Objective:
The objective of this laboratory was to theoretically calculate the moment of inertia of a disk and a ring and then to verify the moment of inertia for both objects through experiment. This laboratory shows that while the theoretical is not within the uncertainty of the experimental, both values are extremely similar to each other.
Data and Analysis:
Data:
Table 1: The Angular Acceleration of No Ring and Ring
Trial No Ring Ring
5g 4.57 ± 0.005 rad/s2 1.32 ± 0.005 rad/s2
10g 13.16 ± 0.005 rad/s2 3.09 ± 0.005 rad/s2
15g 20.45 ± 0.005 rad/s2 4.83 ± 0.005 rad/s2
20g 27.89 ± 0.005 rad/s2 6.60 ± 0.005 rad/s2
25g 35.65 ± 0.005 rad/s2 8.35 ± 0.005 rad/s2
Table 2: The Average Experimental and Theoretical Moment of Inertia for No Ring and Ring
Type Experimental Moment of Inertia Theoretical Moment of Inertia
No Ring 0.000198 ± 0.000047 kg•m2 0.000133 kg•m2
Ring 0.000631 ± 0.000101 kg•m2 0.000503 kg•m2
Analysis:
After completing the experiment, the data was transferred from DataStudio to Excel file, Lab9. Next, the points in the data when it started to increase were removed from the data points because that was when the 3-step pulley spun the opposite way of its original direction. This caused the mass hangar to be pulled back up and our experiment focuses on the just the drop. After deleting the excessive data, a scatter plot was created for all five trials for both the No Ring and the Ring. Then a trendline was added for the trials and the option to show the linear equation was selected. From the graph, the angular acceleration was determined by taking the slope from the equation shown on the graph of each trial.
After finding the angular acceleration, the experimental moment of inertia was calculated for all the tria...
... middle of paper ...
...ertia of the No Ring. The reason for this can be that the height of the 3-step pulley was changed during the experiment. Also, the angle of the clamp-on super pulley was changed in order to prevent the string from falling off the clamp-on super pulley during every trial. These are some of the things that were observed that have affected our results. There might multiple other changes that were done subconsciously by the experimenters without noticing.
In the future, the experiment can be improved by making sure that changes above, if required, are done before the first trial of the first run starts. Another problem was that the 3-step pulley moved slightly every time a trial was conducted. This could be prevented for the future labs by have a 3-step pulley that more resistible to movement. With these improvements, future laboratory might get more accurate results.
There were no significant error factors that may have affected the arrangement of the lab experiment. Everything went smoothly with relative ease.
The biomechanical principle stability for a pirouette is primarily concerned with the center of mass
There are many technicalities and terms associated with a successful device. Some of the main factors come from the materials used, and where they were used in the structure. Some are best used in one place, or another. All of this must be taken into consideration when deciding on how to best utilize the physics and forces applied to the boomerang. As it is a simple machine, it dominates in simplicity for a somewhat daunting task.
... got very different results, however they had carried out the experiment in slightly different ways, making it difficult to compare results.
Possible sources of error in this experiment include the inaccuracy of measurements, as correct measurements are vital for the experiment.
Discussion: The percent of errors is 59.62%. Several errors could have happened during the experiment. Weak techniques may occur.
Based on the data obtained, Figure 1 represents a force vs. time graph for the amount of force that was used to pull a wooden block across a table. As illustrated in Figure 1, the initial flat line in the graph represents the block at rest, this is where the forces acting on the object are the normal force, gravity, and the static frictional force. Force was then applied to the wooden block until it began to move, the point at which the block moves is the peak in Figure 1. This is the point at which there was enough force applied to the block to overcome the maximum static friction force. The graph then begins to decrease because once a force is applied to the object that is greater than the maximum frictional force, not as much force is needed to continue to pull
...mpanies. The Structural Test Article simulated pressure on the vertical components during launch. After testing, Marshall concluded that the gap size was sufficient for both of the O-rings to be out of position. Again Thiokol rebutted Marshall’s claim by challenging the validity of the electrical components used to measure joint rotation. Thiokol believed that their test was superior to Marshall’s test, because it validated their conclusion. This is a fundamental problem know as experimenter’s regress. Since the true solution is unknown, the best test is the one that supports the experimenter’s view. Since this disagreement could not be solved between the two, the O-ring manufacturer was consulted. The manufacturer told the two that the O-ring was not designed for such high project specifications needed for the craft, but NASA decided to work with what they had.
Going into details of the article, I realized that the necessary information needed to evaluate the experimental procedures were not included. However, when conducting an experiment, the independent and dependent variable are to be studied before giving a final conclusion.
The file labeled “Newton’s 2nd Law” is to be opened. The cart’s mass along with the attachment of the sensor and the accelerometer are to be measured and recorded. Being carefully verified in order, the track is leveled and the Force Sensor is set to 10N and connected to...
Vrock= Vcenter of mass + Wrock Where V is the translational velocity, and W is the angular velocity
...e been beneficial to the experiment. An error may have occurred due to the fact that measurements were taken by different individuals, so the calculations could have been inconsistent.
When riding on a roller coaster your seatbelt is not what keeps you seated. Centripetal force is the reason you stay seated on the roller coaster. Throughout this paper I will explain what it is and the difference between centripetal and centrifugal force is. Then how it happens and how it works in those situations. Finally I will explain how to figure out what the centripetal force is in a problem using formulas to solve it. Centripetal force is ubiquitous every day, but we fail to recognize it.
There is also the potential of human error within this experiment for example finding the meniscus is important to get an accurate amount using the graduated pipettes and burettes. There is a possibility that at one point in the experiment a chemical was measured inaccurately affecting the results. To resolve this, the experiment should have been repeated three times.
Measuring the Moment of Inertia of a Flywheel Objective = == == ==