20 views

Uploaded by Ale D.

Force, Momentum, Impulse

Force, Momentum, Impulse

© All Rights Reserved

- EIT Exp 5 DSOscilloscope
- Semi-Log Analysis
- IDF Curv_1
- The Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. I Ch.pdf
- FLUKE 190-204
- Dumont 79-02A_Dual Trace (Vertical Plugin) Instruction Manual With Maintenance Part_6704 55l2
- Momentum and Impulse
- Sample Questions
- BS 4331-1 -1978
- Tds 2012
- PHYSICS CENTRAL FORCE.pdf
- JJ205 Engineering Mechanics - Case Study 2 - Different Between Ac Motor and DC Motor
- Momentum
- Chaudhri (17)
- fall off 3
- LEC 19 (conservation of momentum 041).ppt
- senior science scitech cross curricular proposal
- Physics 2nd Sem Suggest mec
- 2.1-2.3
- Laws of Collision-Demosntration Track and Measure Dynamics

You are on page 1of 10

1.

INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................3

2.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE.....................................................................4

3.

3.1.

CALIBRATION

3.2.

3.4.

ELASTIC COLLISION

OF A

FORCE SENSOR..............................................................................4

ON AN

TWO

MAGNETS...............................................................5

4.

REFERENCES.........................................................................................10

5.

ANNEX.................................................................................................. 10

5.1.

LIST OF FIGURES

YFIG. 1:........................... MEASURED

5

FIG. 2: SET-UP

FIG. 3: LOG-LOG

FIG. 4: SET-UP

GRAPH OF

F(S)

OVER R.................................................................................8

FIG. 5: RECORDED

LIST OF TABLES

YTABLE 1. MEASURED

TABLE 2. MEASURED

1.

INTRODUCTION

The aim of these experiments was to analyse the validity of the 1/r2 law for magnetic forces and the

change of momentum in elastic collisions. For this purpose, the experiment was divided in three parts.

First a force sensor was calibrated using a set of weights of known mass and measuring an output

voltage for each weight to calculate a calibration curve. Then, in the second part of the experiment,

the force sensor was used to measure the attraction force between two magnets. The attractive force

was calculated at different distances r to analyse the validity of the distance law for this force.

The third part of the experiment was devoted to analysing the relationship between the impulse of a

force and the change in linear momentum using a sled on an air cushion track.

2.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

The experiments described herein were performed following the procedures included in the script of

the introductory laboratory course physics.

3.

1

The calibration factor for a bending rod force sensor (U-OL) was calculated. The force sensor has a

known measuring range between 0 and 5 N. The force sensor output was connected to a signal

amplifier (U OL, with the damping switch OFF), which was connected to a power supply and an

oscilloscope was used to measure the output voltage Um of the signal amplifier. Then, using a

weighting platform, series of known masses m having a weight G where systematically measured with

the force sensor and the corresponding voltages Um were recorded.

G=mg

(eq. 1)

Table 1 shows the measured values for voltage Um for the 10 different masses m, the calculated error

for the voltage measurements, and the calculated weight G according to the value of each mass. The

error associated with the voltage measurements was obtained from the amplitude of the deviation of

signal reading from the mean reading of the oscilloscope, this was measure using the measurement

bars of the oscilloscope.

Table 1.

Measured and calculated data used for calibrating the force sensor.

m/g

49.3

99.48

149.07

199.25

300.73

400.5

501.1

Um/mV

285

372

412

433

635

848

1050

U/mV

14

14

14

14

14

14

14

G/N

0.4838

0.9762

1.4629

1.9553

2.9512

3.9302

4.9174

Following this, G was plotted against the voltage output Um, a regression line was calculated for the

plotted values and a calibration curve was obtained.

1.2

1

R = 0.98

0.8

Um/V

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

G/N

Figure 1 shows an almost linear relation between U and G, which is given by the following equation:

U=171.8 G+167

(Eq. 2)

The y-intercept of this calibration line is an adjustment factor resulting from the voltage signal

generated by the force sensor when no external loads are applied to it. During the experiment it was

observed that when no external loads were applied to the force sensor, a voltage signal U 0 of 199 mV

was constantly generated. The difference of 32 mV between the calculated value and the

experimentally observed value may be an indicator of an uncertainty in the measurements. It is

important to mention that the fourth measurement does not comply with the linear behaviour that the

sensor is supposed to have. One cause of this error may be the unstable readings of voltage in the

oscilloscope.

To perform this experiment two magnets were mounted in aluminium tubes, which were screwed to

rods. The upper magnet was attached to the force sensor (S) together with the rod. A guide (A) was

used to confine the motion of the upper magnet to a vertical direction. The lower magnet was

mounted on an adjustable table V, to a position where the longitudinal axes of both magnets

superimposed each other.

