calculate the extension. 15. Repeat for various loads. 16. Plot a graph of load (N) against extension (mm). 17. From the graph select a load W and its corresponding extension x. 18. Calculate G.

Conclusions:
4. State the value for the Youngs Modulus 5. What is the shape of the load- extension graph? 6. Compare the value found of E With the one from Textbooks..

30

Experiment 12 notched bar impact testing of materials

Background Materials sometimes display brittleness which precludes their use in a given design. Brittleness is characterized by fracturing with low energy under impact. The fracture energy is proportional to the area under the tensile stress-strain curve and is called the toughness. A tough steel is generally ductile and requires 100 ft-lbs of energy to cause failure. A brittle steel does not deform very much during failure and requires less than 15 ft-lbs energy to cause failure. Characterizing the toughness of a material is done in several ways. The most common method is the notched-bar impact test for which two types of specimens prevail, Charpy and Izod. By subjecting a specimen to an impact load, it will fail if the load exceeds the breaking strength of the material. By using a swinging pendulum to impart the load, the energy required to fracture the specimen can be calculated by observing the height the pendulum swings after fracture, as shown in Figure 2-1.

This test has been used almost exclusively with body-centered-cubic (bcc) crystalline materials. These materials show a transition from ductile to brittle behavior with temperature (see Fig. 2-2). This means that at low temperature the fracture energy is low. Very often bcc materials are ductile until they are heat treated.

31

The mechanical behavior of materials often exhibits variations even for seemingly identical specimens and materials. The steel specimens for this experiment are manufactured from a single ingot of steel and are machined to a single drawing. Despite these precautions, the results from identical tests will not always be identical. Variations in properties are often evaluated by means of statistics in order to establish the average value and the possible variance in the results. The fraction of shear in the surface failure of steels can be determined by looking at the fresh failure surface under low-power magnification (approx 3X). A smooth surface is characteristic of shear. A fine grained fracture surface is characteristic of cleavage and brittleness. Often failures are mixed (part shear and part cleavage).

If no plastic deformation accompanies fracture, it is generally a brittle fracture, i.e. cleavage. In the impact test the amount of plastic deformation is characterized by lateral expansion. Lateral expansion is a thickening of the specimen during fracturing.

Looking at half the failed specimen, the lateral expansion is measured as shown below.

32

where lateral expansion = Dw = wf - wi wf = final lateral dimension wi = initial lateral dimension

Heat Treatment of Steels Common steels, which are really solid solutions of carbon in iron, are bodycentered-cubic. However, the carbon has a low solubility in bcc iron and precipitates as iron carbide when a steel is cooled from 1600oF (870oC). The processes of

precipitation can be altered by adjusting the cooling rate. This changes the distribution and size of the carbide which forms a laminar structure called pearlite during slow cooling processes. If a steel is quenched into water or oil from 1600oF (870oC) a metastable phase called martensite forms, which is body-centered-tetragonal. This phase sets up large internal stresses and prevents carbide from forming. The internal stresses produce a high hardness and unfortunately, low toughness. After cooling, to restore toughness, steels are tempered by reheating them to a lower temperature around 800oF (426oC) and cooling. The tempering relieves the internal stresses and also allows some iron carbide to form. It also restores ductility.

References Deiter, Mechanical Metallurgy ASM Handbook on Heat Treatment, Vol. 2 Flinn/Trojan, Engineering Materials and Their Applications, 2nd Ed.

Technical Approach The experiment consists of investigating the ductile-to-brittle transition in 1018steel and 2024-aluminum as a function of temperature. The Charpy impact specimens of each material are immersed in a bath for 10 minutes to reach thermal equilibrium at five separate temperatures ranging from -110oF (-79oC) to 212oF (100oC). The

specimens are quickly transferred to the Charpy testing machine, fractured, and the impact energy is measured. After failure the fracture surfaces are examined for

evidence of shear or cleavage failure and lateral expansion at the root of the notch.

33

Data for this experiment have been obtained from other groups during last semester laboratory periods. This data will be supplied to you and should be combined with your own data to produce a data base.

