ADAMSON UNIVERSITY

College of Science
Physics Department

Experiment No. Title of Experiment:

1 Uncertainty of Measurements

2 Vectors

3 Linear Motion

Submitted by: Rivera, Miguel P.

Submitted to: Engr. Elisa O. Casquejo

 Experiment 1: Uncertainty of Measurements

DATA RESULTS
TRIALS RULER VERNIER CALIPER
d (cm) d (cm)
1 1.8m 1.904cm
2 1.8m 1.901cm
3 1.8m 1.902cm
4 1.8m 1.902cm

5 1.8m 1.902cm
𝒙̅ 1.8 1.902
a.d. 0 0.0006
𝛔 0 2.68
Best + 1.8m 1.9518m
Estimated
Value - 1.8m 1.8518m
Volume, V (cm3) 3.0599cm3 3.6073cm 3
Mass, m (g) 28.4 g 28.4g

Density Experimental Value 9.2903 g/cm3 7.873 g/cm3

(g/cm3)
Density Standard Value 7.86 g/cm3 7.86 g/cm3
(g/cm3)
% Error 18.16% 0.165%

SAMPLE COMPUTATION

𝒙̅ = (1.8m + 1.8m + 1.8m + 1.8m + 1.8m) / 5 = 1.8m

Average Absolute Deviation (a.d.) = (0 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0) / 5 = 0

Since all measurements are the same, the standard deviation is also 0.

Volume, V (cm³) = 3.0599 cm³

Mass, m (g) = 28.4 g

Density Experimental Value (g/cm³) = m / V = 28.4 g / 3.0599 cm³ ≈ 9.2903 g/cm³

Density Standard Value (g/cm³) = 7.86 g/cm³

% Error = |(Experimental Value - Standard Value) / Standard Value| × 100%

% Error = |(9.2903 g/cm³ - 7.86 g/cm³) / 7.86 g/cm³| × 100% ≈ |1.4303 g/cm³ / 7.86 g/cm³| × 100% ≈ 18.16%
 Experiment 1: Uncertainty of Measurements

ANALYSIS:

The measurements of length obtained using the ruler were remarkably consistent, with all five trials yielding the
same value of 1.8 meters.
a percent error of approximately 18.16%. This positive percent error suggests that the experimental density
measurement overestimates the standard value.
The relatively high percent error in the density measurement may indicate systematic errors in the measurement
process or inaccuracies in the reference standard.

CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, the experiment demonstrated the importance of measurement precision and the impact it has on the
accuracy of calculated values such as density. The relatively high percent error suggests room for improvement in
the measurement and experimental techniques used in this investigation.

GUIDE QUESTIONS:

1.Explain how the least count of a measuring instrument affects the accuracy of the measurements. Give relevant
example.

- The least count of a measuring instrument is the smallest value it can measure. A smaller least count
provides finer precision, which improves accuracy. For example, a vernier caliper with a 0.01 mm least
count is more accurate for measuring a 2.5 mm length than one with a 1 mm least count, as it reduces
potential errors.

2. Enumerate three possible sources of error that one might make in measuring the length of a sphere with a
vernier caliper.

- Parallax Error: This occurs when the observer's eye is not perfectly aligned with the measurement scale on
the vernier caliper. If you don't view the scale at a right angle, it can lead to an apparent shift in the
measurement, causing inaccuracies.
- Zero Error: Vernier calipers should read zero when the jaws are closed without any object between them.
However, if there is a zero error (positive or negative), where the caliper does not read zero when closed, it
can introduce a systematic error into all subsequent measurements.
- Spherical Surface Contact: When measuring the length of a sphere with a flat-edged vernier caliper,
ensuring that the sphere's surface contacts the jaws perfectly can be challenging. Any misalignment can
lead to an incorrect measurement.

3. Differentiate accuracy and precision.

- Accuracy measures how close a measurement is to the true value, while precision gauges the consistency
of repeated measurements. High accuracy means closeness to the true value, while high precision indicates
consistency among measurements.
 Experiment 1: Uncertainty of Measurements
4. The measured dimensions of a rectangular block are 3.267
0.002m, 4.367 ‡ 0.002m, 0.307 # 0.001 m. Compute the volume of the block and record the result with the correct number
of significant figures.

- Volume = Length × Width × Height

Given the measurements with their uncertainties:

Length (L) = 3.267 ± 0.002 m
Width (W) = 4.367 ± 0.002 m
Height (H) = 0.307 ± 0.001 m

Now, let's calculate the volume:

Volume = (3.267 m) × (4.367 m) × (0.307 m)

To record the result with the correct number of significant figures, you should consider the measurement with the
least number of decimal places, which is 0.307 m (3 decimal places).

So, the volume of the rectangular block, with the correct number of significant figures, is:
Volume ≈ 0.307 m × 3.267 m × 4.367 m ≈ 4.88 m³

Therefore, the volume of the block, recorded with the correct number of significant figures, is approximately;
4.88 cubic meters (m³).

