3- Getting the Cart from Start to Finish:

3.1 : The Launch Speed and Acceleration:

Theoretical Acceleration
Part A: Calculate the theoretical acceleration and maximum velocity at the bottom of the propulsion
stage.
- Using the distance 0.53 and 0.74 meters, we can calculate the theoretical acceleration

0.53
- To calculate the theoretical acceleration, we can use the FREE-BODY-DIAGRAM:

𝜃 = tan−1 ( ) = 31.61°
0.74
𝑁
𝑚
∑ 𝐹𝑥 = 𝑚𝑎 𝑎

𝑊 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 = 𝑚𝑎

𝑚𝑔 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 = 𝑚𝑎 𝜃

0.5
𝑔 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 = 𝑎 𝜃 𝑊 𝑆𝑖𝑛𝜃

𝑎 = 9.81 (𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝑊
31.61) 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝜃
0.74m

𝑊
𝑎 = 5.141 𝑚/𝑠 2
F-B-D of the propulsion stage.
Theoretical Maximum Velocity
- We use the potential energy at the height ℎ1h1 = 0.53 meters to calculate the theoretical maximum velocity.
-To calculate the maximum velocity (theoretical), use the law of conservation of energy:

𝑉=0

0.53𝑚

𝑉 = 𝑀𝐴𝑋
A simple diagram showing the propulsion stage.

𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦: 𝑃𝐸1 + 𝐾𝐸1 =

𝑃𝐸2 + 𝐾𝐸2
At the bottom all this potential energy converts to kinetic energy (ignoring losses)
Since there is no movement at point A, and no potential energy at point B, we can write the relationship
like this:

𝑃𝐸1 = 𝐾𝐸2
1
𝑚𝑔ℎ = 𝑚 𝑣2
2

𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = √2 𝑔 ℎ

𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = √2 × 9.81 × 0.53

𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 3.225 𝑚/𝑠

Part B: Calculate the experimental acceleration and maximum velocity:

To calculate the experimental acceleration, we should use the acceleration formula:

∆𝑣
𝑎=
𝑡
As velocity is required, and we have distance and time, we can substitute the values in the velocity
formula.

Given the experimental time to cover the distance:

Displacement = d = 1.105m

Time: 0.51s
 Thus,
� 1.10
� 5 = 2.167 𝑚/𝑠
𝑉 = =
� 0.5
� 1

∆𝑣 2.167
Therefore,

𝑎 = = = 4.25 𝑚/𝑠2
𝑡 0.51

To calculate Maximum velocity, we need to calculate the average velocity first.

𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒
𝑉𝐴𝑣𝑔 = 1.105
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = 2.167 𝑚/𝑠
= 0.51
𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒

Also, we have another formula that connects average velocity with maximum velocity:
𝑉𝑖+𝑉𝑓
𝑉𝐴𝑣𝑔 =
2
, our cart started from rest, so initial velocity = 0 m/s

Make 𝑉𝑓 the subject:

𝑉𝑓 = 𝑉𝐴𝑣𝑔 × 2 = 2.167 × 2 = 4.333 𝑚/𝑠

Deviation equation

Part C: Compare the theoretical and experimental acceleration and maximum velocity:

Acceleration:

Error Percentage
𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝑽𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆−𝑬𝒙𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒍
Acceleration (𝒎/𝒔𝟐) |
Theoretical Value Experimental Value
𝑽𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆
| × 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝑽𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆
5.141− 4.25
| | × 100 = 17.33%
5.141 m/s² 4.25 m/s²
5.141

Maximum Velocity:

Error Percentage
𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝑽𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆−𝑬𝒙𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒂𝒍
|
Theoretical Value Experimental Value
𝑽𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆
Maximum Velocity | × 𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝑻𝒉𝒆𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 𝑽𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆
(𝒎/𝒔) 3.225 – 4.333
| | × 100 = 33%
3.225 m/s 4.333
3.225
 Summary Of Propulsion Stage

Calculation Type Parameter Value

Theoretical Maximum Velocity 3.225 m/s

Acceleration 5.141 m/s²

Experimental Velocity 4.333 m/s

Acceleration 4.25 m/s²

These calculations incorporate the provided values for mass and distances, providing both
theoretical and experimental insights into the propulsion stage of the roller coaster.