Apparatus

Thermocouple Temperature Baths Charpy Impact Machine Tongs Dial caliper

SAFETY INFORMATION

DURING THE COURSE OF THIS EXPERIMENT YOU WILL BE USING A DEWAR OF ACETONE WHICH HAS BEEN COOLED USING DRY ICE TO THE TEMPERATURE OF DRY ICE (110oF or -79oC). CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO AVOID EXPOSURE TO SKIN OR EYES. THE EXPOSURE MAY CAUSE BURNES AND OTHER EFFECTS. STUDENTS ARE ADVISED TO TAKE THE FOLLOWING PRECAUTIONS: 1. 2. 3. 4. Be careful to slowly insert specimens into the baths. Use tongs to insert and remove specimens. Do not drop specimens into bath. (Dewar will break). While transporting the Dewar, use the special cart set up for that purpose.

Procedure 1. Review safety considerations. Label each specimen using a hammer and punch. 2. Identify and measure the initial lateral dimensions of all specimens. 3. Conduct impact tests on five as received 1018-steel and five 2024-Al specimens heated or cooled to dry ice, antifreeze bath with some dry ice, ice-pure water, room temperature, and boiling water. For consistent results, it is important that all

specimens be positioned identically in the anvil; use the special tongs provided to correctly position the specimen. The notch on the specimen must face 180o opposite to the hammer. 34

4. Measure lateral dimensions. Observe the nature of the fracture surface of steel specimens. The fracture specimens should all be carefully examined and particular attention should be paid to the type of fracture which is obtained in each particular case. Try to relate the type of fracture to the energy absorbed by the metal being fractured. A binocular microscope is available in order to study these fractures carefully. Look for cleavage and shear and estimate the fraction area of each to nearest 20%, i.e. 20% cleavage.

SAFETY INFORMATION

BEFORE USING THE IMPACT MACHINE, YOU SHOULD GET THE INSTRUCTOR TO SHOW YOU EXACTLY HOW TO OPERATE IT. ALWAYS

TAKE GREAT CARE IN HOW YOU HANDLE THE MACHINE IN ORDER TO AVOID ANY ACCIDENT.

If the specimens are transferred rapidly to the machine, it can be assumed that the temperatures at which they are broken are those of the baths in which they have been held. Desired bath temperatures are: dry ice/acetone bath - 110oF- 79oC - 40oF- 40oC 32oF 72oF 212oF 0oC 23oC 100oC

antifreeze/water mix with some dry ice ice/pure water room temperature boiling water

Glossary of Terms Understanding the following terms will aid in understanding this experiment:

Body-centered cubic. Common atomic arrangement for metals consisting of eight

atoms sitting on the corners of a cube and a ninth atom at the cubes center.

Brittle. Lacking in deformability.

Cleavage. Brittle fracture along particular crystallographic planes in the grains of the

material. 35

Face-centered cubic. Common atomic arrangement for metals consisting of eight

atoms sitting on the corners of a cube and six additional atoms sitting in the center of each face of the cube.

Fracture. Failure or breakage of a material.

Impact energy. The energy required to fracture a standard specimen when the load is

suddenly applied.

Impact test. Measures the ability of a material to absorb a sudden application of a

load without breaking. The Charpy test is a commonly used impact test.

Lateral expansion. The lateral change in dimension of a Charpy impact specimen due

to fracture. The dimension measured is the width opposite the v-notch (see fig. 1-3).

Plastic deformation. Permanent deformation of the material when a load is applied,

then removed.

Shear. Deformation due to parallel crystallographic planes. Shear lip. The surface formed by ductile fracture that is at a 45o angle to the direction

Toughness. A qualitative measure of the impact properties of a material. A material

that resists failure by impact is said to be tough (also given as the total area under the stress-strain curve).

36

manner in an impact test.

Write-Up and Discussion 1. Prepare a memo report including the following: 2. Relate the type of fracture observed to the energy absorbed by the metal being fractured. Report the fraction area of cleavage and shear to nearest 20%, i.e. 20% cleavage. 3. Plot the results obtained graphically, relating notched bar impact energies to the temperature of testing, and changes in width to the temperature of testing. 4. Try to relate the type of fractures observed (e.g. shear or cleavage) to the test temperatures. 5. Compare the variation of impact energy with temperature observed for 1018-steel and 2024-Al. 6. Using the data provided by your instructor, calculate the average value of the fracture energy at each temperature. Construct a plot of average fracture energy versus temperature for steel and for aluminum. Calculate the standard deviation for n data points. The Standard Deviation is given by:

SD =

( xi x) 2 (n 1)

x=

xi n

n = number of values (data points)

7. Plot the upper and lower values of the standard deviation versus temperature on the same chart as the average value of the fracture energy. Data from other groups will be supplied to make these calculations.

