Unit 2: Model testing and ethics

Learning goals:
By the end of this unit, you should be able to:
• Make predictions about expected measurements and use the predictions to
check whether data make sense [Goals: 1.c) iv, v.].
• When data and results do not come out as expected:
o determine and test plausible explanations for the disagreement [Goal: 3.
b) i, v],
o test whether the results are reproducible under similar conditions [Goal:
3. b) ii.],
o test whether the results are reproducible with improved precision [Goal:
3. b) iii.].
• When data and results do come out as expected test whether the results are
reproducible with improved precision [Goal: 3. c) i.].
• Consider issues of scientific ethics when conducting experiments and
analyzing data [Goals: 4.d) i., ii., iii.].
• Describe how least-squares fitting provides a measure of the best-fit [Goal: 2.
d)].
• Compare data to a model quantitatively by plotting data on traditional x-y
plots including appropriate representations of uncertainty, performing linear
weighted least-squares fits, plotting residuals, and interpreting the outcomes
of the analysis [Goals: 2. e) i, iii, iv, v.].

Grading criteria
Your lab notes will be graded according to the following criteria (more details at
the end of the lab manual and on WebCourses):

Predictions Predictions are made and justified for each model being tested, and used for
interpreting results. Predictions make sense physically and draw on free-body
diagrams for each model.
Follow-up Follow-up investigations are proposed, carried out, and justified based on previous
results and observations. Follow-up investigations creatively seek to explore,
understand, and push the limits of the initial investigations.
Ethics Several practical, actionable, and creative strategies for mitigating bias during
experiments are described. Multiple strategies are carried out during the
investigation. Considerate reflections of how bias affects experiment decisions are
included.

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 1

Comparison Analyses are carried out on data mostly correctly, and plots of data, fits, and
residuals are clearly communicated. Analyses are interpreted using appropriate
argumentation practices, including multiple, reasonable, and possible
interpretations.

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 2

 Activity I: Responsible conduct of research

With your new group, briefly discuss your responses to Question 2 on the last
post-lab. On your whiteboard, work together to generate some strategies for
managing expectations about results and potential biases.
Your instructor will lead a discussion about your ideas. Briefly summarize the
discussion in your lab notes online and write down in your lab notes one
actionable strategy or course of action you will employ in lab this week to
manage expectations about results and mitigate potential biases.

Actionable strategy for this week:

Activity II: More model testing

We’re going to put our new strategies to work by testing another model: the
motion of objects in free flight. We’ll start by testing two simplified models about
the forces that act on the objects in vertical free flight.
Model 1: the only force on the object is due to gravity.
Model 2: the only forces on the object are due to gravity and air drag.
NOTE: By averaging several sources, we estimate that gOrlando = 9.7921 ± 0.0001
m/s2.

Making predictions from a model

Draw a free-body diagram for each of the models when the object is on the way
up and on the way down (assume the drag force is smaller in magnitude than the
weight).
Model 1 Model 2
Up Down Up Down

Use the free-body diagrams with Newton's 2nd Law to predict how the object's
acceleration during free flight will compare to the acceleration due to gravity
alone.
Magnitude Direction
Model 1 (up): equal to / less than / greater than same / opposite
Model 1 (down): equal to / less than / greater than same / opposite

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 3

Model 2 (up): equal to / less than / greater than same / opposite
Model 2 (down): equal to / less than / greater than same / opposite

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 4

 A. Pilot experiment

In your group, design and carry out a pilot experiment to QUICKLY and roughly
estimate the degree to which the acceleration of a flying object (pick one of either
basketball, beach ball, coffee filter, or Styrofoam bowl) is predicted by these
models.

Record your plan in your lab notes online, including answers and
justifications to the following questions:
• Where along the object’s trajectory will you measure the acceleration?
Will you measure at one location or several? Why?
• How many repeated trials do you need to be confident in your
conclusion?
• How will you quantify the level of agreement between each model and
your measurements?
Not sure how to get started? Talk to another group!

B. Revised experiment

In your lab notes online, provide a preliminary analysis of your results and
comment on whether your results indicate which model more accurately
represents your data.
• If you cannot distinguish the two models, work with your group to design
an improved measurement method to better distinguish them.
• If you can distinguish the two models, repeat your procedure with
another object and/or design a new experiment to further test the favored
model. The better model may still be limited and there may be an even
better model!

Document your methods and results in your lab notes online.

If you have extra time, check your models with another object.

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 5

 Unit 2: Session 1 Post-lab
1. In lab next week, we will extend the flying objects investigations to find
additional corrections to our model for the flying objects.
a. What aspects of the measurement methods were the most
challenging or introduced the most variability, and how might you
improve on those methods?
b. What new testable questions are emerging from the investigations
that you could follow-up on next week or in Unit 4 - Project Lab
(either yours or others in the class)?
c. Which of your effective practices for managing expectations and
potential biases did you use during the investigations? Which were
challenging to implement? What will you do differently next week?
2. The data in the table are values of a falling Time (s) Position (m)
object’s position as a function of time. Use 5.58 0.647
the data to answer the following questions. 5.62 0.703
Submit your analysis in a spreadsheet along 5.66 0.765
with a document that interprets your results. 5.70 0.836
a. Does the falling object reach a 5.74 0.937
terminal velocity? How do you 5.78 0.999
know? 5.82 1.075
b. What is the object’s acceleration while 5.86 1.168
it is accelerating? 5.90 1.269
5.94 1.363
c. How does the acceleration of the
5.98 1.458
object compare to acceleration due
6.02 1.570
only to gravity in Orlando?
6.06 1.687
6.10 1.788
6.14 1.897
6.18 2.002
6.22 2.119
6.26 2.242
6.30 2.364
6.34 2.473
6.38 2.538
6.42 2.651
6.46 2.714
6.50 2.745