First, the force excerpted on the force sensor by the weight of the first magnet was recorded using a

distance r for which the attraction between the magnets could be neglected, this measurement

corresponded to 7.44 mV. Then, the initial distance between both magnets was set using a PVC piece

of 20.00 mm 0.05mm. Subsequently, the adjustable table was set to the scale position s=10.00 mm

0.05mm and the voltage US(s) was measured. Subsequently, s was reduced to about s=2 mm in steps

of approx. 0.5 mm and the output voltage US(s) was measured each time.

To examine the validity of the 1/r2 distance law, the real distance r between both magnets was

calculated. First, the force Fg(s) corresponding to each measured output voltage US(s) was calculated

using the data of the calibration function (eq. 2) and rewriting it as seen in equation 3.

F g (s )=

U sb

a

(eq. 3)

Then, the weight G of the first magnet was subtracted from the force Fg(s) to find the forces F(s)

caused by magnetic attraction were obtained.

F ( s )=F G ( s )G

(eq. 4)

Then, the deflection d(F) of the bending rod of the force sensor was calculated with equation 5, where

a1 and a2 values are 0.4129 and -3.96E-4 respectively.

d ( F )=a1 F +a2 F

(eq. 5)

Using the calculated deflection d(F), the real distance r between both magnets at a scale position s on

the adjustable table was calculated using equation 6. The results are shown in table 2.

r=sd

Table 2.

U/mV

8.74

22.4

27.2

26.9

28.8

32.5

32.2

35.6

40.1

43.8

49.1

58.8

65.1

79.1

101

135

337

(eq. 6)

s/mm

10.0

9.5

9.0

8.5

8.0

7.5

7.0

6.5

6.0

5.5

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

FG/N

0.0509

0.13

0.158

0.157

0.168

0.189

0.187

0.207

0.233

0.255

0.286

0.342

0.379

0.46

0.588

0.786

1.962

Fs /N

0.008

0.087

0.115

0.113

0.124

0.146

0.144

0.164

0.19

0.212

0.242

0.299

0.336

0.417

0.545

0.742

1.918

d(F)/mm

0.021

0.054

0.065

0.065

0.069

0.078

0.077

0.086

0.096

0.105

1.18E-01

1.41E-01

1.56E-01

1.90E-01

2.43E-01

3.24E-01

8.08E-01

r/mm

9.98

9.45

8.93

8.44

7.93

7.42

6.92

6.41

5.9

5.39

4.882

4.3587

3.8436

3.31

2.7574

2.1758

1.1916

F(s) was log-log plotted over r, with a regression line with the fixed slope -2 drawn into the diagram,

as shown in figure 3.

The law 1/r2 was not validated by the results of the experiment. As seen in figure 3, the regression line

with gradient -2 only coincides with a few points. It is visible that the first measured values behave as

the last values would be expected to, that is they do not follow a straight line relationship with the rest

of the values. It was found that the slope of the best fit line through the points excluding the first two

is of about -1.3.

In this experiment an air cushion track, according to figure 4, is used to determine the relationship

between the impulse of force and the change in momentum. The force sensor was fixed on mounting

H and sled k1 was placed on the track L k, which is nearly frictionless due to the air. The sled was

manually accelerated towards the force sensor, during its motion it passes the light barrier Ls twice

which is connected to the CH2 of the oscilloscope. The sensor is connected to the amplifier and to

CH1 of the oscilloscope. Afterwards the signals are recorded on one screen and the momentum is

finally determined. For that the mass of the sled and the width of the screen on the sled are measured.

The recorded screenshot for the oscilloscope is shown in figure 5. The square-wave is the signal from

the light barrier and the other one is from the force sensor.

From the measured values tLS=0.1264 s 0.0001 s and and tLS=0.1316 s 0.0001 s were found for

the motion before and after the collision. The mass m of the sledge was 211.47 g and the width d of

plate B was 3.0 cm 0.05 cm. Using these values, the change in momentum was calculated with

equation 7. The maximum error for this calculation was obtained using equation 8. As requested in the

script m and d were regarded as error free.

p=m d (

1

1

+ ' )

t LS t LS

| | | |

error p=

md

md

'

t ls+

t ls

2

2

t ls

t ' ls

(eq. 7)

(eq. 8)

The change of momentum was also determined with the values recorded on the oscilloscope. To do

so, the mean value of all measurements before and after the collision was taken. This was subtracted

from all measured values during the collision. This mean value was found to be 0.00299V. Then the

sum of the measurements during the collision was taken over all values, which is 77.74V. This values

was then converted to a force by using the calibration curve of the force sensor calculated in section

3.1, giving a force of 451.5N. Afterwards, the resulting force was multiplied by

t=100.05

Sec

/2500 = 2E-4. The resulting change in momentum

t , which is

is given by

equation

(eq. 9)

If we compare both results we see that there is a small difference between the theoretical and the

experimental values. Small losses in friction and possible errors in calibration of the sensor may

account for the small difference between the values. Overall the values are close enough to say that

the system is conservative.