The data is somewhat dissimilar due to measurement errors such as the limitation of measuring tools,
the lack of high-quality measuring tools as these data were taken by phone, in addition to the human
errors such as writing down wrong data. Friction is a major factor in the difference, and since we
neglected the force of friction, it is natural that there is a difference between the numbers, but in
general the difference is not considered very large. This difference can be reduced by using high-quality
measuring devices and reducing random errors that occur in the laboratory.

Discussion

From the above calculations, it can be deduced that both theoretical and experimental values are too
far apart. For the maximum velocity, the difference is 33%, and for the acceleration, the error is 17.33%.
The result articulates that in real-world dynamics a lot matters when using the theoretical model. This
maximum velocity deviation would indicate a better requirement for the alignment of practical
conditions, while a relatively large mistake during acceleration would specify potential areas for
improvement in measurement techniques.

There are a number of reasons why this discrepancy might exist:

 The first was the model of finding out time span required for the cart to travel from point A up to point B.
From the view above, it is obtained through a stopwatch. However, because the model's size is so small,
it causes difficulty doing separate tasks adequately at the same time. These are tasks like pushing the
cart, watching where it is going, getting the stopwatch on to the point, and stopping it at exactly that
point—all done smoothly. This then opens up the possibility for human error, having a very big influence
on the measurement of time and leading to inaccuracies in the calculation of velocity and acceleration.
 Another reason is the procedure followed, that of manually pushing the cart. This brings in the external
force, which puts the cart to a higher speed from the onset, and therefore spends the least amount of
time in covering the distance. The contributed variability in the speed and acceleration of the cart is as a
result of the contradicting amount of push force, hence impacting on the percentage error. Contradicting
push force in the procedure makes it hard to reach precise readings via a stopwatch.
 The procedure followed in the measurement of the ramp may have increased the percentage error.
When any object is measured using a string, with marks made on it, the errors become quite inevitable,
most essentially considering the fact that the ramp was curved. The measured time might be different
from the actual time; thus, leading to discrepancies in the calculated values of velocity and acceleration.
 Another factor causing influence is that the model for the roller coaster track was not in a static position.
While in the process of experimenting, movement on the track had to be made and that was not the
objective. Movement of any type, even if it is minute, causes changes in the measurements and affects
them adversely.
Using the same set of theoretical equations for designing a complete system of a roller coaster,
I would think that it could not totally gain my trust. There are many active controls, like friction,
air resistance, and human error, that cannot be included in the theoretical equations and play a
big role in determining what results will be achieved. These factors will definitely come into
consideration when a real-world roller coaster is designed for safety and performance.

Among the assumptions made are no friction, no air resistance, no human weight, and many
other such more realistic assumptions. Given those are the contributing factors to the
approximation, it is easy to tell that an enormous difference was brought about between the
theoretical and practical value. For practical purposes therefore, the theoretical formula will be
a point of reference for most explicit application. This brings the understanding that the
theoretical formula has no practical significance. All the contributory real-life factors affecting
the ride have to be taken into consideration to make a roller coaster that is both safe and fun.

These errors do, however, make room for improvement with this experiment. Ways of
measuring could be taken to a more refined level through means of better measuring, where
large amounts of human error can be taken out by using automated sensors. Designing and
simulating the roller coaster in CAD programs will help visually control more variables.
knowledge from the experiment and analysis provides an improved understanding of general
design concepts for roller coasters. Future experimentations must keep more controls with
finer methods so that errors are brought down to the least possible manner and towards the
theoretical prediction. This way, there is an assurance of better understanding of how roller
coasters function and how one is supposed to design them effectively.

33%
Parameter Theoretical Value Experimental Value Deviation (%)

17.33%
Maximum Velocity 3.225 m/s 4.333m/s
Acceleration 5.141 m/s² 4.25 m/s²
Part E: Draw the velocity-time graph showing cart’s acceleration:
To draw the velocity-time graph, we must have different velocities with their average time.
The data table below includes information about different velocities of the cart, the distance,
average time and maximum velocity.

