Lab Partner:

PHYS 0030
Lab Report 4
Objective
The purpose of this experiment was to study elastic and inelastic collisions and observe the
conservation of momentum and the possible conservation of kinetic energy depending on
collision type.

Procedure
An air track was fitted with two photocell bridges, one on each side of the collision
region. Each bridge was operating in a gate mode timer that allows the collection of time
intervals before and after collision. To ensure that friction and gravity have minimal effects, the
track was leveled. Before starting the experiment, we ensured that loss in velocity was no
greater than two percent in either direction. To check this, we sent one glider in one direction
and noted the time to cross each photocell placed one meter apart. The difference between the
two times divided by the time to cross the first photocell was the fraction of momentum that was
lost due to friction and gained or lost due to gravity. The track was readjusted accordingly and
the check was repeated in the other direction. The diagram of the setup is shown in Figure 1
below.

Figure 1.

The first step in starting the experiment was measuring the masses of the two gliders (i.e.
the heavy glider and the light glider). The masses of the gliders were made “heavy” or “light” by
adding trimming weights. Then, a series of four collisions (each repeated three times) were
conducted. Table 1 below summarizes the variation of heavy & light collisions and elastic &
inelastic collisions that were conducted in this particular experiment.

Table 1.
Collision Number Initial Direction Sticky bumpers
1 HL Off (elastic)
2 H*L Off (elastic)
3 L*L Off (elastic)
4 H*L On (inelastic)
Note: The color code helps differentiate the types of collision. The color code will be used in
the tables throughout the rest of the report.
“H” indicates heavy glider, “L” indicates light glider, “Off” indicates that the collision was made
elastic by facing the bumpers toward one another, and “On” indicates that the collision was made
inelastic by the mounting the “sticky bumpers” on each end (i.e. pin and putty attachments).
Using the memory mode of the photoelectric timers, we were able to collect times for
both instances (before and after collision) that that glider past the photobridges. The first data
point was our first time point and the second data point was the total of the first and second time
point. Therefore, to get the second time, we had to subtract the first time point from the second
data point. These times were then used to caluculate the velocities and subsequently the
momentum and kinetic energy of both gliders.

Data
The data is presented in Table 1 below.

Table 1.
Trial 𝒎𝟏 (𝒌𝒈) 𝒎𝟐 (kg) 𝒕𝟏 𝒊 (s) 𝒕𝟏 𝒇 (s) 𝒕𝟐 𝒊 (s) 𝒕𝟐 𝒇 (s)

±0.0001kg ±0.0001kg ±0.001s ±0.001s ±0.001s ±0.001s

1 0.3108 0.2100 0.221 0.342 0.184 0.184
2 0.3108 0.2100 0.187 0.486 0.167 0.200
3 0.3108 0.2100 0.212 0.351 0.162 0.201
1 0.3108 0.2100 0.176 1.076 0 0.153
2 0.3108 0.2100 0.240 1.348 0 0.208
3 0.3108 0.2100 0.181 1.054 0 0.158
1 0.2100 0.2100 0.245 N/A 0 0.255
2 0.2100 0.2100 0.184 N/A 0 0.191
3 0.2100 0.2100 0.222 N/A 0 0.229
1 0.3108 0.2100 0.215 N/A 0 0.382
2 0.3108 0.2100 0.252 N/A 0 0.439
3 0.3108 0.2100 0.187 N/A 0 0.342

*for collected data, the uncertainty was determined to be plus or minus the smallest division of
the measurement scale on each device. This uncertainty is inherent in the measurement devices
and exists because there is an assumption that the instrument is not perfect.

Calculations

For each collision, the vector velocity of each body and the vector momentum for each body
before and after the collision was calculated. Then the difference in total momentums and total
kinetic energy was calculated.

Vector velocity (m/s): The following equation was used to calculate the velocities of masses 𝑚1
and 𝑚2 before (𝑣1 𝑖 , 𝑣2 𝑖 ) and after (𝑣1 𝑓 , 𝑣2 𝑓 ) the collision.

𝑑
𝑣=
𝑡
“d” was the length of the aluminum mask that passed by the photobridge (𝑙 = 0.10 𝑚) and “t”
were the four respective times collected in Table 1. Velocity vectors are presented in Table 2.
(Throughout the experiment, movement to the right was considered the positive direction and
movement to the left was considered the negative direction.)
Table 2. Vector velocity
𝒗𝟏 𝒊 (m/s) 𝒗𝟏 𝒇 (m/s) 𝒗𝟐 𝒊 𝒗𝟐 𝒇 (m/s)
(m/s)
0.452 -0.292 -0.543 0.543
0.535 -0.206 -0.599 0.500
0.472 -0.285 -0.617 0.498
0.568 0.0929 0 0.654
0.417 0.0742 0 0.481
0.552 0.0949 0 0.633
0.408 0 0 0.392
0.543 0 0 0.524
0.450 0 0 0.437
0.465 0.262 0 0.262
0.397 0.228 0 0.228
0.535 0.292 0 0.292

𝒌𝒈∗𝒎
Vector momentum � 𝒔 �: The following equation was used to calculate the vector
momentum of 𝑚1 and 𝑚2 before and after collision.
𝑝 = 𝑚𝑣
“p” is momentum. “m” is either mass 𝑚1 or 𝑚2 . “v” is velocity 𝑣1 𝑖 , 𝑣2 𝑖 , 𝑣1 𝑓 , or 𝑣2 𝑓 (given in
Table 2). The vector momentums are displayed in Table 3.

