December 7, 2011 Memorandum

To:

Mr. Josh Bittle Technical Director Design Team 17 Members: David Butler Stephen Vale Arnaldo A Villarreal Carl Vogel

From:

Summary: On November 15th, 2011, we did our first trial runs down the ramp with our completed cars. Using a laser sensor and our flag on our car we were able to determine the takeoff speed of the vehicle off of the ramp. Before this all of our calculations were done without taking air resistance and friction into account. However, now that we have taken this preliminary data, we are able to apply our knowledge of physics and calculate the actual path of our car, and juxtapose it with the ideal path. This was done using a spreadsheet with our equations to draw a graph showing this comparison. The objective of this project was to help us further understand the effects of air drag and friction on motion, specifically projectile motion for the car. In addition to this, we had to prove that the position of the car does not change with size, where its movement path through the air was similar to that of a single particle, proving that size of the car does not matter.

Method: In order to accomplish the task laid out for us, we first had to run our cars down the test track to gather preliminary data, afterwards, we then compiled all of our data and equations into a spreadsheet which would show us the projected trajectory of our vehicle under ideal conditions, and with air resistance.

Procedure:

After gathering the data from our trial run, and calculating the takeoff speed, as well as factoring in all of our data from the car itself, such as silhouette area, mass of the car, and the density of

air, we were able to plug our data into a spreadsheet provided to us by Mr. Bittle, which with proper manipulation of our drag coefficient, would allow us to observe the actual path the car would travel, with air resistance calculated, alongside the ideal path, which we calculated when we first began the project.

The primary equations we used which relate velocity, acceleration, and the drag coefficient was ( ) Where the constant D is equal to: ( Where is the density of air, C is the drag coefficient which we manipulated, and A is the silhouette area of the vehicle. and ( )

With these we were able to derive the other equations which would go in our spreadsheet.

Results and Discussion: Our initial calculations were done assuming that the car was a singular point of uniform shape and mass, which fit perfectly with the equations of motion whilst assuming no air resistance and drag. As part of these initial calculations, we calculated the takeoff speed, the time it would take for the car to hit the ground, and the distance covered by the car. Using Equation ( ), we found the takeoff speed to be 5.44 m/s, which is the expected number as shown by comparison with other groups, as well as discussion with Mr.Bittle. However this value isnt very useful by itself, as we are seeking to analyze the effects of external forces acting on the car, which we will cover in a later part of the memo. We then needed to find the ideal distance the car would travel, to do this, we used equation () to find the time the car would travel, and then plug that into the next equation, which would give us the distance the car would travel. This turned out to be 182.262. Once we gathered all of this baseline data, we then needed to account for the effect of drag and air resistance on the vehicle. To do this we created a spreadsheet in excel. Using the equation for drag, we figured out the coefficient of friction, then plugged this data into other equations of motion, which yielded these results.

0.2000

0.0000 0.0000 -0.2000

0.5000

1.0000

1.5000

2.0000

-0.4000 Actual Ideal -0.6000

-0.8000

-1.0000

-1.2000

As seen by the graph, as expected, the actual trajectory of the car is shorter than the ideal. Our C (coefficient of friction) turned out to be 3.4, which was somewhat expected for our vehicle, when compared to an object such as a baseball which has a coefficient of about .2-1 (rolls easily and is flat all around). Our silhouette area was measured to be 0.004875 . We adjusted our takeoff speed and found it to be 3.6919 m/s, which is quite a step under 5.44 m/s under ideal conditions, and a clear indicator of the effects of drag and air resistance. Once we got this graph, we were able to determine the height of the individual billboards. Which are as follows,

Billboard 1 2 3

Bottom (in. from ground) 16.95 13.44 8.49

Top (in. from ground) 25.88 22.30 18.35

Distance from ramp (in.) 19.68 27.55 35.43

During our final run, the car performed exactly how we expected, flawlessly flying through all of the ramps, which validated the process we undertook to determine the effect of drag, and our understanding of free-falling bodies. Conclusions:

As a result of our calculations, we have determined that the billboards would be best placed .4 and .6 m away from the ramp to yield the best results, and the highest chance of the car passing through them successfully.