Moment of Inertia of a Tennis Ball

Author’s Name: Arsalan Ahmed

Author’s ID : aa03980

Laboratory Partner’s Name : Syed Sarim Zuhair

Laboratory Partner’s ID : sk03972

November 10, 2018

 Plagiarism Declaration:
This lab report is 100% my own work and is in
my own words, except for the paraphrased
ideas, quotations and pictures taken from
published and unpublished sources which are
clearly acknowledged and given credit as such.
I am aware of the fact that copying or
paraphrasing material from any source
without acknowledging it will be considered as
plagiarism according to Habib University’s
regulations.
Contents

1 Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3 Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.1 Moment of Inertia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.2 Torsional Pendulum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1 Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2 Setup of the Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.3 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5 Results/Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.1 Torsional Constant κ of the wire . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2 Moment of inertia I of the tennis ball . . . . . . . . . . 13
6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1 Abstract
The primary reason to do this experiment was to investigate whether the ex-
perimentally determined values of moment of inertia yielded the same result
as the equations of moment of inertia.

For this we first calculated the moment of inertia I of the tennis ball theoreti-
cally by measuring its dimensions using a vernier caliper. Then we calculated
the theoretical value of the moment of inertia I of the composite cylinder by
measuring its dimensions using a vernier caliper which was to be used in
calculating the torsional constant κ of the wire. Next by measuring the time
period T for the composite cylinder using a stop watch and torsional pen-
dulum where the cylinder was the suspended entity, we were able get the
experimental value of the torsional constant κ of the wire along with its
uncertainty came to be:

κ = 0.006277 ± 0.00123 kg m2 /s2

Finally we calculated the experimental value of the moment of inertia of the

tennis ball by using the value of the torsional constant κ and measuring the
time period T for the ball using the same setup as that for the cylinder which
came to be:
I = (3.12 ± 0.63) × 10−5 kg m2
The literature value of the moment of inertia of the tennis ball after measuring
the dimensions of the ball was:

I = 3.744 × 10−5 kg m2

The literature and experimental values of the moment of inertia I of the

tennis ball were in agreement with each other while considering some errors
in the experiment.

1
2 Introduction
From the motion of tiny subatomic particles like neutron, proton and elec-
tron to the motion of large heavenly bodies, rotation is something which is
observed at all scales. When we talk about a rotating body like a ceiling fan
or a circular saw blade, we do not consider it as a point moving rather it is
a body rotating about a fixed axis.

The type of motion produced in a body capable of undergoing rotations

is dependent upon the applied external force on it. The type of motion of
the body can vary because rotations of the body around a fixed perpendicu-
lar axis of rotation can be different if the external force is applied at different
locations on the body. This rotational force is called torque which tends to
rotate a body around its axis by taking into consideration the direction and
location of the applied force. When a rigid body is undergoing rotational
motion about a fixed axis, a quantity called the the moment of inertia is as-
sociated with it which is dependent upon the body’s mass distribution. The
moment of inertia is in rotational motion, what mass is in non-rotational
motion. Its the measure of the object’s resistance to change its rotational or
angular velocity just like mass resists the change in linear velocity which is
called inertia.

The main objective of this experiment was to introduce and familiarize our-
selves with the concept of moment of inertia. While dealing with moment
of inertia in this experiment we came across an important concept of tor-
sional constant of a wire and saw how it is calculated. Some important sub-
objectives that were achieved with this experiment includes learning about
calibration, error propagation, complete cycle of experiment, data genera-
tion, analysis and presentation and other mathematical tools to find a re-
quired quantity [1]. Finally, a comparison was made between the theoretical
and measured values to determine the accuracy of our hypothesis [1].

3 Theory
3.1 Moment of Inertia
The moment of inertia is a physical quantity which describes how much a
body resists change in its rotational or angular velocity [2]. Moment of inertia
also known as rotational inertia is the rotational analogue of mass, meaning
what inertial mass does in non-rotational motion, is done by moment of in-

2
ertia in rotational motion [2]. The unit of moment of inertia is kg m2 .

The moment of inertia for a simple point particle is given as:

I = mr2
where m is the mass of the point particle and r is the distance of that point
particle from fixed axis of rotation.

Since any object is made up of collection of point masses, this relationship

I = mr2 becomes the basis for rotational inertia of objects of different types.