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 6

 Activity III: Thinking about fits

So far, our data analysis has been limited to making comparisons between pairs
of uncertain measurements. Often, it’s more useful to plot continuous
measurements and use fit lines to make and test predictions about models. Let’s
look at an example.
A group of researchers stretched a rubber band and collected data for the force as
a function of extension. Each researcher in the group drew a different fit line. We
want to determine which, if any, is a better fit to the data.
120 Student A

100 Stretch Force Uncertainty

80 (cm) (N) in Force (N)
Force (N)

y = 10x - 11
60 1 1 1
40 2 7 1
20 3 17 1
0 4 16 8
0 5 10
Extension (cm) 5 22 8
120
Student B 6 33 8
100 7 61 1
80
8 70 1
Force (N)

60
y = 11x - 21 2
y = x + 6 9 90 8
40

20

0
0 5 10
Extension (cm)

120 Student C Student D

120

100 100

80 80
Force (N)

Force (N)

60 60

40 40
y = 5x - 3
20 20

0 0
0 5 10 0 5 10
Extension (cm) Extension (cm)

A. Intuitive Interpretation

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 7

1. Which student’s line, A or B, are you most confident represents a good fit to
the data?

Student A / B (circle)
Explain your reasoning:

2. Which student’s line, A or C1, are you most confident represents a good fit to
the data?
Student A / C (circle)
Explain your reasoning:

3. Which student’s line, A or D, are you most confident represents a good fit to
the data?
Student A / D (circle)
Explain your reasoning:

B. Invent a procedure
Work with your group on a whiteboard to invent at least two ways to
quantitatively evaluate the quality of a fit line to data. Your methods should
allow you to compare which student’s model is a better fit to the data with a
single index, such that a smaller index implies that the equation is a better fit to
the data. As in the Unit 1 activity, the goal here is to be creative and work with
information to invent solutions to a problem.
Your instructor will lead a discussion of your ideas.

1
A common description of a good fit line is that it balances the number of points
above and below the line. Student C’s graph is an example of where that rule of
thumb can go awry.
Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 8
Summarize the discussion in your lab notes.

Use the data and line information provided to compute the quality of the fit for
one student (your instructor will assign which student). Record those values in
your lab notes.

Student A / B / C / D (circle)
Quantitative estimate of the quality of the fit line: _________________________

Activity IV: Improve the models

Your instructor will lead a discussion about the results from different flying
objects and the questions from the post-lab, and we'll brainstorm possible
alternative models or measurements. Each group will design an experiment to
test the alternative variables.

Before collecting any data, use your proposed new model to make predictions
about what measurements you might expect if that model were true (use free-
body diagrams, Newton's 2nd Law, etc.). Perform a rough calculation for the
precision you might need to distinguish your proposed model from other
models, using your earlier, preliminary tests and data. Document your model
and prediction in your lab notes online.

Design a new experiment to test your new model and record your plan in your
lab notes online. Include decisions about the questions from last time and use
your previous methods, results, and predictions to justify your plan.

Implement your new design! While you work, remember to also jot down in
your lab notes online:
• Your observations and analysis,
• Any on-the-fly changes you make to your method (and explain why), and
• Interpretations of your data and analysis, including how your model’s
predictions compare to your data.
At the end of the session, each group will be expected to briefly (1 minute
max.) share their methods and conclusions (no matter how tentative) with the
class.

"What goes in my lab notes?” reminder:

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 9

You should have a set of notes that document your process through this whole
lab session. This should include:
• A quick summary of your reflections on the Unit 1 lab and ethical conduct of
experimentation,
• A description of your initial experimentation plan for the lab, revisions and
reflections as you went, your results, and an evaluation of the investigation
and model, and
• Any other musings on the nature of science, models, or flying objects.

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 10

 Unit 2: Session 2 Post-lab
1. The table provides values of a falling object’s position as a function of
time (the same data used in the Unit 2 Session 1 Post-lab). This time,
average velocity (the difference in position between two rows, divided by
their corresponding times) and corresponding average time (average of
the two times used in the calculation of each velocity) are included.
Answer the following questions by submitting a spreadsheet with your
analysis and a document that interprets your results.
a. Use the manual fitting template on WebCourses to find the
terminal speed of the object once it reaches terminal velocity, using
only the position and time data.
b. Use the manual fitting template on WebCourses to evaluate the
degree to which the data are explained by a model that assumes
gravitational acceleration (as measured in Orlando) is the only
force acting on the falling object before it reaches terminal velocity.
You can use the average speed and time data for this analysis.

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 11

Time (s) Position (m) Average Time (s) Average Velocity (m/s)
5.58 0.647
5.62 0.703 5.60 1.40
5.66 0.765 5.64 1.55
5.70 0.836 5.68 1.78
5.74 0.937 5.72 2.53
5.78 0.999 5.76 1.55
5.82 1.075 5.80 1.90
5.86 1.168 5.84 2.33
5.90 1.269 5.88 2.53
5.94 1.363 5.92 2.35
5.98 1.458 5.96 2.38
6.02 1.570 6.00 2.80
6.06 1.687 6.04 2.93
6.10 1.788 6.08 2.53
6.14 1.897 6.12 2.73
6.18 2.002 6.16 2.62
6.22 2.119 6.20 2.93
6.26 2.242 6.24 3.07
6.30 2.364 6.28 3.05
6.34 2.473 6.32 2.73
6.38 2.538 6.36 1.63
6.42 2.651 6.40 2.83
6.46 2.714 6.44 1.58
6.50 2.745 6.48 0.78

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 12

Unit 2 | PHY 2048 Lab Manual | 13