37

EXPERIMENT 13 MECHANICAL TESTING-IMPACT & HARDNESS Experimen11Experiment: Mechanical TestingImpact & Hardness Testing TESTING

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Experiment 14 MOMENT OF INERTIA

Moment of Inertia

PRELAB EXERCISES

1. Consider an ideal system of two masses attached to a massless platform at the same distance from the center. If that distance is doubled, how does the moment of inertia of the system about the center change? 2. Imagine a solid disk, made of uniform material, of radius R and thickness L. What is the ratio of L/R, if the moment of inertia of this disk about the axis passing through the center and perpendicular to the plane of the disk is the same as the moment of inertia about the axis passing through the center and parallel to the disks plane? 3. Is it possible to have a torque act on an object while the net force applied to it is zero? If no, why not, if yes, give an example. 48

I.

OBJECTIVE

There are three objectives for this experiment. 1. To study Newton's Second Law in rotational form. 2. To elucidate the analogies between quantities in translational motion and quantities in rotational motion ( , , ) and to use these analogies to develop expressions for angular quantities such as rotational kinetic energy. 3. To illustrate the dependence of the moment of inertia on the shape of the object as well as on the choice of the axis of rotation.

II.

INTRODUCTION

The motion of any rigid body can be analyzed by separately considering the translation of its center of mass and the rotation about its center of mass. If all points of an object move along parallel straight lines, then the translational description alone suffices. If the center of mass of a rotating object is fixed, then the rotational description alone suffices. In many other cases, such as a flight of a football after a free kick, both descriptions are needed simultaneously to describe the complicated motion. The translational version of Newtons Second Law for a rigid body can be written as , where is the linear momentum and all vector quantities refer to the center of mass of the body. Using our dictionary (see objective 2 above), this can be translated into rotational language , where L is the angular momentum and is the angular acceleration. For simplicity, we have written this rotational law of motion in its scalar version. All rotational quantities therein must be calculated about the same axis of rotation, which we will take as an axis passing through the center of mass of the body. The moment of inertia I depends not only on the mass of the object, but also on how its mass is distributed. The greater the portion of mass located far away from the rotation axis, the greater the moment of inertia about that axis. Thus, for a point mass m rotating a distance R from an axis (or a thin hoop of radius R) the moment of inertia about that axis (or hoops axis of symmetry) is I=mR2, but a uniform disk of the same mass and radius has the moment of inertia of only half this value! In turn, the same uniform disk 49

rotating about an axis passing through the center and in the plane of the disk has the moment of inertia I=mR2/4+mL2/12 where L is the disks thickness. Unless L is large, this is even smaller than the moment of inertia of a disk rotating horizontally. Can you explain why? Why does the moment of inertia of a disk depend on L for one configuration of the disk and not for the other? Starting with these expressions, you will be able to determine moments of inertia of more complicated arrangements by summing the moments of inertia of all constituent parts (again, all theses moments must refer to the same axis of rotation!). In this way, you will be able to determine the moment of inertia of the rotating part of the apparatus in this experiment. Now consider the system as shown in the photograph on page 39. If the pulley is ideal, then the tensions in the horizontal and vertical parts of the string are equal. The tension, T, is the force which produces a torque on the rotating shaft given by =rT, where r is the radius of the spool on which the string winds. This torque is calculated for the axis passing along the shaft through its center, as are all subsequent rotational quantities. From Newtons Second Law (in translational form) for the falling mass, we obtain mg-T=ma, where m is the mass of the hanger and weights and a its acceleration. In practice, as you will observe, the acceleration of the falling mass a is much less than the acceleration due to gravity g, a<<g, and the quantity ma is small compared to other terms in this equation. Then and the torque can be approximated by app=mrg. More accurately, by writing Newtons Second Law in rotational form for a rotating assembly with the moment of inertia I, and by using

which relates the angular acceleration of the rotating shaft to the linear acceleration of the falling hanger, it can be shown that .