Distance (𝒎) Time (𝒔) Average Time (𝒔) Velocity Maximum

𝒕𝟏 + 𝒕𝟐 + 𝒅
Velocity
𝒕𝟑 𝒗=
𝒕 𝑽𝒎𝒂𝒙 = 𝒗 ×
Distance traveled by Time captured by cart in 3

𝒕𝒂𝒗𝒈 =
cart different videos.
𝟐
(𝒎/𝒔) 𝟐 (𝒎/𝒔)

𝒎/𝒔 𝒎/𝒔
1–a 0.24 0.23 0.24 0.22 0.23 1.04 2.08
m Sec Sec Sec Sec

𝒎/𝒔 𝒎/𝒔
1–b 0.38 0.27 0.3 0.26 0.28 1.357 2.714
m Sec Sec Sec Sec

𝒎/𝒔 𝒎/𝒔
1–c 0.59 0.34 0.38 0.35 0.36 1.639 3.278
m Sec Sec Sec Sec

𝒎/𝒔 𝒎/𝒔
1–d 0.72 0.37 0.4 0.44 0.4 1.8 3.6
m Sec Sec Sec Sec

𝒎/𝒔 𝒎/𝒔
1–e 0.905 0.44 0.45 0.49 0.46 1.967 3.934
m Sec Sec Sec Sec

𝒎/𝒔 𝒎/𝒔
1–2 1.105 0.53 0.50 0.49 0.51 2.167 4.333
m Sec Sec Sec Sec
Velocity / time graph for the propulsion stage
To create the velocity/time graph for the propulsion stage using the data from
experiment details we will use the distances traveled and corresponding average
times taken for each segment to calculate the average velocity at each point. The
maximum velocity at each segment.
The graph got:

Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph

Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph Linear (Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph)
Linear (Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph)
5
4.333
4.5
3.934
4 f(x) = 7.70372781065089 x + 0.447108284023669
3.6
3.5 3.278
Velocity (v)

3 2.714
2.5 2.08
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55
Time (s)

The graph above illustrates the velocity-time

The slope equation is given by:

𝑦 = 7.7037𝑥 + 0.4471
The slope of the velocity-time graph gives us the acceleration, which means that the slope created by the
linear equation gives us the acceleration.

𝑦 = 7.7037𝑥 + 0.4471

𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑎 = 5.4578 𝑚/𝑠2

Part F: Calculate the distance covered by the cart using velocity-time graph:

Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph

Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph Linear (Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph)
Linear (Velocity (v) Vs Time (s) graph)
5
4.333
4.5 3.934
4 3.6
f(x) = 7.70372781065089 x + 0.447108284023669
3.278
3.5
3 2.714
Axis Title

2.5 2.08
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55
Axis Title
1. Propulsion Stage
Since this roller coaster design doesn’t have an engine to move the cart, principles of physics were used
to make it gain velocity to get to the other end of the track. The first law of physics used is the law of
conservation of energy, which states that "energy can neither be created nor destroyed - only
converted from one form of energy to another" (Ethan Boechler, 2021). In this case, the energy will be
changed from potential energy to kinetic energy.
Also, according to Newton’s first law of motion, an object in motion will stay in motion, and an object at
rest will stay at rest if no force is applied to the object (the object will have inertia) (The Physics
Classroom, n.d.). However, in this case, some friction will be there, so it will make the cart decelerate a
little.
The potential energy that will be talked about here is the gravitational potential energy, which increases
as the object is brought further away from the center of the Earth (The Physics Classroom, n.d.).
Potential energy=mass×gravity×height
Kinetic energy is the energy that moving objects have, i.e., the energy of motion (The Physics Classroom,
n.d.).
1
Kinetic energy= ×mass×velocity2
2
This stage is used to make the cart accelerate so that it will be fast enough to finish the whole track
without stopping.