Figure 1: A disk can be conceptualized as comprising of a large number of

particles. [1]

Now lets consider an object for example a disc rotating about a fixed axis of
rotation. Since the disc is made up of many point particles, its moment of
inertia is given as a sum of all the point particles present in the disc [3]:

mi ri2
X
I=
i

Here, there are i number of point particles.

If we consider the disk to be made up of infinite number of point particles

then the moment of inertia becomes:
ri2 δmi
X
I=
i

3
where δmi is the small mass element (which tends to zero) at a distance ri
from the axis of rotation.

This sums becomes an integral once limits are applied [3].

ri2 δmi
X
I = lim
δmi →0
i
Z
I= r2 dm
Using this technique we can precisely calculate the rotational inertia of dif-
ferent objects. In this experiment we have used a tennis ball and a composite
cylinder.

The moment of inertia of a tennis ball (a hollow sphere) is given as:

5
2 R5 − Rint
I = M ext
3 3
(1)
5 Rext − Rint
where M is the mass of the tennis ball, Rext is the external radius and Rext
is the internal radius [1].

The moment of inertia of a composite cylinder is given as:

1
I = πρ(h1 R14 + h2 R24 − h2 R14 ) (2)
2
where ρ is the density of the material, h1 is the total height of the cylinder,
h2 is the height of the bottom cylinder, R1 is the radius of the top cylinder
and R2 is the radius of the bottom cylinder [1].

3.2 Torsional Pendulum

The basic difference between a conventional pendulum and torsional pen-
dulum is that a torsional pendulum has a mass suspended on a wire that
rotates about its axis of rotation periodically, unlike a conventional pen-
dulum where the suspended mass swings sideways in periodic manner [4].
Torsional pendulum are commonly used in mechanical watches and mouse-
traps [1]. Another example of a torsional pendulum is the Cavendish balance
with which the value of gravitational constant G was determined [1]. Figure
2 shows a Cavendish torsion balance.

4
 Figure 2: Cavendishs torsion balance. [1]

The torsional pendulum undergoes simple harmonic motion which is an os-

cillatory or periodic motion under a restoring force opposite in direction and
proportional to the displacement from a position of equilibrium [4]. The wire
of a torsional pendulum is attached to a support at one end and to the cen-
tre of the mass of the object at the other end. When the object is twisted
slightly the object starts rotating periodically. The wire exerts a restoring
torque which brings the object back to its equilibrium position.

Figure 3: (a) The torsional pendulum, compared with a (b) simple pendulum.
Analogy with a (c) mass attached to a spring. [1]

Hooke’s law also stays valid for torsional pendulum where the restoring force
i.e. the torque τ is proportional to the angular displacement θ [4].

τ = −κθ (3)

where κ is the torsional constant depending on the properties of the wire.

The negative sign in the equation signifies that the direction of torque is
opposite to the angular displacement θ [5]. This equation is analogous to
F = κx which is for a mass-spring system.

5
The equation for Newton’s second law of motion for rotational or angular
motion is given as:
τ = Iα
d2 θ
τ = I 2 (4)
dt
where I is the moment of inertia and α = d2 θ/dt2 is the angular acceleration.
This equation is analogous to force in linear motion that is F = ma.

Comparing equations 3 and 4:

d2 θ
−κθ = I 2
dt
d2 θ κ
2
= −( )θ
dt I
The solution to the above differential which is the equation of motion for a
simple harmonic oscillator is given as:
θ(t) = θm cos(ωt + φ)
where θm is the maximum angular displacement,
q φ is the phase constant and
ω is the angular frequency which is equal to κ/I [5].

Figure 4: The position of the particle executing SHM. [1]

The time period of one oscillation is given as:
2π
T =
ω
Substituting the value of ω in the equation.
s
I
T = 2π
κ

6
This equation is extremely important for our experiment because we can
calculate the torsional constant κ and the moment of inertia I of the object
from this equation depending upon what is known and unknown to us.

Rearranging the equation to make κ the subject:

4π 2 I
κ= (5)
T2
If we have the measured values of the moment of inertia I and the time pe-
riod T we can calculate the torsional constant κ of the wire from equation 5.

Now again rearranging the equation to make I the subject:

T 2κ
I= (6)
4π 2
On the other hand if we have measured the time period T and the torsional
constant κ, we can calculate the moment of inertia I of any object from the
above equation 6.