Under what condition does this expression for torque reduce to the approximate expression derived above? The accuracy of the approximate expression for the torque, app, can be estimated directly by calculating the relative difference from the exact expression

In this experiment we will measure the linear acceleration of the mass hanger directly using a photogate attached to the pulley. Once the mass is released, it will fall down and 50

then start moving up again, with the apparatus reversing its direction of spin, it will then start falling again, etc. We will observe multiple such oscillations. Note that while the acceleration predicted above is applicable to both up and down motion, friction in the system will result in . Here, as in M4, the average of these two values should agree with the prediction for an ideal system, and the frictional torque is given by their difference .

III.

EQUIPMENT

The equipment for this experiment consists of a PASCO rotational base and several different shapes that can be attached to it (a disk, a ring, an aluminum platform, and a pair of block masses). The masses (and associated errors) of these shapes are given below. A mass set and pulley provide the angular acceleration in the system, and a photogate connected to the DataStudio interface allow the motion of the system to be carefully analyzed. A ruler and calipers are also available to measure the appropriate dimensions of the system.

51

As show in the picture above, the aluminum platform and block masses can be mounted on the rotational base. The position of each block on the platform can be varied. In effect, this allows one to change the moment of inertia about the axis passing along and through the center of the shaft of the rotating assembly. System masses plastic disk: m= 1.43 0.05 kg metal ring: m= 1.43 0.05 kg mass block (each): m= 0.27 0.01 kg aluminum platform: m= 0.58 0.02 kg

IV.

PROCEDURE

Part I Horizontal Disk

52

For each of these runs, we will consider the relative error in au and ad to be the same as in the first run. Is this a good approximation? Can it be verified? 8. Using the masses and their corresponding accelerations, calculate the approximate torque (app = mrg) applied by the masses, with the associated error, and the angular acceleration (=a/r) of the disk. You can assume the error in hanging mass is negligible. Input these values into the table on page 2 of the DataStudio workbook. By examining plot 2, determine the moment of inertia, I, of the horizontal disk and the associated experimental error. Record this value. Select landscape printing under page setup in the file menu, and print your workbook.
Part II Other Moments of Inertia

9. Select one of the mass configurations from those used in Part I. You will use this mass for Part II of the experiment. Note: you will not need to print any data from Part II; however, you should make detailed notes and sketches. 10. Measure and record the relevant dimension(s) of the ring. Place the ring concentrically on top of the disk. Predict the effect on the moment of inertia of the system. Using your chosen mass, repeat steps 4 - 6. How have the plot and the acceleration changed from Part I? Calculate the torque produced by the mass and the resulting angular acceleration. Using the relationship =I, calculate the moment of inertia of the system and the associated error. How does it compare with I for the horizontal disk? 11. Remove the ring and the disk from the vertical shaft. With the assistance of your instructor, mount the disk vertically on the shaft (using one of the holes along the perimeter). How should the moment of inertia change from what was observed in Part I? Make sure the disk is properly secured before proceeding. As in step 10, determine I for the vertical disk. Does it agree with your expectations? 12. With the assistance of your instructor, remove the disk. Mount the aluminum platform on the vertical shaft. Make sure it is properly secured with the thumbscrew. How do you think the moment of inertia of the platform will compare with the disk? Determine I for the platform using the procedure in step 10. 13. Measure and record the mass of the black blocks. For the purposes of this experiment, we will treat these as point masses. Is this a good approximation? Attach the blocks symmetrically to the aluminum bar. Record the distance from the center of the rotating shaft to the center of one of the blocks. How will the blocks affect the moment of inertia of the system? Measure I for the bar with attached blocks. 14. Repeat step 13 for a different (but still symmetric) position of the two blocks. How does the moment of inertia change as you move the blocks?

