Natalia Zalinski - nmz4

Selin Aktuna - saktuna

Grant Roche - grroche2

Introduction:

The objective of this experiment is to determine whether or not friction is negligible when
trying to find the net work done on the IOLab by tension. The way this will be determined is two
2
compare two equations known to calculate net work, 𝑊𝑛𝑒𝑡 = Δ𝐾𝐸 = 1/2 * 𝑀 * (𝑉𝑓 − 𝑉𝑖)
and 𝑊𝑛𝑒𝑡 = 𝐹𝑛𝑒𝑡 * Δ𝑥. It is important to test results like this because oftentimes friction does
have an impact on experimental results and values, even though we assume differently.
Someone may make the claim that friction is negligible because ideal calculations assume as
such, but it isn’t an ideal world.

Methods:
1. Our group, before conducting the experiment, predicted that friction would not be small
enough to be negligible.
2. If the claim that friction is negligible in 𝑊𝑛𝑒𝑡 = 𝐹𝑛𝑒𝑡 * Δ𝑥, then the results between the
two different calculations should yield approximately the same work, AKA be equal to the
change in kinetic energy
3. First, we marked out the distance (30cm) the IOLab would travel every trial with tape.
Afterwards, we connected a block to the IOLab with a length of string so that tension
force would be doing the work on the IOLab.
4. In each trial, velocity and force were measured using the wheel velocity and force
2
sensors, so as to plug in to 𝑊𝑛𝑒𝑡 = Δ𝐾𝐸 = 1/2 * 𝑀 * (𝑉𝑓 − 𝑉𝑖) and
𝑊𝑛𝑒𝑡 = 𝐹𝑛𝑒𝑡 * Δ𝑥, respectively.
5. We started each trial with the mass resting on the table, so that the force could have a
measurable zero area.
6. After letting the mass rest for a second or two, we hung the mass over the edge of the
table and then dropped the mass, making sure to catch the IOLab right as it hit the 30cm
mark
7. We found the average force acting on the IOLab as it moved 30cm, and then we found
the maximum velocity of each trial using the velocity graph. This provides the 𝐹𝑛𝑒𝑡 and
𝑉𝑓. 𝑉𝑜 is 0, because at the start of the experiment its initial velocity will be 0.

Results:
To get velocity: we would measure the peak of the velocity-time graph (end of highlighted
region)
To get force: we would measure the average of the smooth part just before the peak (highlighted
section)

Trial Number Final Velocity (m/s) Force (N)

1 -1.446 -0.903

2 -1.300 -0.879

3 –1.302 -0.905

4 -1.221 -0.906

5 -1.390 -0.977

Analysis:
Wnet(1,1) = .903 * .3 = .2709 NM
Wnet (1,2) = .879 * .3 = .2637 NM
Wnet (1,3) = .905 * .3 = .2715 NM
Wnet (1,4) = .906 * .3 = .2718 NM
Wnet (1,5) = .977 * .3 = .2931 NM
 Wnet (2,1) = ½ (.2) -1.446^2 = .2091 NM
Wnet (2,2) = ½ (.2) -1.3^2 = .169 NM
Wnet (2,3) = ½ (.2) -1.302^2 = .1695 NM
Wnet (2,4) = ½ (.2) -1.221^2 = .1491 NM
Wnet (2,5) = ½ (.2) -1.390^2 = .1932 NM

Mean Wnet(1) +- SE = .2742 +-. 007 NM

Mean Wnet(2) +- SE = .17798 +- .013 NM

t’ value = 6.517

Discussion:

The difference between our average measurements was .09622 NM, which when
divided by the distance of .3 m gives a frictional force of .32N (since w = f*d, then f = w/d). Given
that the tension force we measured averaged .914N, this frictional force makes sense, firstly
because the IOLab would still accelerate in the direction of the tension, but slightly slower since
the net force is less then the tension and secondly, the coefficient of kinetic friction would come
out to be ~.163, since the force of friction = kN, so .32 = k(.2(9.8)), and therefore k would be
equal to .163

Conclusions:

Even though our t’ value was extremely high, we ignored friction for the first method
which would explain it. We didn’t do anything wrong in our experiment, we just assumed
something was negligible when it wasn’t. We then went back to figure out what the Frictional
force would be and it made sense with our prediction.

Natalia - helped collect data and write lab report

Selin - did the experiment and wrote lab report
Grant - helped calculate data and write lab report