You are on page 1of 15

001004-042

The aim of the experiment was to demonstrate the Second Law of Newton. The
experiments objective was done through a pulley experiment and a ticker time where
there is a cord dotted every 0.02 s. The variables were the masses from 0.1 to 1.0 kg;
thus, to show how far the dots were according to every mass so to prove a changing
acceleration. Quantitatively, this was done by measuring the distances from every 7, 14,
21 and 28 spaces from the initial dot.

The formulas in order to find the mass of the car and to test the
Newtons Second Law, some kinematics formulas were used.

1
s=ut a t 2
2

Since, u=0, therefore: ut=0, then:

1 2
s= a t
2

The time is obtained because of the ticker timer which has a period (and frequency).

Since, this is the condition; we can find acceleration if we have the distance between
certain points and the time it took. The time it took can be deduced since the period of
one separation between the points is known, as the period. So if we measure the
distance between 7 points ( 6 spaces), then if we know the period it took for the ticker
timer to mark these 6 spaces ( 6 times the period), we will know the time, and the
distance. Thus, the acceleration can be obtained.

S can be the y, 0.5t2 our variable, so to find the acceleration of the


car.

s
2
=a
0.5t

As Newtons second and first law, we can observe how Tensions,


Weight and the Friction Force are applied.

1
001004-042

This diagram shows the set-up of the experiment, with the ticker time.

Ticker Car/ Glider


Timer

Distance between
dots (cm)

2
001004-042

The diagram shows the free body diagram of the experiment:

Hence, as by taking the y and x axis separately, the formulas are


given by:

x-axis

T Fr=Ma

Since, Friction can be thought to be negligible, and then the correct


formula would be:

T =Ma

y-axis

W T=ma

Where,

W =mg

Then,

3
001004-042
T =mgma=m( ga)

Where:

T= tension/ N W= Weight of the weights/N

Fr= Force of Friction/ N m= Mass of the weights/kg

M= Mass of the glider /kg a= acceleration /ms-2

4
If there is further need for awareness of the Frictional force, then:

NW =0

N=Mg

Fr=N

Raw Data

Independent: Masses of weights/kg

Dependent: Distance between spaces in paper/ m

Graph
x-axis: Acceleration (ms-2)

y-axis: Tension (N)

Since,

T =Ma

Tension
=Mass of Glider
Slope= Acceleration
Average Distance is got from the average of the distance of the trials.

For, 7 spaces and for the 0.096 kg weight, then the average is got from:

distances = 0.0030+ 0.0070+ 0.0036 0.005 m


of trials 3

This process was done and the results are shown in Table n2 below with all the
masses and spaces.

The acceleration is calculated by: So for 7 spaces and for 0.096 kg,

s Time taken/s=
a= spaces period of 1 space=0.020 7=0.14 s
0.5 t 2
Then, since 0.5 t 2 is aimed: So,

0.0045
2 2 a= =0 . 463 ms2
0.5 ( 0.14 ) 0.010(s ) 0.010

Besides, average distance between 7 spaces This was repeated with all the spaces and
was measured to be: 0.0045m all masses. These results are shown in the
table below.
Since acceleration is known and T is given by:

T =m( ga)

Then, ga can be found so that it times the mass will equal the Tension in Newtons.

For example, for Mass= 0.096 kg, its acceleration = 0.540 ms-2. Then, ga is:

9.810.540=9.270 m s2

As the mass and g-a are known, then for this case, m=0.096 kg and g-a= 0.270 ms -2
2
T =0.096 9.270 0.9 N ( kg m s )

This calculation was done for all masses, finding each Tension. The table below shows
the results from these calculations.
Calculation of Error Propagation

Since the balances used had as minimum measurement: 0.01 kg; then, its
absolute uncertainty was 0.005 kg.

The time ticker uncertainty was negligible (or 0 units), thus it is not shown in the
table.

In order to calculate the absolute uncertainties of Acceleration, we need to go back to


the formula:

s
2
=a
0.5t

To determine what the uncertainty of a is; the sum of percentage uncertainties of


Distance/m and of time must first be calculated.

Since uncertainty of time is negligible; its percentage uncertainty is experimentally 0%.


Therefore, the percentage uncertainty of distance has to be calculated only.

Since the absolute uncertainty of distance is 0.0005m , its percentage uncertainty


will vary amongst the different distances measured. Thus, in the table below, the
calculation of all the percentage uncertainties of all the values of distance is calculated.

i.e

For 7 spaces and smallest mass (0.096 kg): Distance= 0.0045 m

If this experimental distance equals a 100%, how much would the absolute uncertainty
(0.0005 m) will be as %?

