Accelerations on an Incline Name: Wan Xian Koh Lab Partners Name: Laurie Wang, Emma Parsons Date: 5th

November 2012 Introduction The purpose of this lab is to compare the predicted and measured accelerations on a low friction incline plane, by calculating the value for the theoretical accelerations of a toy car on a low friction table top using force analysis and comparing it with the measured accelerations for various distances. An object on an inclined plane will slide down with acceleration because the forces acting on it are not balanced. Force of gravity (Fg) on the object pulls straight down at all times. The perpendicular component of Fg is equal and opposite to force normal (FN). Without friction, only the parallel component of Fg is responsible for pulling the object down the incline. If the distance travelled by the toy car decreases, then the time taken to travel will decrease, because distance is directly proportional to time. Variables Independent variable: Distance from start to finish line Dependent variable: Time taken to travel Controlled variable: Angle of the inclined table

Materials/ Equipment 8 textbooks, measuring tape, stopwatch, toy car, table, masking tape Methods Refer to Physics 12 Lab 1: Inclines lab hand-out. Results Table 1. The distance travelled and time Distance Travelled (m) 1.0m 0.9m 0.8m 0.7m 0.6m 0.5m Time taken, t (s) 1.5s 1.3s 1.2s 1.2s 0.9s 0.9s Time squared, t2 (s2) 2.25s2 1.69 s2 1.44 s2 1.44 s2 0.81 s2 0.81 s2

Table 2. The distance between table legs, vertical rise, calculated angle and mass of the toy car Distance between table legs, d Vertical rise of the table leg, h Calculated angle of the table Mass of the toy car 1.15m 0.135m 6.742o 0.03260kg

Discussion Uncertainty Analysis 1. Estimate the uncertainty in the distance and provide a justification for your estimate. There are a few sources of error that may cause an uncertainty in the distance travelled by the toy car. Firstly, the accuracy of the measured distance may be affected by parallax error. Secondly, the measuring tape was only able to measure distance accurate to 0.01m. Thirdly, the height of the books on either side of the table legs was not identical. The table was slightly tilted to one side and the car went diagonal instead of straight down the incline. As a result, the actual distance travelled was more that the measured distance between the start and finish line. Fourthly, the actual distance travelled may be affected by the starting position of the car. Distance travelled was measured with the back wheels of the car on the starting line to when the car falls off the edge of the table. If the starting position varies slightly, the actual distance may vary. 2. Estimate the uncertainty in the travel time and provide a justification for your estimate. There are a few sources of error that may cause an uncertainty in the travel time of the toy car. Firstly, due to human error, the moment the stop watch was started and stopped may not be exactly the same as the moment the car was released and when it fell of the edge. Secondly, as the stop watch could only measure time accurate to 0.1s, the accuracy of the measured travel time may be slightly more or less that the recorded time. Thirdly, since the car went diagonal instead of straight down, the time recorded is for a further distance than the distance recorded. Fourthly, the recorded travel time is more than the actual time needed because of friction. Neither the surface of the table nor the wheels of the car is completely frictionless. Friction opposes the motion of the car and causes and increase in the recorded time. 3. Not all the time uncertainties will be the same. Which trials in your opinion have a larger uncertainty? Explain why. In my opinion, the 1.0m trial will have a larger uncertainty because the toy car has to travel the longest distance to reach the finish line. During its travel, it travels diagonally for a longer period of time. The actual distance travelled deviates largely from the measured distance, which is 1.0m. Consequently, the time taken is longer than it should be for 1.0m.

Calculations 1. Calculate the predicted (theoretical) acceleration of the cart.

FN

d = 1.15m
6.74
o

Fperpendicular
6.74
o

h = 0.135m

Fg
Sin = 0.135/ 1.15 = 6.742o = 6.74o Fg = mg Fg = (0.03260)(-9.80) Fg = -0.31948N Fg = -0.319N

Fparallel
Fparallel = Fg sin Fparallel = 0.31948 sin 6.742o Fparallel = 0.03751N Fparallel = 0.0375N FNet = Fparallel + Ff = ma FNet = 0.03751 + 0 = 0.03260a a = 1.15061m/s2 a = 1.15m/s2

2. Calculate the measured (actual) acceleration of the cart from your graph. Based on our results, the graph does not pass the vertical line test because there is more than one y value for each x value; hence, the graph is not a function but a relation. The measured acceleration of the toy car cannot be calculated by calculating the slope of the graph. Measured (actual) acceleration can be calculated using the formula: d = Vi t + 0.5 at2 Distance 0.5 m Individual measured (actual) acceleration (0.5) = (0)(0.9) + 0.5(0.81)(a) a = 1.234 a = 1m/s2 (0.6) = (0)(0.9) + 0.5(0.81)(a) a = 1.481 a = 1m/s2 (0.7) = (0)(1.2) + 0.5(1.44)(a) a = 0.9722 a = 1m/s2 (0.8) = (0)(1.2) + 0.5(1.44)(a) a = 1.111

0.6m

0.7m

0.8m

0.9m

1.0m

a = 1m/s2 (0.9) = (0)(1.3) + 0.5(1.69)(a) a = 1.065 a = 1m/s2 (1.0) = (0)(1.5) + 0.5(2.25)(a) a = 0.8889 a = 0.88m/s2

Average measured acceleration = (1.234 + 1.481 + 0.9722 + 1.111 + 1.065 + 0.8889)/ 6 = 1.125 = 1m/s2 3. Find the percent difference between the acceleration values measured predicted predicted = 1.125 1.15 1.15 = 2.1739 = 2% ___________________________________________________________________________ The purpose of this experiment was met. We compared the predicted and measured accelerations of a toy car on a low friction incline plane. The predicted (theoretical) acceleration of the toy car was calculated using force analysis and is 1.15m/s2. The measured acceleration for each distance was calculated using the formula d = Vi t + 0.5 at2. The average measured (actual) acceleration is 1m/s2. In this lab, the timing introduces an uncertainty of about 10%. The percent difference between the predicted and measured acceleration is 2%. Since the percent difference is less than the percent uncertainty, and values are in agreement and we conclude that the date supports the prediction of the theory of force analysis. The experiment also fails to reject the hypothesis. If the distance travelled by the toy car decreases, then the time taken to travel will decrease, because distance is directly proportional to time. Sources of uncertainty will cause the measured value to vary slightly from the predicted value. The largest source of uncertainty in this experiment is the motion of the car. Instead of going straight down the inclined table, the car went diagonal. This affects the travel time. If the car had gone straight down, the travel time would have been less than the time recorded. Using the formula d = Vi t + 0.5 at2, we would see that the measured acceleration would increase if the travel time decrease. The percent difference would x 100% x 100%

decrease as the measured acceleration would increase from 1m/s2 to a value closer to 1.15m/s2, which is the predicted acceleration. In addition, friction may have affected the travel time. If the tables surface and the wheels of the car were truly frictionless, the travel time would decrease. This will also cause a decrease in the percent difference.

Diagrams

Distance vs time squared

1.2 1 Distance (m) 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.5 1 Time Squared, 1.5 t2 (s2) 2 2.5 distance (m)

Graph 1. Graph of distance versus time squared