Physics I Laboratory Faculty of Science, Ontario Tech University

Lab Report PhyI-02: Mechanical Equilibrium

Student’s name: _Parker Naus ________________________ CRN CRN: ______40379___

Date: 09/27/2021 _____________

First angle 5°, mass at first pulley = mass of hanger 5.4g______ + extra mass 1, __10.00g ________

Second angle 150°, mass at second pulley = mass of hanger 5.4g______ + extra mass 2, ___7.00g
_______

Table 1

FA FB Equilibrant, FE

Method
Magnitude, Magnitude, Magnitude,
Direction, q Direction, q Direction, q
mN mN mN

88.2 237°
Experiment: 150.92 5° 121.52 150°

FEx = -48.04
FAx = 42.8 FBx = 84.9 237°
Component: F = -144 N/A N/A FEy = -73.9
Ay FBy = -86.9
FE = 88.199
88.199 237°
Graphical: N/A N/A N/A N/A

Conclusion:

The purpose of the lab was to determine the force required to balance two other exerted
forces. This was done to allow the system to be at equilibrium. To determine the
equilibrant force three methods were used.

To find the equilibrant force, three methods were used: the experimental method,
component method and graphical method. All three methods were used to determine
the magnitude and angle that the equilibrant made. Every method used the two given
forces and their masses to find at what angle and weight would the equilibrant need to
be at for the system to reach equilibrium. Different amounts of weight were added to the
hanger that was not given a mass until equilibrium was achieved.

Lab Report PhyI-02: Mechanical Equilibrium

Physics I Laboratory Faculty of Science, UOIT

The first method used was the experimental method. The experimental method used
two forces that were applied on a force table by hanging masses. The two masses
were then angled. Next, a third mass was hung in the last pulley and adjustments were
made until the system reached equilibrium. The second method used was the vector
component method. The vector component method used two forces
that added the x and y components together by using trigonometry.(trigonometry.
do you need to say what the x and y components are?) The third and final method used
in the lab was the graphical method. the graphical method used two forces that were
added together by drawing them to scale. The forces were then drawn tip to tail so
they can be added together.

The main sources of error were random error; the weights used in the lab were not
always the right weight which led to an inconsistency when trying to figure out the right
weight for the system to reach equilibrium. (meaning?)
weight which caused the equilibrant to not be the exact weight and not have true equilibrium.
Another error is a human error when reading the angle. Trying to tell what angle
thetheThe equilibrant was at it was difficult to accurately readreaddetermine the angle
because the force table did not have the exact angle measurements on it at certain
areas, it was hard to read the angle when it was in between the small notches. .. (do
you need to explain what the certain areas were?)

The most precise method that was used was the component method. The component
method was more accurate because when using the graphical method there could be
drawing errors and not as much precision. However, every value calculated when using
the component method was more accurate. For example, when calculating the
magnitude of the equilibrant with the experiment method the answer was 88.2 mN but
when using the component method, the value was much more precise measuring as
88.199 mN. The .001 is significant because that means that the magnitude was weaker and
could have affected how much mass it takes for the system to reach equilibrium. (maybe
explain why this .001 difference is significant in one more sentence)

When comparing the values found in chart 1, the equilibrant force of the magnitude is
slightly less than the value that was found using the experimental method; however, its
angle is the same for each method that was used in the lab. This shows that there is no
difference in the angle no matter what method was used. Conversely, there is a small
difference between the values found for the magnitude, even though the angles stay the
same throughout the lab.

The equilibrant force and its angle that were found using the three different methods
should all be equal. Because each method used the same valuesvalues, and it would be
an error if they did not all produce the same answer . (do you need to explain why this is
the case?)

2
Lab Report PhyI-02: Mechanical Equilibrium
Physics I Laboratory Faculty of Science, UOIT

The value of the difference is reasonable: the percent error between the experimental
(88.2−88.199)
value and the component value is only % error= x 100 = 0.0011%. The values
88.2
found for the magnitude between the two methods are practically the same and when
rounded to 3 significant digits the magnitudes would be equalthey are equal.

The purpose of the lab was found through using the three different methods and seeing
how each one had its own values in the x and y plains. Ultimately showing how
equilibrium is achieved and how many different elements go into equilibrium. The
elements that affect equilibrium are it’s state of motion and it’s internal energy both of
those factors can notcannot change in order for something to be at equilibrium. (be more
specific by naming the elements directly).

3
Lab Report PhyI-02: Mechanical Equilibrium