- EIT Exp 5 DSOscilloscopeUploaded byMahadev
- Semi-Log AnalysisUploaded bymroostaeian
- IDF Curv_1Uploaded byresearcher911
- The Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. I Ch.pdfUploaded byDeevita Dv
- FLUKE 190-204Uploaded byAmer Keres
- Dumont 79-02A_Dual Trace (Vertical Plugin) Instruction Manual With Maintenance Part_6704 55l2Uploaded byjabo499534
- Momentum and ImpulseUploaded byJosh Pilipovsky
- Sample QuestionsUploaded bymkpsrtm
- BS 4331-1 -1978Uploaded bymomo
- Tds 2012Uploaded byinjector1
- PHYSICS CENTRAL FORCE.pdfUploaded bysushant mishra
- JJ205 Engineering Mechanics - Case Study 2 - Different Between Ac Motor and DC MotorUploaded byabidsufian
- MomentumUploaded byMusa Mohammed
- Chaudhri (17)Uploaded byسحر سلامتیان
- fall off 3Uploaded byMukisa Herman
- LEC 19 (conservation of momentum 041).pptUploaded byAmul Yadav
- senior science scitech cross curricular proposalUploaded byapi-306208131
- Physics 2nd Sem Suggest mecUploaded byGada Hada
- 2.1-2.3Uploaded byDuygu Deniz Eryaşar
- Laws of Collision-Demosntration Track and Measure DynamicsUploaded byDelfinManuel
- Newton laws of motion.pdfUploaded byTaylor Andres Amaya
- Scope 1Uploaded bySunu Pradana
- Final PosterUploaded bysujingthet
- Full TextUploaded byJake Villaruel Cabauatan
- Prelim Test Procedure Little GooseUploaded byAmberMeerab
- phabulous physics rollercoaster unitUploaded byapi-297478801
- Law of NewtonUploaded byConselvien Juno Limson Asoy
- Vitors WorkshopUploaded byAlexander Wiese
- Project ProposalUploaded byMohammad Abbas
- 34080945 Automotive ElectronicsUploaded byusamedemir

- E703-98 EC Sorting of NonFerrous.pdfUploaded byTerfaia Nadjat
- FGUploaded byFranck Jonhson
- Resonance SoundUploaded byVikash Vashisht
- UTD2000&3000 User Manual V1.02.pdfUploaded byWilliam Oscar Jacob Fernandez Pari
- ECE102 Electronic Lab II Manual IIU MalaysiaUploaded bysteiner68
- Oscilloscope PhysicsUploaded bykukumarcic
- Manual de Usuario GOS-6103CUploaded byAnonymous sE5f6iNnQY
- Proteo UsUploaded byFredy Siswanto
- Scope Pocket GuideUploaded byandorrr4937
- Smart Sat ManualUploaded byYasser Badreddine
- power E lab 2Uploaded byAkhilaa Servai
- Sony Hcd Xb66Uploaded bysajara5
- 1398 ManualUploaded byvaquero215
- 0076J1Uploaded byReza Mehrad
- Troubleshooting SMPS ProblemUploaded bykevin_ipr
- AC Stag 300 ISA2 - ManualUploaded bynixonbn
- Fluke Calibration Products and Services Short Form CatalogUploaded bysava88
- ci73Uploaded byJaime Huaynate
- Small-Signal Laplace-Domain Analysis of Uniformly-sampled Pulse-width ModulatorsUploaded bythietdaucong
- ME3200 simulador de InstrumentaçãoUploaded byferruzzi
- telwin 111 repairUploaded byKlavdija Cankar
- ChopperUploaded byRolando Garcia
- China TV 3Y11Uploaded byLefter Tiron
- Chapter 1 PAM Modulator Dan DemodulatorUploaded byGaluhIrawan
- EsrUploaded byNishan Ranabhat
- Rigol DS1054Z UserGuideUploaded bynivlark
- Oscilloscope BasicsUploaded byapi-3832313
- SE E TC 2015 Course 14 JuneUploaded byAnonymous kT0ONW
- INEL4077Uploaded byXavier J. Aguilar García
- emmi 1Uploaded bySoundari Nadar