Caveats:

53

1. Depending on the moment of inertia and the torque applied, the system can spin quite rapidly. Exercise caution while the apparatus is spinning. 2. When you wrap the string around the shaft, do it in such a way that the string connecting the shaft to the pulley is as close to horizontal as possible at all times while the string unwinds. Why is this important? 3. Your results will depend on the value of r, the radius of the spool on which the string wraps. If you wrap the string so that it overlaps itself creating layers you will change r, thus changing values derived from it. 4. As you release the mass hanger, make sure that it falls straight down. Any side-toside oscillations can affect your data and are not accounted for in our analysis. 5. As the direction of the hangers motion changes, the data will usually appear noisy. Try to avoid using these transitional data points in your fits. Can you conjecture why there is this noise effect?

V.

REPORT

1. Include all measured and predicted moments of inertia and their comparisons. In each case, note whether prediction agrees with the measurement within experimental error (you do not need to predict the moment of inertia of the platform by itself). 2. Based on your results, can you confirm that the moment of inertia is an additive quantity, i.e., the moment of inertia of any object is a sum of the moments of all its constituent parts (all measure with respect to the same fixed axis)? 3. Does your data show that the mechanical energy of the system decreases as the oscillations continue? Where does the energy go? Is the conservation of mechanical energy theorem violated for this system? Is this rate of decrease the same for all configurations? Use you plots to qualitatively answer these questions. 4. In calculating the torque, it was assumed that . Estimate the percent error introduced by this assumption. Hint: Calculate the tension using and then the torque for the 50 and 500 gram runs using and , and compare these values. Alternatively, use the ratio of actual (translational) acceleration to gravitational acceleration g. 5. Comment on all your results and the applicability of the approximation used. 54

6. Answer all the questions included in the introduction and procedure sections.

55

Experiment 15: Rotational Motion. Moment of Inertia

Aleksandr Shpiler Section E2
Abstract

This experiment was conducted to figure out and analyze the effects of force on circular rotating objects about their centers by analyzing their basic components such as moment of inertia and angular momentum. In part A we will measure the moment of inertia of a solid disk about an axis of rotation through the center of the disk and perpendicular to the face and in part B we will test the conservation of angular momentum for a collision process in the absence of a net external torque.

Data

Preliminary Data (raw) Diameter of the disk Diameter of the spool Inner diameter of the ring Outer diameter of the ring Mass of the disk Mass of the ring Values 10.76 38.24 107.4 127.74 1444 1439 cm mm mm mm g g Uncertainty 0.05 0.81 0.005 0.005 0.5 0.5 cm mm mm mm g g
2 2 fi + t ins

***uncertainties are incorrect because we forgot to use tfi =

***all the calculations in this experiment will be based on the original uncertainty!!!
Preliminary Data (converted to SI) Values Diameter of the disk 0.1076 Diameter of the spool 0.3824 Inner diameter of the ring 0.1074 Outer diameter of the ring 0.12774 Mass of the disk 1.444 Mass of the ring 1.439 Original Uncertainty 0.0005 0.00081 0.000005 0.000005 0.0005 0.0005

m m m m kg kg

m m m m kg kg

56

Part A (General raw data)

Part A xG1 xG3 Delta m

cm cm g

50 0.05 0.001

cm cm s

General data converted into SI units.

Part A xG1 xG3 Delta m

m m kg

m m s

Part A Obtained Data

Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Suspended mass, g 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 tG2tG1, s 2.488 1.928 1.362 1.256 1.158 1.041 0.983 0.883 tG3tG1, s 4.047 3.074 2.28 2.082 1.907 1.721 1.614 1.463

Part A Obtained Data in SI units

Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Suspended mass, kg 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 tG2tG1, s 2.488 1.928 1.362 1.256 1.158 1.041 0.983 0.883 tG3tG1, s 4.047 3.074 2.28 2.082 1.907 1.721 1.614 1.463

Part B (General raw data)

Part B Rp Delta Rp Delta t

mm mm s

w Delta w

12.68 0.005

mm mm

57

Part B (General data converted to SI)

Part B Rp Delta Rp Delta t

m m s

w Delta w

0.01268 0.000005

m m

Obtained Data in SI units

Trial 1 2 3 tb1, s 0.012 0.018 0.008 tb2, s 0.016 0.027 0.011

Analysis
Experimental values of the moment of inertia and friction torque.

