“Work”

Connor Fitzgerald

E1030L

CRN#=

College of Engineering

The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

“--/--/2019”

1
 Table of Contents

Summary p.3

Theory p.4

Apparatus p.4

Results p.5

Appendix

Data p.7

Sample Calculations p.11

Summary

2
 This experiment was done to test the relationship between kinetic energy, potential
energy, and work. For part one, the apparatus consisted of the motion sensor on the floor with the
force sensor being held above it with a 200g weight. For part two, the apparatus consisted of the
motion sensor being placed 40 to 50 cm away and a large diameter spring hooked from the force
sensor to an anchor point. The motion sensor is used to see how far the force sensor is moved
with an amount of force measured by the force sensor against the force of gravity and the spring.
During part one, the object went from 0.283m to 0.584m over the course of 7.28 seconds using
an average force of 2.122N. During the second part, 0.349m over the span of 8.55 seconds
increasing work up to 0.3659N*m, which varies from the calculated potential energy of the
spring, whose constant was 4.647 N/m, from 216% to 74% at different points. These variations
might be due to energy loss from friction and that the experiment was started with some tension
already in the spring.

Theory

The amount of work done on an object is equal to the change in kinetic energy and the change in
potential energy. It can be calculated by multiplying a force on an object by its displacement.
Work is also a measure of energy transfer.

Apparatus

3
 Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Results

4
The results are on Tables 1-5.

Table 1

Part I
Time (s) Position (m)
Start moving 1.14 0.283
Stop moving 8.42 0.581

Table 2

Average force (N) 2.112

Work done (J) 0.629376
Integral during lift: position vs force (N*m) 0.6591
ΔPE (J) 0.584
% Error integral & ΔPE 12.729

Table 3

Part II
Time (s) Position (m)
Start pulling 0.05 0.049
Stop pulling 8.60 0.398

Table 4

Spring Constant (N/m) 4.647

Table 5

Stretch
0-10cm 0-20cm 0-30cm
Integral (during pull) 0.07346 0.1986 0.3659

5
(N*m)
ΔPE (J) 0.023235 0.09294 0.20915
% Error integral & 216.161 113.686 74.9755
ΔPE

Appendix

Data

6
Figure 4

Figure 5

7
Sample Calculations