PHY111L Lab 5 Static equilibrium3
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Grand Canyon University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
111L
Subject
Mathematics
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by SuperGalaxy9213
Lab 5:
Static Equilibrium
1.
Testable Question:
How is the forces FX and FY relating to the angle 2.
Hypothesis
:
As angle increases then FX decreases, and FY will increase because static equilibrium needs to be maintained.
3.
Variables:
Control(s):
Gravity g= 9.81 m/s^2/ force 200= Fzero= 0.2kg
Independent:
Dependent:
Fx and Fy
4.
Experimental Design:
i
1–8
5.
Materials:
Force table with 3 pulleys
3 weight hangers
Central ring with 3 attached strings
Centering pin
Assorted weights
6.
Procedure:
Setup:
y
x
7.
Data:
8.
Analysis:
Both sets of data must be plotted on the same graph with an appropriate Legend to distinguish the two scatter plots. Excel will automatically color code the data points.
Judge the shape of the scatter plot and consult the Graphical Analysis
resource if
necessary, to identify what needs to be done to linearize the data, if it’s not linear. If it
is linear, plot the trend line and get the best-fit equation and R
2
value. If it is not
linear, manipulate the independent variable until it is; then add the best-fit line, along
with the equation and R
2
value. The lines must go through the origin (proportional
relationship. Include both the Raw Data and Linearized graphs in the lab report, in
that order.
Use the equations being investigated to identify the formula for the Theoretical Slope
(T.S.) and perform the calculation. The Measured Slope for each trend line is the
same and, therefore, can be averaged. Present this average value, next, without
showing the calculation, with the correct number of significant figures and units.
Lastly compare these values using a percent error:
%
error
=
|
TS
−
MS
|
TS
×
100
9.
Conclusion: Use the Graphical Analysis
resource to identify the correct relationship. Use words for the variables, rather than symbols, in the written portions of the lab. Also, the Conclusion
must read like the Testable Question but with answer to the question, followed by the two
equations from the linearized graph (just copy and paste it so mistakes aren’t made). Label the equations on the left margin (i.e.,
For F
x
:
).
10. Evaluation: Be sure to include each of the following. Do not use bullet points – three block paragraphs separated by a line is best (
see the
Lab Report Format
and the Sample Lab
documents for guidance
).
Only one experiment was conducted but there were two components equations. In this case, two hypothesis statements must be written, since the mathematical relationship is the different for each. However, the wording will be very similar. For the accuracy and precision, the errors are based on the same experimental setup, so if the errors are consistent
, they can be averaged
or presented together. If averaged, state that they are being averaged. Then provide one systematic and one random error to explain the errors, in either case.
First, address if your hypothesis was supported or not. Do not state that the hypothesis
was proven true – that is an error. Hypotheses cannot be proven true, only supported or refuted. Next, present a detailed mathematical description of how the dependent variable (use proper names) was affected as the independent variable was increased in
the format of the hypothesis statement. See the LRF and Sample Lab for help. Do not put your explanation in this statement; just the specific mathematical relationship.
Evaluate the level of accuracy (% error less than 2.5% is outstanding to excellent; 2.5% to 7.5% is excellent to good, 7.5% to 15% is fair, 15% to 25% poor, and above, a failure), and then cite your % error when making the statement. Next, state which was greater, the TS or the MS (
no numbers
). Lastly, provide a reasonable source of systematic error to explain an inaccuracy in the experiment, and how it supports the results of either the MS being less than the TS or vice versa.
Evaluate the level of precision (R
2
value between 1.000 to 0.995 is outstanding to excellent, 0.995 to 0.985 is excellent to good, 0.970 to 0.985 is fair to good, 0.955 to 0.970 is poor to fair, and below 0.955 is terrible but not a failure, since taking more and more data can always improve the precision of an experiment), followed by your R
2
value error. Then, provide a reasonable source of random error that can explain this imprecision. Be sure to indicate how it is a fluctuating type error.
Take Note:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
If values for the % error is 0% and/or the R
2
is 1.000, this does not mean there is not any error just that it is below the three significant figure threshold. Examples of each type of error must still be presented.
Outliers are not experimental errors. They are mistakes that should be corrected as they arise. If you plot the points as you collect them, you can easily spot outliers and fix them, right away.
It is very good to have more than one person making a measurement and agreeing on the values. It is not acceptable, however, to have one person take a few measurements, followed by another lab partner independently taking the remainder of
the data.
The report should be submitted in the “Lab 5: Static Equilibrium
” drop box on Halo as directed by your instructor.