4 Method
4.1 Equipment
The equipment we have used in this experiment is listed below:

1. Stainless steel wire

2. Tennis ball

3. Half cut tennis ball

4. Iron stand with a clamp

5. Stop watch

6. Vernier caliper

7. Aluminum composite cylinder

8. Electronic balance

7
4.2 Setup of the Experiment
The basic setup of the experiment included the object whose time period
was to be measured for example a cylinder or a ball been suspended on an
iron stand using a wire. This step assembled the torsional pendulum and the
time periods were measured using a stop watch when a slight twist was given
to the object to start oscillations. The setup of the experiment is shown in
figure 5 below:

Figure 5: (a) Setup for calibration, (b) tennis ball attached to a fixed support,
and (c) the provided apparatus. [1]

4.3 Procedure
First of all we took the measurements for dimensions of the tennis ball and
the composite cylinder. The radii of the tennis ball and the heights in the
composite cylinder were measured using a vernier caliper while the mass of
the ball was measured using an electronic balance. Once we had the mea-
surements we did the theoretical calculations for the moment of inertia of
these two objects.

Next we had to measure the torsional constant κ of the wire so that we

can get the experimental value of the moment of inertia of the tennis ball.
For that we suspended the composite cylinder using the wire on the iron
stand and gave it a slight twist. The cylinder started undergoing oscillations
and the time period for 10 oscillations was measured using a stop watch and
the time period for a single oscillation was calculated from it. We did this
step 6 times to minimize the random error. Once we had the average value
of the time period we calculated the torsional constant κ from equation 5

8
since we already had the moment of inertia I of the tennis ball.

Finally we had to get the experimental value of the moment of inertia of

the tennis ball. Since we already found the torsional constant κ of the wire,
we just required the time period of the oscillation of the tennis ball. This
time we suspended the tennis ball using the wire on the iron stand and gave
it a slight twist. The ball started undergoing oscillations and the time period
for 10 oscillations was measured using a stop watch and the time period for
a single oscillation was calculated from it. We did this step 6 times to min-
imize the random error. Once we had the average value of the time period
we calculated the moment of inertia I from equation 5.

5 Results/Analysis of Data
5.1 Torsional Constant κ of the wire
Theoretical Calculations:

In our experiment we were given:

ρ = 2.70 g/cm3 or 2700 kg/m2

since we were using an aluminum composite cylinder.

In our experiment we measured:

h1 = 2.085 cm or 0.02085 m
h2 = 1.100 cm or 0.01100 m
R1 = 0.522 cm or 0.00522 m
R2 = 1.385 cm or 0.01385 m

Putting the above values in equation 2:

1
I = π×2700×(0.02085×0.005224 +0.01100×0.013854 −0.01385×0.005224 )
2
I = 1.739 × 10−6 kg m2
Experimental Readings:

The measured values of the time period of the oscillation of the compos-
ite cylinder are shown in Table 1 below:

9
 S. No. Time Period (T ) Square of Deviation (T − A)2
s s2
1 0.09 s 2.25 × 10−4 s2
2 0.08 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2
3 0.13 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2
4 0.12 s 2.25 × 10−4 s2
5 0.13 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2
6 0.08 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2

Table 1: Time period of composite cylinder

T1 + T2 + T3 + T4 + T5 + T6
Average Time Period = A =
6
A = 0.105 s
The average time period of the composite cylinder is A = 0.105 s

Now from the average time period, we can calculate the value of torsional
constant κ by using equation 5 since we have already calculated the value of
the moment of inertia I:
4π 2 I
κ=
T2
Putting the value of moment of inertia I and time period T of the cylinder
that we have already obtained in the equation.

4π 2 × 1.739 × 10−6
κ=
0.1052
κ = 0.006277 kg m2 /s2
So the torsional constant κ turns out to be equal to 0.006277 kg m2 /s2

We also needed the uncertainty in the value κ for which we did the fol-
lowing calculations:

Uncertainty in I:

We calculated the moment of inertia I from the equation 2. The measured

entities in that equation were the heights and radii of the composite cylin-
der which were measured using a digital vernier caliper and hence contained

10
Type B uncertainty. This uncertainty in the values of heights and radii is
calculated below:
1
(Length of Interval)
UH−R = 2 √
3
1
2
× 0.0001
UH−R = √
3
UH−R = 2.887 × 10−5 m
Transferring this uncertainty UH−R in the measurements of heights and radii
to the moment of inertia I of the composite cylinder:

1
I = πρ(h1 R14 + h2 R24 − h2 R14 )
2
1
dI = πρ((h1 (4R13 dR1 )+R14 dh1 )+(h2 (4R23 dR2 )+R24 dh2 )−(h2 (4R13 dR1 )+R14 dh2 ))
2
1 4dR1 dh1 4dR2 dh2 4dR1 dh2
dI = πρ(h1 R14 ( + ) + h2 R24 ( + ) − h2 R14 ( + ))
2 R1 h1 R2 h2 R1 h2
1 4dR1 dh1 4dR2 dh2 4dR1 dh2
dI = πρ(h1 R14 +h2 R24 −h2 R14 )(( + )+( + )−( + ))
2 R1 h1 R2 h2 R1 h2
4dR1 dh1 4dR2 dh2 4dR1 dh2
dI = I(( + )+( + )−( + ))
R1 h1 R2 h2 R1 h2
s
4UH−R UH−R 2 4UH−R UH−R 2 4UH−R UH−R 2
UI = I (( + ) +( + ) −( + ))
R1 h1 R2 h2 R1 h2
Putting all the values in above equation we get:

UI = 1.303 × 10−8 kg m2

To calculate the uncertainty in the torsional constant κ we also needed the

uncertainty in the time period T which was of two types.

Type A uncertainty in the time period T :

(T −A)21 +(T −A)22 +(T −A)23 +(T −A)24 +(T −A)25 +(T −A)26
Average Square Deviation = Z = 6

Z = 4.91 × 10−4 s2
√
Standard Deviation = σ = Z

11
σ = 0.0221 s
σ
UA = √
N −1
0.0221
UA = √
6−1
UA = 9.88 × 10−3 s
Type B uncertainty in the time period T :
1
2
(Length of Interval)
UB = √
3
1
2
× 0.01
UB = √
3
UB = 2.887 × 10−3 s
Total uncertainty in the time period T :

q
UT OT AL = UA2 + UB2
q
UT OT AL = (9.88 × 10−3 )2 + (2.887 × 10−3 )2
UT OT AL = 0.0103 s

Now calculating the uncertainty in the torsional constant κ by transferring

these uncertainties:

Uncertainty in the torsional constant κ:

4π 2 I
κ=
T2
T 2 dI + I(2T dT )
dκ = 4π 2
T4
4π 2 I (T 2 dI)/I + (2T dT )
dκ = ( )
T2 T2
4π 2 I dI 2dT
dκ = ( + )
T2 I T

12
 s
UI 2 2UT 2
Uκ = κ ( ) +( )
I T
Putting all the values in above equation we get:
Uκ = 0.00123 kg m2 /s2
So,
κ = 0.006277 ± 0.00123 kg m2 /s2

5.2 Moment of inertia I of the tennis ball

Theoretical Calculations:

In our experiment we measured:

M = 63.3 cm or 0.0633 kg
Rext = 3.270 cm or 0.03270 m
Rint = 2.630 cm or 0.02630 m

Putting the above values in equation 1:

2 0.032705 − 0.026305
I= × 0.0633 ×
5 0.032703 − 0.026303
I = 3.744 × 10−5 kg m2

Experimental Readings:

The measured values of the time period of the oscillation of the tennis ball
are shown in Table 2 below:
S. No. Time Period (T ) Square of Deviation (T − A)2
s s2
1 0.44 s 2.25 × 10−4 s2
2 0.42 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2
3 0.46 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2
4 0.47 s 2.25 × 10−4 s2
5 0.41 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2
6 0.46 s 6.25 × 10−4 s2
Table 2: Time period of composite cylinder

T1 + T2 + T3 + T4 + T5 + T6
Average Time Period = A =
6
13
 A = 0.443 s
The average time period of the tennis ball is A = 0.443 s

Now from the average time period, we can calculate the experimental value
of the moment of inertia of the tennis ball using equation 6 since we have
already calculated the value of the torsional constant κ:
T 2κ
I=
4π 2
Putting the value of torsional constant κ and time period T of the ball that
we have already obtained in the equation.
(0.443)2 × 0.006277
I=
4π 2
I = 3.12 × 10−5 kg m2
So the experimental value of moment of inertia I of the tennis ball turns out
to be equal to 3.12 × 10−5 kg m2 .