x13 x12 t13 t12 we calculate the linear acceleration, a, for each 1) Using the equation a = 2 t13 t12 mass used. x12 = xG2 xG1 and x13 = xG3 xG1 x12 = 0.5 0.257 = 0.243 t12 = tG2-tG1 and t13 = tG3-tG1 t12 = 2.488 t13 = 4.047 x13 = 0.698-0.257=0.441

x13 x12 0.441 0.243 t13 t12 m a=2 = 2 4.047 2.488 = 0.0145 2 4.047 2.488 t13 t12 s

*** rest of the values for linear acceleration are in the table on the next page 2) Using equation = mr ( g a) we calculate the applied torque, and equation =
a r

we calculate the corresponding angular acceleration, again for each mass.

= mr ( g a )
= 0.05 * 0.01912 * (9.81 0.0145) = 0.00937 Nm

58

a r

0.0145 rad = 0.7582 2 0.01912 s

*** to save time and space without writing out every single equation I will use a table for the rest of the trials on the next page

3) a (acceleration) Trails Mass kg

x13 x12 t13 t12 m a=2 t13 t12 s 2
0.014497 0.030408 0.032695 0.044417 0.057166 0.067109 0.08251 0.090473

(torque) = mr ( g a ) Nm

(angular acc.) =
a rad r s2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0.758237 1.590391 1.709984 2.323065 2.989861 3.509872 4.315352 4.73186

59

4) Plot of the applied torque, (y-axis) versus the angular acceleration, (x-axis). The slope of the trend line is the best estimate value for the moment of inertia of the disk,
Id, and the y-axis intercept gives the frictional torque f.

alpha vs torque
0.00937 0.00936 torque Nm 0.00935 0.00934 0.00933 0.00932 0.00931 0.0093 0.00929 0.00928 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 alpha rad/s ec^2

y = -2E-05x + 0.0094

Since the applied torque is linear we use linear function with intercept. . From the graph we obtain that the slope is = -2E^-05 so I d = -2E-05 kg * m 2 From the graph we also obtain that the y-intercept is 0.0094 so the f = 0.0094 Nm
Is the graph supposed to look like that?? The frictional torque makes sense, I think, but shouldnt the graph increase? I think theres an error somewhere but I couldnt find it, of course I could be wrong.

5) Here we found the uncertainties for the slope and the intercept using the LINEST function. This is a measure of Id and f, the uncertainties in the measured moment of inertia for the disk and in the frictional torque.

60

-1.82787E-05 2.83012E-18

0.00937836 8.58979E-18

From here we can see that

I d =-1.82787E-05 kg * m 2

I d = 0.00937836 kg * m 2
f = 8.58979E-18 Nm

f =2.83012E-18Nm

Theoretical value of the moment of inertia

7) Now we calculate the theoretical value for the moment of inertia of the disk, I d , using equation
1 0 Id = MR 2 2 1 0.1076 2 0 Id = * 1.444 * ( ) = 0.0388 kg * m 2 2 2 1 0 8) Based on expression I d = MR 2 and using the uncertainty propagation rule, and 2

known values of R, M, R, and M, we derive the formulas for the moment of inertia uncertainty components due to uncertainty in the mass (I d )M and radius (I d )R .
0 0

We take derivatives with respect to M and then with respect to R and get the following
1 MR 2 MR 2 0 = I d = M + R 2 M R =
1 2 R 0.0005 + (2MR 0.0005) 2

[(

***using the appropriate uncertainty of the Diameter of the disk divided by 2. As well as the uncertainty of the mass
0 I d = 0.5 [( 0.01912 2 * 0.0005) + (2* 1.444 * 0.01912 * 0.0005)] = 1.3896E-05 kg * m 2 .

or 1.39*10-5 kg * m 2

61

0 0 9) Now we calculate (I d )M , (I d )R and the total uncertainty 0 0 I d = I d

( ) + (I )
M

0 d R

The experimental values for the moment of inertia are I d =1.82787E-05 kg * m 2 I d min = -0.0094 kg * m 2 I d = 0.00937836 kg * m 2 I d max = 0.00936 kg * m 2

The theoretical values for the moment of inertia are :