5. Below are common sources of errors encountered when performing experiments in the laboratory. Classify them as
personal, instrumental, or external.

A. Eye strain
- Personal Error
- Eye strain is typically a result of personal factors such as fatigue, lack of focus, or individual visual limitations.

B. Swelling of meter stick due to increase in humidity

- External Error
- The change in humidity affects the external environment and the equipment. It's not directly related to personal
actions or the calibration of instruments.

C. Expansion of scale due to sudden change in temperature

- Instrumental Error
- The expansion of the scale is primarily related to the properties of the instrument (in this case, the scale) and its
sensitivity to temperature changes. It's an instrumental error

D. Poorly calibrated weighing scale

- Instrumental Error
- The calibration of the weighing scale is an instrumental aspect, and a poorly calibrated scale is an instrumental error.

E. Shaky hands
- Personal Error
- Shaky hands are a personal factor that can introduce errors when making precise measurements or handling
equipment.
 Experiment 2: Vectors
DATA AND RESULTS

VECTOR MAGNITUDE (Dynes) DIRECTION

F1 53,900 Dynes East or 0°

F2 73,500 Dynes North or 90°

F3 102,900 Dynes 30° South of West or 210°

Equilibrant (Force Table) 41, 160 Dynes 329°

Resultant (Force Table) 41,160 Dynes 153°
Resultant (Graphical Method) 53,000 Dynes 141°
Resultant (Component Table) 41547.91 95°
% Error (Graphical Table and 27.56% 3.42%
Component Method)
% Error (Force Table and 0.93% 4.69%
component Method)

SAMPLE COMPUTATION

To calculate the percent error between the force table and component method, we can use the formula:

% Error = |(Measured Value - Accepted Value) / Accepted Value| × 100%

For the magnitude:

% Error (Force Table and Component Method) = |(41,547.91 Dynes - 41,160 Dynes) / 41,160 Dynes| × 100%
≈ |387.91 Dynes / 41,160 Dynes| × 100% ≈ 0.94%

For the direction:

% Error (Force Table and Component Method) = |(95° - 153°)| / 153° × 100% ≈ |(-58°) / 153°| × 100% ≈
37.91%

So, the percent error between the Force Table and Component Method for magnitude is approximately
0.94%, and for direction, it is approximately 37.91%.
 Experiment 2: Vectors

GRAPH
 Experiment 2: Vectors

ANALYSIS:

The experiment aimed to investigate vector addition and equilibrium using different methods.
The Equilibrant obtained from the Force Table was used to find the Resultant. The Force Table Resultant and the
Component Method Resultant showed similar magnitudes, with a small percent error in magnitude (0.94%).
However, a significant difference was observed in the direction of the resultant between the Force Table (153°) and the
Component Method (95°), resulting in a high percent error in direction (37.91%).
The graphical method yielded a different magnitude and direction for the resultant force compared to both the Force Table
and Component Method. This highlights the graphical method's sensitivity to construction accuracy.

CONCLUSION:

The experiment aimed to investigate vector addition and equilibrium using different methods.
The Equilibrant obtained from the Force Table was used to find the Resultant. The Force Table Resultant and the
Component Method Resultant showed similar magnitudes, with a small percent error in magnitude (0.94%).
However, a significant difference was observed in the direction of the resultant between the Force Table (153°) and the
Component Method (95°), resulting in a high percent error in direction (37.91%).
The graphical method yielded a different magnitude and direction for the resultant force compared to both the Force Table
and Component Method. This highlights the graphical method's sensitivity to construction accuracy.

GUIDE QUESTIONS:

1. Given two vectors, what must the orientations be to get the maximum resultant?

- To achieve the maximum resultant from two vectors, their orientations should be in the same direction. In other
words, the vectors should be collinear, meaning they have the same line of action. When two vectors are perfectly
aligned in the same direction, their magnitudes simply add up to produce the maximum resultant.

2. A rope 30m long is attached to two points A and B, 26m apart at the same level. A load of 220 N is carried at the
middle of the rope. What force is exerted on A?

Given:
Load Force (F_Load) = 220 N
Distance between A and B (d) = 26 m (half of the rope's length)
Since the load is in the middle, Fa and Fb are equal:

Fa = Fb
So, we have:
Fa + Fb = 220 N
2Fa = 220 N
Fa = 220 N / 2
Fa = 110 N

Therefore, the force exerted on point A is 110 Newtons.

