Sharon Zhao

Partner: Sarah Brewington

TA: Keither Thrasher
Physics 107L-01
6/27/15
Rotational Motion
Introduction
Circular motion is the movement of an object along the circumference of a
circle or rotation along a circular path. In this lab, rotational motion was explored by
using a rotational motion apparatus to examine angular momentum, angular
acceleration from a torque, and moment of inertia. With experimenting with
rotational motion, we consider only rigid bodies. A rigid body is an object that
retains its overall shape, and in this lab disks were used. The rotational motion of a
rigid body occurs when every point in the body moves in a circular path along an
axis of rotation. The angular displacement (ΔΘ) is the angle the object turns and is in
units of radians. There are 360°, or 2π radians in a circle. A radian can be found by
dividing the arc length by the radius. Angular velocity is the change in angular
displacement over time, defined by: ΔΘ/Δt. Angular acceleration is the rate of
change of angular velocity, α=Δω/Δt. Angular and linear quantities can be related
through 3 equations which are s=rΘ, v=rω, and a=rα.
In previous labs, we have explored kinematic equations for bodies moving at
constant acceleration. There are very clear rotational counterparts for linear
displacement, velocity and acceleration, so we are able to define an analogous set of
equations for rotational kinematics. These include ωf = ω0 + αt and Θf = Θ0 + ω0t + ½
αt2. Torque is a measure of rotational force and defined as force times the lever arm,
Τ = FL. The level arm is the perpendicular distance between the “line of action” and
the axis of rotation. If the definition of torque along with relationships between
linear acceleration and tangential angular acceleration are substituted into
Newton’s second law, we get Τ = Iα. I, or mr2, is the moment of inertia of a point
mass about the center of rotation for a disk/cylinder. Angular momentum is
rotational momentum that is conserved and is a product of the moment of inertia
and angular velocity: L = Iω. The relevance to this lab is to explore these
relationships between angular velocity, angular acceleration, torsion, and inertia
through various disks spinning in a rotational motion apparatus.

Procedure
This lab was broken down into 3 experiments to explore different aspects of
rotational motion. The first explored angular momentum through the inelastic
sticking of two rotators. The masses and radius of two steel disks and one aluminum
disk was found using a weight scale and ruler. The steel disk with the large center
hole was placed at the bottom and the other steel disk was placed on top. We then
opened the file “rot_motion” on DataStudio. After turning on the air pump and
inserting a drop pin between the two disks, we used our hands to spin the top disk.
We clicked “start” to start recording our data on the angular velocity vs time plot.
After a few seconds, the air vent pin was removed and we clicked “stop” to stop
recording data. This exact procedure was then repeated with the aluminum disk as
the top disk. The graphs of angular velocity vs time were then analyzed.
The second experiment explored angular acceleration from a known torque.
A string was wrapped around a bobbin and mounted on top of the steel disk. The
string was passed over the pulley and a pre-weighted mass was placed at the end of
the string so that it was hanging freely off the edge of the table. We then wound the
string on the bobbin so that the mass hanged freely just below the pulley. We clicked
“start” on DataStudio and allowed the top disk to freely spin as the mass falls due to
its weight force. We clicked “Stop” when the string completely unwound from the
bobbin. Data analysis was then done on the resultant graphs.
The third experiment was finding the moment of inertia for a mass point
based on changes in radius. A barbell assemble was set up on top the bobbin. This
consisted of a long pole placed horizontally that rotated freely around a center pole
that served as the axis of rotation and held in place with a screw. The string was
wound onto the bobbin, and with no masses on the barbell assembly, we clicked
“start” on DataStudio and allowed the mass to fall. The next trial consisted of placing
two pre-weighed masses approximately half the length of each barbell arm. We then
similarly collected data by releasing the disk and allowing the mass to fall. Three
other trials were conducted by adjusting the masses to different lengths along the
barbell arm. The length was measured from the center of rotation to the middle of
the mass beforehand using a ruler. Data analysis was done on resulting values of α
and moment of inertia for each trial.

Data and Analysis

In the inelastic sticking of two rotators, data was generated in a steel-steel
configuration and an aluminum steel-steel configuration. Before any data was
collected, the masses of the disks were found using a weight scale and the radius
was measured with a ruler. Table 1 displays our mass and radius data for the three
disks used.
Mass Radius
Top Steel Disk 1.359 kg 6.3 x 10-2 m
Top Aluminum Disk 0.474 kg 6.3 x 10-2 m
Bottom Steel Disk 1.341 kg 6.3 x 10-2 m
Table 1. Mass (kg) and radius (m) for three disks used in part 1
Running our data generated an angular velocity vs. plot. The graph reveals the time
where only the top disk was rotating, and the change when the pin was removed
and both disks moved at a common angular velocity. Figure 1 shows the plot of our
steel-steel disk configuration.