0 Id = 0.0388 kg * m 2 0 Id = 1.39*10-5 kg * m 2

I d min = 0.038786104 kg * m 2

I d max = 0.038813896 kg * m 2

4) v =

uncertainties in the velocity v v w 1 tb + w = 2 tb + w tb w tb tb

V=1/tb1i* W1+W1/tb1i^2* tb1i
deltaTB1I = Squareroot(uncert^2+.001^2)

dv1i
0.019729

dv1f
0.004283469

dv2f
0.022041

v1i = v1f =

0.024 1 m 0.00141 + 0.001 = 0.019729 2 s 0.0739 0.0739 0.024 1 m 0.005686 + 0.001 = 0.00428347 2 0.33 s 0.33

v2f =

5) Initial and Final momentum

Pi = m1v1i
0.09915

Pf = m1v1 f + m2 v 2 f
0.098527

62

Pi = m1v1i = 0.3053 kg * 0.324763

Pf = m1v1 f + m2 v 2 f = 0.3053 kg * 0.072727

m kg m = 0.09915 s s

6) Uncertainty in the momentums

partial derivative of p delta Pi=V1i*dM1+M1*dV1i Delta Pf=V1f*dM1+M1*dVf1+V2f*dM2+M2*dV2f delta Pi = delta Pf = 0.006039642 0.005843968 Pi +/- dPi Pf +/- dPf (+) 0.10519 0.104371 (-) 0.093111 0.092683

pi =

pi = 0.324763 0.00005 + 0.3053 0.019729 = 0.006039642 p f m1 p f v1 f p f m 2 p f v 2 f

kg m s

p f =

m1 +

v1 f +

m 2 +

v 2 f = v1 f m1 + m1v1 f + v 2 f m2 + m2 v2 f

p f = 0.072727 * 0.00005 + 0.3053 * 0.004283469 + 0.372671 * 0.00005 + 0.2048 * 0.022041

= 0.005843968

kg m s

The results clearly indicate that momentum (p) was conserved during these collisions. P 0.006039642 Pi / Pi = i = = 0.06091 0.09915 Pi Pf 0.005843968 Pf / Pf = = = 0.0593134 Pf 0.098527 10) Kinetic Energy
Ki=1/2M1V1i^2 0.0161 Kf=1/2M1V1f^2+1/2M2V2f^2 0.015029

Ki = m1v12f
2
2 m2 v2 f

Kf =

63

11) Uncertainty in Kinetic Energy

partial derivative of k delta Ki=dM1(V1i^2)/2+dV1iM1V1i delta Kf=dM1(V1f^2)/2+dV1fM1V1f+dM2(V2f^2)/2+dV2fM2V2f (+) delta Ki= 0.001958817 Ki+/- dKi= 0.018059 delta Kf= 0.001780932 Kf+/- dKf= 0.01681

(-) 0.014319 0.013248

v K i K i K i = m1 + v1i = 1i m1 + m1v1i v1i m1 v1i 2 kg m 2 K i = (0.324763 * 0.00005)*0.5 + (0.019729 * 0.3053 * 0.324763) = 0.001958817 s2
2

K f v1 f v2 f Kf Kf K f = m1 + v1 f + m 2 + v 2 f = m1 + m1v1 f v1 f + m2 + m2 v2 f v2 f m1 v1 f m2 v2 f 2 2
K f = (0.00005* 0.0727272 )* 0.5 + (0.004283469*0.3053*0.072727) + (0.00005*0.3726712)*0.5 +

K f

(0.022041*0.2048*0.372671) = 0.001780932

kg m 2 s2

The results clearly indicate that kinetic energy was conserved during these collisions. Fractional Uncertainties K 0.001958817 Ki / Ki = i = = 0.1217 0.0161 Ki Kf 0.001780932 K f /K f = = = 0.1185 Kf 0.015029

