The Atwood Machine

Harleigh Donovan
Harleigh.donovan@louisville.edu
Madeline Mason, Michael Ewing, Samantha Benjamin
PHYS 223 Section 06
Atanu Pathak
Thursdays 1:00-2:50
DATE DUE: March 5, 2020
DATE SUBMITTED: March 5, 2020
Harleigh Donovan PHYS 223-06
2

Introduction:

The Atwood machine is an experiment demonstrating Newton’s 2 nd Law. The machine is

compromised of two masses, of different value, connected by a string, which is hungover a pulley. And
allows the system to move. The pulley is considered frictionless; therefore, the pulley does not
contribute to the physics of the system. The only forces acting, are those of gravity and the tension on
each mass.

In this experiment, we will use these equations:

1. Apred = (m1-m2) / (m1+m2) g … to predict the acceleration

2. Ameas = (2Δy)/ t2 …to find the measured acceleration
3. Slope = (m1-m2) g ... to find the slope
4. Apred = ((m1-m2) g) x (1/ (m1+m2)) … to predict acceleration of a linear function

Objective:

The objective of this experiment is to verify Newton’s 2 nd Law. During this experiment, the
Atwood machine was used with a variety of weight, and timed with a timer, to be able to calculate
acceleration.

Questions and Analysis:

1. No, the trend of the times did not agree with our prediction. Our prediction was that the times would
get faster due to the increasing weight, but the times, actually, got slower with the increasing weight.
This happened because the force increases with mass, causing acceleration to get slower, as mass gets
heavier. For example, rolling a ten-pound ball vs the twenty-pound ball, the 20-pound ball will have a
slower acceleration.

2. The average % error was 4.13%. Yes, our initial correction for friction worked well for the other trials,
4 grams were added in the beginning to correct the friction, and it carried all the way through each trial.

3. The value of the slope of the acceleration vs reciprocal plot is 187.26. The percent error between this
and the theoretical value is 61.8%.

4. Our data appears linear, with some minor offsets.

5. One crucial source of error in this experiment, was saying that the pulley has no friction. This error is
statistical and would have affected the final answer of acceleration because we would have to multiply
each mass times the force for the account of acceleration. Another error would be not letting the weight
sit fully at rest before dropping it. This would be statistical because it would have altered time times by a
few milliseconds, which would change the times for each trial of the experiment. The time would not be
as crucial to the experiment, as it would only alter the values very slightly, but the friction of the pulley is
crucial to the experiment, because they pulley does have friction, which is altering the acceleration.
Harleigh Donovan PHYS 223-06
3

Data Tables/ References

M1 M2 Δt Apred Ameas % Error

170 150 1.42 0.613 0.600 2.1%
220 200 1.65 0.467 0.440 4.9%
270 250 1.80 0.377 0.369 2.1%
320 300 1.88 0.316 0.342 8.2%
370 350 2.11 0.273 0.272 0.4%
420 400 2.33 0.239 0.222 7.1%

M1 M2 1/ (m1+m2) Ameas
170 150 0.00313 0.600
220 200 0.00238 0.440
270 250 0.00192 0.369
320 300 0.00161 0.342
370 350 0.00139 0.272
420 400 0.00122 0.222

Comparing Slope Graph

0.7

0.6
f(x) = 187.261225909327 x + 0.0102344530260577
0.5 R² = 0.983053831760603
Acceleration

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025 0.003 0.0035
1/(m1+m2)

Conclusion

This experiment concludes that the Atwell machine verifies Newton’s 2 nd Law. The average percent error
was 4.13%. The Ameas was relatively close to the Apred, which means there was minimal error in the
experiment. The values of the reciprocal were linear, but not relative to the theoretical value. This is due
to errors in the pulley, such as the theoretical value has absolutely no friction in the pulley and the
experimental value had friction in the pulley.