Figure 1

It was designed as a declined slope so that in the beginning at point A, the cart will have potential
energy only since it is raised above the ground and is stationary. As it goes to point B it will accelerate
and gain velocity thus gaining kinetic energy and losing potential energy as the height is decreasing.

Summary of Deviation Calculations

These calculations show the deviations between the theoretical and experimental values for both
maximum velocity and acceleration, highlighting the effects of practical factors such as friction and
measurement accuracy.
2. Loop-the-Loop
The loop-the-loop stage of the roller coaster involves the cart navigating through a vertical loop. This is
where the concept of centripetal force becomes very evident. It is a force exerted on an object that
moves in a circular path inwards toward the center of the circle. As the cart enters the loop, the
gravitational force provides the necessary centripetal force to maintain its motion along the loop.
The height at the top of the loop must be less than the initial height to ensure that the cart has

formula 𝑚𝑣2𝑟 where m is the mass of the cart 𝑣 is the velocity of the cart, and r is the radius of the
sufficient velocity to complete the loop without falling. The centripetal force can be calculated using the

loop.

Figure 2
The theory behind this was to ensure that the cart would remain on track as it went through loop

minimum velocity 𝑣≥𝑔𝑟 , the so-called critical velocity, that ensured you would keep contact with the
motion. That means the velocity at the top of the loop had to be greater than or equal to a certain

track. The critical velocity is defined as. If the velocity of the cart decreases past that, then it won't
possess the centripetal force needed to hold it against the track and will fall.
3. The Hill
On the hill part of the roller coaster, the cart must be in a position to move both upwards and
downwards the hill, which implies kinetic energy has to be converted into potential energy and vice
versa. The height of hill, h2 must be less than the initial height, h1 so that the cart could acquire enough
speed over the hill while moving up. On climbing up the hill, the cart loses kinetic energy and potential
energy. On the other hand, it picks up energy as it gets into a descent, and loses potential energy in the
process. The change from one form of energy to the other is what will keep the momentum of the cart
for the whole period.
Thus, when the cart is where the hill ends to meet the level, the forces acting on it consider the
necessity of centripetal force required to keep the cart in circular motion. Therefore, at that position,
the normal force the track exerts on the cart has to neutralize both the gravitational force as well as the
surplus centripetal force needed to keep the cart in the circular path. This increased normal protects the
cart from falling off the track while negotiating the bottom of the hill.
At the bottom of the hill, there is a straight path so this has the cart accelerating and centripetal force
added. This is the necessity that makes the forces acting on the cart balanced: normal force equals
gravitational force, which ensures continuation of smooth motion transferred to the cart without any
additional applied forces in the vertical direction.
As the cart is going up that hill, it becomes a maximum amount because it has to cause forward
acceleration. As the cart reaches the bottom of the hill (back), this larger normal force is felt again
because centripetal force is required to alter its direction. At this increased normal force, the cart will
stay in path and not fly off the track.
 Figure 3
4. Final Stage
The final stage of the roller coaster will include some method of stopping the cart with a deceleration.
This can be with a spring or means of damping to remove the remainder of the KE. The height, h at that
point (h3) will be calculated such that the cart has enough energy to coast up and over the crest safely
and then decelerate to a safe stop. This is where many of the safety features on the ride come into
place; they prevent the cart from traveling indefinitely, which may well result in it hurting somebody
else.

Figure 4

To determine the distance covered by the cart, find the area of the graph, as the area gives us the
distance by:

𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 𝑥 × 𝑦

𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 × 𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦

𝑚
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 𝑠 ×
𝑠
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 𝑚 = 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒, our graph have a triangular

shape: Thus, Total distance:

1
𝑑𝑡 = × 4.333 × 0.51 = 1.104915𝑚, which is the same distance as the propulsion stage we measured.
2
Error Percentage Calculation
Data:
 Experimental Value (Measured Distance): 0.78 m
 Graphical Value (Calculated Distance): 0.779 m
Calculating the percentage error:

Part G: Does our total distance measured under the graph equal the total distance of the propulsion
stage we measured?