 Experiment 2: Vectors

3. What is the resultant of the following vectors: Fi=25N 35°N of W, F2= 15N South, F3 = 75N East.

Resultant horizontal component (Rx) = F1x + F2x + F3x

Resultant vertical component (Ry) = F1y + F2y + F3y

Rx = (25 N * cos(35°)) + 0 + 75 N = (approximately) 88.27 N East

Ry = (25 N * sin(35°)) - 15 N + 0 = (approximately) 9.31 N North

Finally, find the magnitude and direction of the resultant vector:

Resultant magnitude (R) = √(Rx^2 + Ry^2)

Resultant direction = arctan(Ry / Rx)

R ≈ √((88.27 N)^2 + (9.31 N)^2) ≈ 89.10 N

Resultant direction ≈ arctan(9.31 N / 88.27 N) ≈ 6.02° North of East

So, the resultant of the given vectors is approximately 89.10 N in a direction of 6.02° North of East.
 Experiment 3: Linear Motion (A)
DATA AND RESULTS
A. Understanding motion
Part of the motion
1. Two second stop
2. Three second forward
3. Two second stop
4. Three second backward
SAMPLE COMPUTATION AND GRAPH (A)
Slope (m/s) Interpretation
0.0003 Velocity is 0, it is at rest
0.240 For the 1st sec, the velocity is 0, then
seconds 2 and 3 the velocity
increased constantly, therefore it is
moving to the right (positive)
0.0355 Velocity is 0, it is at rest
-0.320 For the 1st sec, it is at rest, then
seconds 2 and 3 the velocity
decreased constantly, therefore it is
moving to the left (negative)
 Experiment 3: Linear Motion (A)

SAMPLE COMPUTATION AND GRAPH (A)

 Experiment 3: Linear Motion (A)

SAMPLE COMPUTATION AND GRAPH (A)

Experiment 3: Linear Motion (A)

SAMPLE COMPUTATION AND GRAPH (A)

 Experiment 3: Linear Motion (B)

DATA AND RESULTS

Ball 1
Trials
Height, Time g expt’l Average
H T (cm. s−2 ) g expt’l %error
(cm) (s)
1 41.2cm 0.3134s 858.94

2 42.1cm 0.2961s 960.36 927.02 5.41%

3 34cm 0.2659s 961.77

B. Free-fall

Ball 2
Trials Height, Time g expt’l Average
H T (cm. s−2 ) g expt’l %error
(cm) (s)
1 41.2cm 0.2879s 994.13

2 42.1cm 0.2918s 988.88

979.20 0.08%
3 34cm 0.2669s 954.58
 Experiment 3: Linear Motion (B)

SAMPLE COMPUTATION (B)

Ball 1 Ball 2

Trial 1: Trial 2:
2h
g= 2h
t2 g= 2
t
2(41.2) 2(41.2)
g= 2 g=
(0.3134) (0.2879)
2

g=858.94cm. s−2
g=994.13 cm. s−2
Trial 2: Trial 2:
2h 2h
g= 2 g=
t t2
2(42.1) 2(42.1)
g= 2 g=
(0.2961) (0.2918)
2

g=960.36 cm. s−2 g=988.88 cm. s−2

Trial 3: Trial 3:
2h
g= 2h
t2 g=
t2
2(34)
g= 2(34)
(0.2659)
2 g=
(0.2669)2

g=954.58 cm. s−2

g=961.77 cm. s−2

Average g expt’l:

858.94 + 960.36 + 961.77

/3

g expt’l = 927.02

%Error:

980−927.02
x 100 = 5.41%
980

Experiment 3: Linear Motion (A/B)

ANALYSIS:

A. The measurement of our procedure is not perfect; therefore, we have error in one of the parts of sensor
which is the last 3 seconds
B. The percentage of margin of error in the ball 1 and ball 2 are fairly marginal. When the height of the Drop
is raised, the fall of the ball is decreased

CONCLUSION:

A. We can interpret this by seeing the relation of positive are the graph going up and the inversely the relation
of negative are the graph going down.
B. We therefore concluded, we knowhow to measure and calculate the free-fall experiment such as it’s
height, time and %error. We also conclude that with the objects we experimented with even though it has
different heigh given, they still have a little difference with time.

GUIDE QUESTIONS:

1. Figure below is a graph that shows the displacement of an object along a straight line plotted against time.
Describe the motion of the object.
- Answer:
- The graph shows that the motion has a constant positive velocity from 0 to 3 seconds, then it declined at
rest for the rest of the line

Experiment 3: Linear Motion (A/B)

2. Figure below is a graph that shows the velocity of an object along a straight line plotted against time.
Describe the motion of the object.

- Answer:
- The graph shows that it has at rest velocity but the displacement is not zero, then around 3 seconds
onwards the velocity inclined, making it stiffer therefore; the velocity increases constantly positive.

3. if the ball in the experiment is given an initial downward velocity instead the of just being released, would
 the resulting experimental value of E have been different? Explain

- Answer:
- if the ball is given an initial downward velocity, the resulting experimental value of E will be different
from the case where it is released from rest. The total mechanical energy will vary throughout the motion,
reflecting the interplay between kinetic and potential energy. This change in energy dynamics will affect
the experimental observations and measurements, particularly when assessing energy conservation
principles.