64

Part B

1) w = tb1i tb(1+2)f xb1+ xb2 =

0.0728s 0.1274s 0.0005+ 0.0005 = 0.001033s 0.002633s 0.001 m deltaTB1I deltaTB1F

tb1i tb1f

t b1i = 0.001033 2 + 0.0012 t b1 f = 0.002633 2 + 0.0012

0.001438s 0.002817s

2)

v1i =
v1 =

w1 t b1i
v2 =

v1 f =

w1 tb 2 f

Uncertainties in the velocity v = v v w 1 tb + w = 2 tb + w tb w tb tb

V=1/tb1i* W1+W1/tb1i^2* tb1i
deltaTB1I = Squareroot(uncert^2+.001^2)

dv1i
0.02025

dv1f
0.01201

v1 = v2 =

m 0.024 1 0.001 = 0.02025 0.001438 + 2 0.0728 0.0728 s m 0.024 1 0.002817 + 0.001 = 0.01201 2 0.1274 0.1274 s

Initial and Final momentums

Pi = m1v1i
0.10065

Pf = (m1 + m2 )v 2

0.9609

65

Pi = m1v1 = (0.3053) 0.32967

m kg m = 0.10065 s s m kg m = 0.9609 s s

6) Uncertainty in the momentums

(+) 0.106848 0.9669 (-) 0.094452 0.9549

delta Pi = delta Pf =

0.006198 0.006

kg m s kg m s

p f = v 2 m1 + v 2 m 2 + (m1 + m 2 )v 2 = 0.32967 0.00005 + 0.188383 0.00005 + 0.5101 0.012014 =0.006

The results clearly indicate that momentum (p) was conserved during these collisions. P 0.006198 Pi / Pi = i = = 0.06158 0.10065 Pi Pf 0.006 Pf / Pf = = = 0.006244 Pf 0.9609

) Kinetic Energy
Ki Kf 0. 00905

0.01659

Ki =

66

11) Uncertainty in Kinetic Energy

(+) 0.01859 0.01021 (-) 0.01459 0.00789

0.002 0.00116

Ki+/- dKi= Kf+/- dKf=

v1 kg m 2 2 K i = m1 + m1v1 v1i = 0.32967 x 0.5x0.00005 + 0.32967 x 0.3053 x 0.02025 = 0.002 2 s2 v v K f = 2 m1 + 2 m2 + (m1 + m2 )v 2 v 2 =0.1883832x 0.5x0.00005+0.1883832x 0.5x0.00005 + 0.5101 x 2 2 kg m 2 0.188383 x 0.012014= 0.00116 s2 The results clearly indicate that kinetic energy was not conserved during these collisions.
Fractional Uncertainties K 0.002 Ki / Ki = i = = 0.12055 0.01659 Ki Kf 0.00116 K f /K f = = = 0.1282 Kf 0.00905
2 2

Results Part A

Velocity
m m 0.019729 s s m m v1f = 0.072727 0.004283469 s s m m v2f = 0.372671 0.022041 s s

v1i = 0.324763

Momentum
kg m kg m 0.006039642 . s s kg m kg m Pf = 0.098527 0.005843968 s s

Pi = 0.09915

67

Pi / Pi = 0.06091 Pf / Pf = 0.0593134

Kinetic Energy

kg m 2 kg m 2 K i = 0.0161 0.001958817 s2 s2 kg m 2 kg m 2 K f = 0.015029 0.001780932 s2 s2

Fractional Uncertainties:
K i / K i = 0.1217 K f / K f = 0.1185

Part B

Velocity
m m 0.02025 s s m m v2 = 1.8838 0.01201 s s

v1 = 0.32967

Momentum
g cm kg m 0.006198 . s s g cm kg m Pf = 0.9609 0.006 s s

Pi = 0.10065

Fractional Uncertainties:
Pi / Pi = 0.06158 Pf / Pf = 0.006244

Kinetic Energy:

68

kg m 2 kg m 2 0.002 s2 s2 kg m 2 kg m 2 K f = 0.00905 0.00116 s2 s2 K i = 0.01659

Fractional Uncertainties:
K i / K i = 0.12055 K f / K f = 0.1282

Conclusion

For part A the theoretical and experimental values for the moment of inertia are in
0 0 agreement because the he range of possible values for the theoretical value I d I d

overlap the range of possible values for the experimental result I d I d . For part B the Momentum was conserved there is an intersection between the two values and therefore the momentum is conserved. The kinetic energy obtained showed that there is no intersection between the two answer sets and therefore kinetic energy was not conserved. This proves that the collisions performed in part B are non-elastic and contrariwise.

69