Yes, as we got a total distance equal to 1.104915m, which is the same distance we measured on the
propulsion stage.

Part H: If it is not equal, explain why there might be a difference?

In fact, we obtained the same distance that we measured, but perhaps our measurements were
inaccurate due to the use of poor equipment, given that the path taken by the cart was not straight
100%, and we assumed that it was straight.

3.2 : The power to launch:

As the cart will move through the full track, we need to calculate the power required to get it to the
finish line.

In this part, we will use the free body diagram to calculate the force, work and average power to
accelerate the cart until it reaches the maximum velocity:

𝑁
For the force: 𝑚𝑎

∑ 𝑭𝒙 = 𝟎

𝑤𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 − 𝑚𝑎 = 0

𝑤𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 = 𝑚𝑎 𝑊 𝑆𝑖𝑛𝜃

𝐹 = 𝑚𝑔 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 𝑊 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝜃

𝑊
𝐹 = (0.08) × (9.81) × 𝑠𝑖𝑛(31.61) =
0.411𝑁
A simple FBD showing
Work done: the forces acting on the
 Calculating average power and maximum velocity
The cart starts from a height on a track with a slope leading to point B. The total distance from the top
of the slope to the bottom (Point B) is AB = 0.78 m. Using conservation of energy principles
we can determine the velocity at Point B and use it to find average power.
Energy Conservation:
At point A the cart is stationary but has potential energy due to its height. As the cart rolls down to
point B all potential energy is converted into kinetic energy which can be calculated as follows:

To calculate the work done, we can use the formula of the work done; which tells us that the product of
the force and the distance of the propulsion stage gives us the work done.

𝑊𝐷 = 𝐹 × 𝐷

𝑊𝐷 = 0.411 × 1.1049= 0.4541139𝑁𝑚

Maximum power:

Multiplying both maximum velocity and force gives us the average power:

𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 × 𝐹

𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 3.225 × 0.411 = 1.325475𝑊

n-of-energy

Discussion
In this experiment, the length calculated from A to B was 0.78 meters. For the
length calculated by the graph, from the trend line it was 0.779 meters, giving an
error percentage of 0.128% between methods. This could happen for a number of
reasons that tend to be common in manual experiments: timing, precision in
measurement, and human reaction are not always similar.
For instance, acceleration was determined in three different ways, and the students
had the following results: 4.2052 m/s² graphically, 5.59 m/s² theoretically, and the
third is 2.848 m/s² measured. These differences may arise from majorly varying
individual methods of doing experiments, accuracy in measurement, and important
assumptions—for example, air friction and earth friction—in a theoretical
calculation affecting actual results.
These differences, however, could be justified by the 5Ms (Manpower, Machine,
Material, Method, and Management) as they would show the presence of human
factors, material conditions, procedural adherence, and organizational oversight.
For instance, manual measurement methods for time and distances in such settings
might not quite accurately have reflected the rapid motion of the cart, and thus
either underestimated or overestimated the velocities involved.
Areas of improvement that can be carried out for the future experiments to be
executed to ensure the accuracy and reliability of this data:
 Automate the release of the cart due to a pneumatic cylinder eliminating differences
in timing at the beginning.
 Time may be captured by using sensors attaching to stopwatches, whereby the
stopwatches exist in some critical parts on the track in a manner that can capture the
 time accurately when the cart is projected to reach that point.
 Upgrading to more advanced measuring instruments, for example, laser measures or
vernier calipers, for doing distance measurements in order to be more accurate in
results.
Though these improvements are sure to be realized, the theoretical estimations
from the energy conservation theory still hold good. These estimations assume
ideal conditions and make for a very robust theoretical base, hence this document
may prove useful as a benchmark for any study dealing with the physics of motion
and energy transmission in the described system.
The experiment further places emphasis on the importance of precision in physical
measurements, which will become valuable in practical use of theoretical physics
in the designing of systems. The insights harvested from this can help in the design
of roller coasters that are thrilling and safe through maximization of potential to
kinetic energy transitions without the aid of external engines.