0.0005 100
= 11.008
0.0045

Thus, the general formula for calculating the percentage uncertainty of both Distance
and Acceleration is given by:

absolute uncertainty 100


=
Distance

Since this percentage uncertainty of distance summed with 0% (ticker timers) is


the percentage uncertainty of acceleration, its absolute uncertainty can now be
calculated (since, they are the same).

i.e

For 7 spaces and smallest mass (0.096 kg): Acceleration = 0.463 ms-2
If this experimental acceleration equals a 100%, how much would percentage
uncertainty (11.008 %) be as an absolute uncertainty?

0.463 11.008 2
A .U ( )= 0.05 m s
100

Thus, the absolute uncertainty of Acceleration can be given by:

Acceleration Percentage U .
Absolute Uncertainty ( )=
100

To find the most precise calculation of the Absolute Uncertainty of Acceleration, all the
absolute uncertainties of the different accelerations were averaged.

As the table below aims to summarize all of above calculations mentioned, the average
2
absolute uncertainty of acceleration was found to be 0.018 ms

It is worth noting that the Tensions absolute uncertainty was calculated by looking at
the most accurate Newtonmeter available, and replicating its uncertainty, which in this
case was found to be 0.01 N

Results
In order to prove the 2nd law of Newton, the slope of the Tension- Acceleration
graph must be the mass of the car used.

In reality, the slope of the graph was found to be:

m=0.7476 therefore , M ( kg )=0.748 kg with a R2=0.943


As a matter of fact, since the real value of the car was 0.855 kg, then this leads to a
percentage error in comparison to the real value of car of:

|0.7480.855|
100=12.5
|0.855|

Conclusions and Evaluations


The results that the experiment yielded were that the mass of the car must have
been 0.753 kg as calculated from the slope of the Tension-Acceleration graph. The
percentage error was around 12.5% which shows, in a way, how reliable the experiment
was. As a matter of fact, since the hypothesis stated that mass of the car was going to be
found within a low percentage of error, we can say that the experiment was successful
and so the hypothesis was correct. The 2 nd law of Newton was, therefore, successfully
proved.

Along the experiment, there are certain errors that came up. It is worth noting
that the natures of the errors differ in context. There were systematic errors and random
errors. It is worth noting that there were some anomalies analysed from the graphs, such
as when its Tension was 3N and its acceleration 2 ms -2. This changed slight the
inclination of the line, changing its slope, which eventually is considered due to a
random error. Furthermore, for example, a clear mistake which propagated errors was
that the surface on which the car and the experiment were executed was not completely
straight. The effect of this error is that this created a certain angle with the horizontal
which generates a vector of the forces, which changes acceleration and the tension.
Besides, as shown the in the graph, the best-fit line does not pass through the origin,
being (0;0) which indicates that systematics errors were the source of error in the
experiment results.

A weakness in the experiment was that since the masses of the weights used
were relatively low, the points between each other were really close apart, especially in
the first ones, thus there was some inaccuracy when reading these short distances. It is
worth noting that also the gliders rope was not completely parallel to the variable
weights, as well, and also the mass of the rope or cord was not taken into consideration.

In order to simplify the calculations, in the experiment, we assumed that there


was no friction along the air track or in the pulley, and neither was there air drag on the
moving glider or the falling weight. This created a change in the actual Tension (and
acceleration). It was noticeable that the masses of the weights were measured with an
analogue balance with a really high inaccuracy which increased the likelihood of
systematic errors. The uncertainties of the time of the ticker timer were negligible but
in practice, there is a certain uncertainty which has to be taken into consideration for
further accuracy.

In order to obtain better and more accurate results, there are improvements to bear in
mind. With the help of a spirit level, one must make sure that the most possible
straightness is achieved of the surface, so that there is no probable angle created.

To counteract the systematic errors and random errors, the range of the masses of
the weights used should increase, giving a larger range of acceleration and tension so a
more accurate slope is obtained. This will be done as well, by enlarging the range of the
measuring distances from point to point, so that more data is obtained.

The friction created a huge problem since its negligibility isnt quite accurate.

Actually, what can be done is to investigate the friction coefficient ( of the surface

and thus, from these formulas, the Normal force can be calculated.

NW =0

N=Mg

Fr=N

If the normal force and thus the friction force can be calculated, this will reduce the
inaccuracy of the experiment greatly.

Besides, it would be ideal to use electronic devices to measure since their absolute
uncertainties are lower than of analogical devices. Since, the results yielded inaccuracy
as the best fit line did not pass thought the origin, or even, due to there were anomalous
accelerations, the calibration of the balances and rulers (devices) must be taken into
more depth. In addition, the random errors can be reduced by increasing the number of
trials of the measurements.

You might also like