We also needed the uncertainty in the value I for which we did the fol-
lowing calculations:

Type A uncertainty in the time period T :

(T −A)21 +(T −A)22 +(T −A)23 +(T −A)24 +(T −A)25 +(T −A)26
Average Square Deviation = Z = 6

Z = 4.91 × 10−4 s
√
Standard Deviation = σ = Z

σ = 0.0221 s
σ
UA = √
N −1
0.0221
UA = √
6−1
UA = 9.88 × 10−3 s
Type B uncertainty in the time period T :
1
2
(Length of Interval)
UB = √
3

14
 1
2
× 0.01
UB = √
3
UB = 2.887 × 10−3 s

Total uncertainty in the time period T :

q
UT OT AL = UA2 + UB2
q
UT OT AL = (9.88 × 10−3 )2 + (2.887 × 10−3 )2
UT OT AL = 0.0103 s

Now calculating the uncertainty in the moment of inertia I by transferring

these uncertainties:

Uncertainty in I:
T 2κ
I=
4π 2
1
dI = 2
(T 2 dκ + κ(2T dT ))
4π
T 2 κ dκ 2dT
dI = ( + )
4π 2 κ T
s
Uκ 2 2UT 2
UI = I ( ) +( )
κ T
Putting all the values in above equation we get:

UI = 0.63 × 10−5 kg m2

So,
I = (3.12 ± 0.63) × 10−5 kg m2

6 Discussion
If we compare the theoretical and the experimental values of the moment
of inertia I of the tennis ball it is evident that the theoretical value of I
is 3.744 × 10−5 kg m2 while the experimental value with its uncertainty is
(3.12 ± 0.63) × 10−5 kg m2 . This means that experimental value of I over-
laps with the theoretical value or is inside the uncertainty bounds. Lets now
discuss some sources of errors present in our experiment.

15
Firstly, when we were measuring the time period of oscillations of the tennis
ball and the composite cylinder using a stop watch, there was a random error
present even though we tried to minimize it by measuring the time period
several times.

Secondly, there were several potential sources of systematic error in our ex-
periment. There is no general method for determining systematic error. The
devices we used like the electronic balance and digital vernier caliper could
have been being calibrated poorly or not adjusted at all. Another source of
error could be the fact that we took measurements on one tennis ball and
measured the oscillations on an entirely different ball. This is referring to the
point that for measuring the mass and the radii of the tennis ball we used a
half cut tennis ball but for the oscillations a full tennis ball attached with the
wire was used. Another thing to note here is that the theory almost always
assumes some simplifications in order to make the calculation reasonable. In
our case it neglected the weight of the wire and also assumed that friction is
zero. When some important physics is neglected in the experiment, system-
atic error comes into play.

The accuracy of our results could be improved by minimizing the sources

of error discussed above. Systematic errors are usually hard to detect as
they occur due to neglecting an initial condition and are consistent through
out the data. In general, best ways to get rid of systematic errors are using a
different set of tools, repeating the experiment in a different environment and
asking someone else to do the experiment and then compare the readings.
Also, while calculating the theoretical values all physical conditions should
be taken into account without neglecting or assuming anything.

7 Conclusion
This experiment was meant to experimentally calculate the moment of iner-
tia of a tennis ball. Once we calculate that we made a comparison with the
theoretical value and checked whether our hypothesis(The theoretical equa-
tions of moment of inertia) was correct and determined the accuracy of our
result.

The literature value of the moment of inertia of the tennis ball after measur-
ing the dimensions of the ball was:
I = 3.744 × 10−5 kg m2

16
The experimental value of the moment of inertia of the tennis ball with its
uncertainty after experimentally calculating the value of torsional constant
κ was:
I = (3.12 ± 0.63) × 10−5 kg m2

It is evident that the experimental value of I overlaps with the theoretical

value or is inside the uncertainty bounds. So keeping in mind the sources
of errors present in our experiment which were discussed in the last section,
the literature value and the experimental value are quite close or are in
agreement with each other which conveys that our hypothesis was correct
and the experiment was a success.

8 References
[1] S.A.Alvi and W.Mushtaq, Moment of Inertia of a Tennis Ball, (ISciM,
Habib University), pp 1-7.

[2] R.Gupta and S.Salgia, Moment of Inertia, (Brilliant.org.)

[3] S.J.Ling, J.Sanny and B.Moebs, Calculating Moments of Inertia, (Open-

Stax University Physics, phys.libretexts.org, 2018).

[4] R.Fitzpatrick, The Torsion Pendulum, (farside.ph.utexas.edu, 2006).

[5] E.W. Weisstein, Torsion Pendulum, (scienceworld.wolfram.com, 2007).

17