Table 3. Vector Momentums

𝒌𝒈 ∗ 𝒎 𝒌𝒈 ∗ 𝒎 𝒌𝒈 ∗ 𝒎 𝒌𝒈 ∗ 𝒎
𝒎𝟏 𝒗𝟏,𝒊 � � 𝒎𝟐 𝒗𝟐,𝒊 � � 𝒎𝟏 𝒗𝟏,𝒇 � � 𝒎𝟐 𝒗𝟐,𝒇 � �
𝒔 𝒔 𝒔 𝒔
0.141 -0.114 -0.0909 0.114
0.166 -0.126 -0.0640 0.105
0.147 -0.130 -0.0886 0.104
0.177 0 0.0289 0.137
0.130 0 0.0231 0.101
0.172 0 0.0295 0.133
0.0857 0 0 0.0824
0.114 0 0 0.110
0.0946 0 0 0.0917
0.145 0 0.0814 0.0550
0.123 0 0.0708 0.0478
0.166 0 0.0909 0.0614

𝒌𝒈∗𝒎
Total initial and final momentum � 𝒔 �: The following equations are for total initial (𝑝𝑖 ) and
total final (𝑝𝑓 ) momentums of the two-body system. (Variables are same as defined above.)

𝑝𝑖 = 𝑚1 𝑣1,𝑖 + 𝑚2 𝑣2,𝑖
𝑝𝑓 = 𝑚1 𝑣1,𝑓 + 𝑚2 𝑣2,𝑓
*Note: For collision type 4, the 𝑣1,𝑓 and 𝑣2,𝑓 were equal since they moved together as one object.
Therefore, final momentum could be found as 𝑝𝑓 = (𝑚1 + 𝑚2 )𝑣𝑓 .

%Difference in Momentum: The following equation was used to find percent difference in
momentum. These values are indicative of a percent error.

Initial Momentum − Final Momentum

% Error = � � × 100
Initial Momentum

Total initial and final momentums for the system, difference in total momentum, and % Error are
displayed in Table 4.

Table 4. Total Momentums

𝒑𝒊 (kg *m/s) 𝒑𝒇 (kg *m/s) 𝒑𝒊 − 𝒑𝒇 (kg *m/s) % Error
0.0265 0.0233 0.00325 12.26%
0.0405 0.0410 0.00059 1.47%
0.0170 0.0159 0.00104 6.15%
0.177 0.166 0.01045 5.92%
0.130 0.124 0.00548 4.23%
0.172 0.162 0.00931 5.42%
0.086 0.082 0.00336 3.92%
0.114 0.110 0.00418 3.66%
0.095 0.092 0.00289 3.06%
0.145 0.136 0.00822 5.69%
0.123 0.119 0.00470 3.81%
0.166 0.152 0.01392 8.38%

Kinetic Energy (J): The initial and final kinetic energies were found for each type of collision
with the lowest percent error in momentum. The following equation is used for kinetic energy:
1
𝐾 = 𝑚𝑣 2
2
Where the total initial kinetic energy of two-body system is
1 1
𝐾𝑖 = 𝑚1 𝑣1,𝑖 2 + 𝑚2 𝑣2,𝑖 2
2 2

And the total final kinetic energy of the two-body system is

1 1
𝐾𝑓 = 𝑚1 𝑣1,𝑓 2 + 𝑚2 𝑣2,𝑓 2
2 2

%Difference in Kinetic Energy: The following equation was used to find percent difference in
kinetic energy. These values are indicative of a percent error.

Total Initial Kinetic Energy − Total Final Kinetic Energy

% Error = � � × 100
Total Initial Kinetic Energy

Total initial and final kinetic energies for the system and % Error are displayed in Table 5.
Table 5: Kinetic Energy
𝑲𝒊 (J) 𝑲𝒊 (J) % Error
0.0822 0.0728 11.4%
0.0270 0.0251 6.93%
0.0213 0.0201 5.69%
0.0245 0.0135 44.7%

Experimental Uncertainties: Per instructions in the lab manual, instead of calculating a detailed
uncertainty, an approximate idea of the uncertainty can be determined from the variation in
difference in momentum among the three trials for each type of collision. Root mean square and
standard error can give us a snapshot of this variation.

