Phsy - grade PDF

Preview

Summary

grade...

Description

3/11/2020

Eduardo Luis Physics Lab. I # 14719 Centripetal Force

3/11/2020

 Objective Measure the net force causing centripetal acceleration for a variety of cases. Equipment’s used:     

objects Stopwatch(smartphone) string Meter stick tube

Equations used: v=2πr/T |Fnet|=

m∗v 2 r

| Fnet |=mh*g v=speed m=mass r=radius Fnet=net force g=gravity F N = mg F N = mg F N = mg F N = mg F

=

4 π 2 ∗m∗r T2

3/11/2020

N = mg F N = mg F N = mg F N = mg F N = mg T: the time for a full rotation 10T =19.06s T=1.906s

3/11/2020

Object

Small

Medium

Large

Mass of object m

21.2g

36.2g

55.4g

Net force( Fnet)

Net force( Fnet) in theory(weight force)

Percentage error (%)

.84

.443N

.490N

9.59

.374

.61

.841N

.98N

14.18

150g

.374

.409

1.87N

1.47N

27.21

200g

.416

.448

1.73N

1.96N

11.73

100g

.407

.798

.913N

.98N

6.83

150g

.407

.668

1.303N

1.47N

11.36

200g

.407

.583

1.711N

1.96N

12.7

250g

.407

.503

2.29N

2.45N

6.53

150g

.40

.756

1.53N

1.47N

4.08

200g

.40

.655

2.03N

1.96N

3.57

250g

.40

.628

2.21N

2.45N

9.79

300g

.40

.571

2.68N

2.94N

8.84

Mass Mh

Radius(m )

Time (s)

50g

.374

100g

3/11/2020

Conclusion Using Newtons second law the coe cient of sta c fricon (µ st ) and the coe cient of kinec fricon (µ k ), were more accurately determined. µ st was found to be 0.42, while µ k was 0.33. Experimentally both values were found to be 0.25. Using Newtons second law the coe cient of sta c fricon (µ st ) and the coe cient of kinec fricon (µ k ), were more accurately determined. µ st was found to be 0.42, while µ k was 0.33. Experimentally both values were found to be 0.25. In conclusion, the results of the experiment were close to what was supposed to be achieved for most of the lab, based on the percent error. The data supports Newton’s second law is true because the centripetal force on an object moving in a circle is equal to the mass of the object, multiplied by the radius and the angular velocity squared. The experimental and the theoretical values were close to each other.

The results of this experiment were very accurate. For trials 1-3 in which we only changed the length of the string and kept the mass and angle of displacement constant, the measured periods became smaller as we decreased the length of the string. For example, at a

3/11/2020

length of 1.2 m, our measured period was 2.251 s (with average time of 45.02 seconds for 20 oscillations). At a length of 1 m, the measured period was 2.0595 s (average time of 41.19 s for 20 oscillations). At 0.75 m, the measured period was 1.772 s (average time of 35.44 s for 20 oscillations). When comapared to the calculated (GAV) periods for trials 1-3, we obtained percent errors of 2.41%, 2.66%, and 2.01% for trials 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The results of this experiment were very accurate. For trials 1-3 in which we only changed the length of the string and kept the mass and angle of displacement constant, the measured periods became smaller as we decreased the length of the string. For example, at a length of 1.2 m, our measured period was 2.251 s (with average time of 45.02 seconds for 20 oscillations). At a length of 1 m, the measured period was 2.0595 s (average time of 41.19 s for 20 oscillations). At 0.75 m, the measured period was 1.772 s (average time of 35.44 s for 20 oscillations). When comapared to the calculated (GAV) periods for trials 1-3, we obtained percent errors of 2.41%, 2.66%, and 2.01% for trials 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The results of this experiment were very accurate. For trials 1-3 in which we only changed the length of the string and kept the mass and angle of displacement constant, the measured periods became smaller as we decreased the length of the string. For example, at a length of 1.2 m, our measured period was 2.251 s (with average time of 45.02 seconds for 20 oscillations). At a length of 1 m, the measured period was 2.0595 s (average time of 41.19 s for 20 oscillations). At 0.75 m, the measured period was 1.772 s (average time of 35.44 s for 20 oscillations). When comapared to the calculated (GAV) periods for trials 1-3, we obtained percent errors of 2.41%, 2.66%, and 2.01% for trials 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The results of this experiment were very accurate. For trials 1-3 in which we only changed the length of the string and kept the mass and angle of displacement constant, the

3/11/2020

measured periods became smaller as we decreased the length of the string. For example, at a length of 1.2 m, our measured period was 2.251 s (with average time of 45.02 seconds for 20 oscillations). At a length of 1 m, the measured period was 2.0595 s (average time of 41.19 s for 20 oscillations). At 0.75 m, the measured period was 1.772 s (average time of 35.44 s for 20 oscillations). When comapared to the calculated (GAV) periods for trials 1-3, we obtained percent errors of 2.41%, 2.66%, and 2.01% for trials 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The results of this experiment were very accurate. For trials 1-3 in which we only changed the length of the string and kept the mass and angle of displacement constant, the measured periods became smaller as we decreased the length of the string. For example, at a length of 1.2 m, our measured period was 2.251 s (with average time of 45.02 seconds for 20 oscillations). At a length of 1 m, the measured period was 2.0595 s (average time of 41.19 s for 20 oscillations). At 0.75 m, the measured period was 1.772 s (average time of 35.44 s for 20 oscillations). When comapared to the calculated (GAV) periods for trials 1-3, we obtained percent errors of 2.41%, 2.66%, and 2.01% for trials 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The results of this experiment were very accurate. For trials 1-3 in which we only changed the length of the string and kept the mass and angle of displacement constant, the measured periods became smaller as we decreased the length of the string. For example, at a length of 1.2 m, our measured period was 2.251 s (with average time of 45.02 seconds for 20 oscillations). At a length of 1 m, the measured period was 2.0595 s (average time of 41.19 s for 20 oscillations). At 0.75 m, the measured period was 1.772 s (average time of 35.44 s for 20 oscillations). When comapared to the calculated (GAV) periods for trials 1-3, we obtained percent errors of 2.41%, 2.66%, and 2.01% for trials 1, 2, and 3, respective...