Figure 1. Angular velocity (deg/s) vs. time (s) plot for our steel-steel disk configuration
The theoretical value for the moment of inertia for the disks was found using the
equation I = ½ mr2 for a disk where m is the total mass and r is the radius of the
disk. Calculated theoretical values of I for each disk can be found in Table 2.
Theoretical I
Top Steel Disk 0.00270 kg x m2
Top Aluminum Disk 0.000940 kg x m2
Bottom Steel Disk 0.00266 kg x m2
Table 2. Moment of inertia for each disk found using the equation ½ mr2
Using the statistics icon on DataStudio, we determined the values for ω1i and ωf. The
experimental value was found by dividing ω1i by ωf. This was compared to the
theoretical value, which was found using the equation (I1+I2)/I1. Calculations are
shown on attached supplemental page 1 and data displayed in Table 3.
Theoretical ωi/ωf Experimental ωi/ωf % Error
Steel-Steel 1.99 deg/s 1.99 deg/s 0%
Configuration
Aluminum-Steel 3.83 deg/s 3.87 deg/s 1%
Configuration
Table 3. Theoretical vs. experimental ωi/ωf for disk configurations and their associated
percent error

The second part of our experiment was finding the angular acceleration from a
known torque. Pre-measured data for the mass of the hanging weight and the radius
of the bobbin is shown in Table 4.
Mass of hanging weight Radius of Bobin
0.020 kg 1.25 x 10-2 m
Table 4. Mass of hanging weight and radius of bobbin
Figure 2 shows our angular velocity vs time plot from the mass dropping. We fit the
data with a linear fit line, and the theoretical angular acceleration (α) is the slope of
this line. The experimentally determined value of α was found using the equation α
= mgr/(I+mr2). Our data is shown in Table 5.
Theoretical Experimental
α 50.0 deg/s2 51.91 deg/s2
Table 5. Theoretical and experimental values of α (deg/s2)
Figure 2. Angular velocity (deg/s) vs time (s) plot for a mass falling

In the third part of the experiment, we found the moment of inertia for 2 masses
arranged at different radii along the arms of a barbell assembly. I0 was first
determined by removing the masses (M) from the system .We solved for I0 using the
equation I0 = mgr/α – mr2 and got an I0 value of 0.00280 kg m2. The masses (M)
were then weighted and totaled to be 0.397 kg. A radius R between the bobbin and
the mass was measured for each of the four trials using a ruler. Angular acceleration
was found by taking the slope of the linear fit. ITOTAL was found using the equation
ITOTAL = mgr/α – mr2 for each trial. The experimental I value was found by
subtracting I0 from ITOTAL. The theoretical value for I was found using the equation
2MR2, where M is the combined weight of the masses, and R is the radius. Percent
error was the found using the equation |theoretical-experimental|/theoretical x
100%. Calculations for each trial are shown on attached supplemental page 2 and
the data is shown in table 6 below. Solving equations 9.15, 9.16 and 9.17 for
equation 9.18 and 9.21 can be found on attached supplemental page 3.
 Run 1 2 3 4
Radius of mass 0.0450 m 0.0700 m 0.0600 m 0.0200 m
M
I total 0.00413 kg m2 0.00600 kg m2 0.00514 kg m2 0.00324 kg m2
I of the 2 0.00133 kg m2 0.00320 kg m2 0.00234 kg m2 0.000400 kg m2
masses
experimental
I of the 2 0.00161 kg m2 0.00390 kg m2 0.00286 kg m2 0.000318 kg m2
masses
theoretical
% error of I for 17% 18% 18% 38%
the 2 masses
Table 6. Moment of inertia calculation values for 4 trials with different radii of mass M
Conclusion
The goals of this lab were met through the three parts that explored rotational
motion. The angular velocity for a steel-steel disc and steel-aluminum disk
configuration showed that when a pin that separates the discs is removed, both
discs will move at the same angular velocity. Our calculated theoretical ratio of
initial over final angular velocity compared to the experimental ratio using inertia
resulted in a 0% error for our steel-steel configuration, and 1% error in our
aluminum-steel configuration. Sources of error in this part could have been due to
the bottom disc initially spinning as we spun the top disc, resulting in an initial
angular velocity that contributed to the system for the bottom disc when it should
be zero. In the second part, we found a theoretical angular acceleration from the
slope of the linear fit to be 50.0 deg/s2 and an experimental acceleration using the
equation to be 51.91 deg/s2. These values are relatively close together, reflecting the
accuracy of our data. However, error in this part could have been due to the mass
bouncing off the edge of the table as it fell, or the string on the bobbin being wound
poorly. In the last part of the experiment, we observed that as we increased the
radius of the mass M, there was an overall increase in the moment of inertia. Our
four trials all resulted in reasonable percent errors between theoretical and
experimental I values. For R = 0.0450m, error = 17%. For R = 0.0700m, error = 18%.
For R = 0.0600m, error = 18%. And for R = 0.0200m, R = 38%. Differences could
have been due to systematic errors in instrumental uses. We noticed that we had
difficulty measuring the precise value of R, given the bulky apparatus and flimsy
rulers. A very small change in R could have a large effect in the equation 2MR2 when
calculating for theoretical inertia. Overall, the objectives of this lab were met
through exploring angular velocity, angular acceleration, torsion, and moment of
inertia and seeing how they relate to one another.