Mean: First the mean difference in momentum must be calculated:

𝑁
1
𝒑𝒊 − 𝒑𝒇 =
�������� �(𝒑𝒊 − 𝒑𝒇 )𝑖
𝑁
𝑖=1

��������
𝒑𝒊 − 𝒑𝒇 is the symbol for arithmetic average of the difference in momentum, N is the number of

measurement trials (in this case N=3), i indicates where to begin the sequence of summation (in
this case i=1 indicates that the summation ∑ begins at the first number of the set), and (𝒑𝒊 − 𝒑𝒇 )𝑖
is the difference in momentum for each trial (in this case starting at i=1 and going up to i=3).
(𝒑𝒊 − 𝒑𝒇 )𝑖 values are taken from Table 4 above. Average difference in momentum is presented in
Table 6 below.

Table 6. Average Difference in Momentum

��������
𝒑𝒊 − 𝒑𝒇 (kg *m/s)

0.00163
0.00841
0.00348
0.00895

Root Mean Square (RMS): The following equation was used to calculate the root mean squared:

((𝒑𝒊 −𝒑𝒇 )𝑖 −(𝒑𝒊 −𝒑𝒇 )𝑎𝑣 )2

RMS =�∑𝑁
𝑖=1 𝑁

The root mean square (RMS) reflects the spread among the individual measurements. It is thus a
measure of precision. The RMS value is the approximate value of the standard deviation of the
mean. This RMS accounts for the random uncertainty that is inherent in the experiment as a
result of both the instrument and the observer. In this equation, N is the number of
measurements (in this case N=3), i indicates where to begin the sequence of summation (in this
case i=1 indicates that the summation begins at the first number of the set), (𝑝𝑖 − 𝑝𝑓 )𝑖 is the
difference in momentum for each trial (in this case starting at i=1 and going up to i=3; presented
in Table 4), and (𝑝𝑖 − 𝑝𝑓 )𝑎𝑣 is the average (mean) difference in momentum presented in Table 6.

The RMS for each collision is given in Table 7.

Table 7: RMS

RMS (kg *m/s)

0.00116

0.00213

0.000533

0.00380

Standard Error (S.E.): Finally, we can use RMS to calculate 𝑆. 𝐸.:

𝑆. 𝐸. = 𝑅𝑀𝑆/√𝑁

This equation gives the value of S.E., which is the uncertainty in the average of N repeated
measurements. In the equation, RMS is the root mean squared which was calculated above and
N is the number of measurements (in this case N=3).

The value of S.E. are in Table 8.

Table 8. S.E.
S.E. (kg *m/s)
0.000670
0.00123
0.000308
0.00219

Results

%Errors, variation, and uncertainties in our momentum and kinetic energy are given below. The
discussion section will evaluate these numbers and their significance in the conservation of
momentum and kinetic energy.

% Error for Momentum

12.26%
1.47%
6.15%
 5.92%
4.23%
5.42%
3.92%
3.66%
3.06%
5.69%
3.81%
8.38%

% Error for Kinetic Energy

11.4%
6.93%
5.69%
44.7%

Spread among individual trials for each collision:

RMS (kg *m/s)

0.00116

0.00213

0.000533

0.00380

Uncertainty in average difference in momentum:

��������
𝒑 𝒊
− 𝒑𝒇 (kg *m/s) ± S.E.
0.00163 ± 0.000670
0.00841 ± 0.00123
0.00348 ± 0.000308
0.00895 ± 0.00219

Discussion

For elastic and inelastic collisions, we expect that the momentum is always conserved.
The relatively low percent errors (i.e. less than 15%) for total momentum before and after
collision indicate that this conservation occurred (within the error).
We expect kinetic energy to be conserved for the elastic collisions (i.e. the first three
collisions) but not the inelastic collision (i.e. the last collision). Our experiment supports this as
the first three collisions have low percent errors (i.e. less than 15%) and the last collision has a
very high percent error (44.7%) indicating a large difference between the initial and final total
kinetic energies. We do not observe a conservation of kinetic energy in inelastic collisions
because energy is being converted to other energy forms such as internal energy (e.g. heat).
 The random error in our experiment (as indicated by our high precision RMS values) was
already very low. Sources of random error can attributed to the measuring instrument (the
photoelectric timer) and the way it may be affected by its surroundings. This random error
affects the variation in our data; however, it does not affect the mean value. We can reduce our
random error by doing more and more trials.
Additionally there might also be systematic error in our experiment. If systematic error is
present, it would affect the mean value. There might be some inconsistency in the photobridges
and their detectors or the overall track level setup that cause this systematic error. The S.E. value
allows us to see this uncertainty in the average difference in momentum. Since all our data lies
within one standard deviation for each collision (i.e. within 0.000670, 0.00123, 0.000380, and
0.00219 kg*m/s respectively), we can conclude that accuracy as well as the precision was high.
Any uncertainty that we did observe could be attributed to residual friction and gravity
due to slight unleveling of the track. However, as indicated in the procedure, we checked the
loss in momentum due to such unleveling and because we kept that loss within 2% or less we
were able to reduce these unwanted effects. As a result, given the experimental uncertainties,
our results do confirm our expectations for momentum and kinetic energy.