DoM and HL LR

pdf

School

University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

102

Subject

Mechanical Engineering

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

9

Uploaded by DrBookPony31

Report
Experiment one: Density of Matter 1. Introduction: The purpose of this experiment was to study the density of solid objects. The greater the volume of an object, the smaller the density of an object as they have an inversely proportional relationship. In this lab, density will be found from found masses and volumes calculated from measurements taken during the lab. The mathematical equation used to calculate the volume of cylindrical solids is: V = (1) Π𝑟 2 ? where V is the volume of the cylinder, is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its Π radius, r is the radius of the cylinder, and l is the length of the cylinder. The mathematical equation used to calculate the volume of a solid rectangular prism is: (2) 𝑉 = ??ℎ where V is the volume of the rectangular prism, l is the length of the rectangular prism, w is the width of the rectangular prism, and h is the height of the rectangular prism. The mathematical equation used to calculate the density of an object is: (3) ρ = 𝑀 𝑉 where is the density of an object, M is the mass of the object, and V is the volume of an ρ object. 2. Experiment procedures: The materials and equipment used for this lab included the following: 3 aluminum cylinders of varied sizes, 3 cardboard rectangular prisms of varied sizes, a balance, and vernier calipers. Part 1: - Step 1: The balance was turned on and zeroed. - Step 2: The mass of a cylinder was measured on the balance. - Step 3: The radius and height of the cylinder were measured by putting the cylinder in between the ends of the vernier calipers. - Step 4: The volume was found by multiplying the square of the radius by the height of the cylinder by pi. - Step 5: The density was calculated by dividing the found mass of the cylinder by the found volume of the cylinder. - Step 6: Steps 1-5 were repeated twice for two other cylinders.
Description: The aluminum used were smooth, opaque, silver cylinders. Part 2: - Step 7: Steps 1 and 2 were repeated for the rectangular prism. - Step 8: The height, length, and width of the prism were measured by putting the prism in between the ends of the vernier calipers. - Step 9: The volume was found by multiplying the length by the height by the width of the cylinder. - Step 10: Step 5 was repeated. - Step 11: Steps 7-10 were repeated twice for the other rectangular prisms. Description: The rectangular prisms used were made of cardboard. The largest was red, the second largest was yellow, and the smallest was blue. They were hollow and opaque with a semi-matte finish. 3. Results, analysis, and questions: Table 1: Table one shows the mass, length, radius, volume, and density of the aluminum cylinders. Column 1 mass (grams) length (cm) diameter (cm) radius (cm) volume (m^3 x10^-6) density (kg/m^3) cylinder 1 27.52 7.7 1.1 0.55 7.32 3760 cylinder 2 12.56 3.1 1.1 0.55 2.95 4258 cylinder 3 6.36 7.5 0.6 0.3 2.12 3000 Based on table 1, the graph illustrated the relationship between volume versus mass of the cylinders. Graph 1:
From graph 1, the slope of best fit was 0.000254, which demonstrates (based on equation 3). 1 ρ Therefore, the density of aluminum is theoretically 3,979 kilograms per meter cubed. The average experimental density of the aluminum cylinders was found to be approximately 3,673 kilograms per meter cubed, which means that there was around a 7.69% error. The coefficient of determination was calculated to be 0.981. This demonstrates that the data from this part of the experiment was relatively accurate. A likely source of error was from measuring the cylinders with the vernier calipers, where the cylinder may not have gripped tight enough for accuracy. Table 2: Table 2 shows the mass, height, length, width, volume and density of the blocks. Mass (grams) Height (cm) Length (cm) Width (cm) Volume (m^3 x 10^-3) Density (kg/m^3) Block 1 (red) 134.18 303 74 150 3.36 40 Block 2 (yellow) 86.6 75 152 152 1.73 50 Block 3 (blue) 50.01 146 73 73 0.78 64 Based on table 2, the graph 2 illustrates the relationship between mass and volume of the blocks.
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
From graph 2, the slope of best fit was 0.0308, which demonstrates (based on equation 3). 1 ρ Therefore, the density of cardboard was 32.47 kilograms per meter cubed. The average experimental density was 51.3 kilograms per meter cubed, giving a 36.8% error. The coefficient of determination was calculated to be 0.994. This demonstrates that the data from this part of the experiment was precise, but not accurate. A source of error was likely due to the inexact measuring of the blocks due to a tightened grip on the vernier calipers. It is possible that the cardboard may have been compressed, making the measurements more inaccurate. 4. Conclusion: Through this experiment, the density of solid objects was studied. A deeper understanding of laboratory procedures and precise measurements were also examined. The density of solid objects was studied. One was calculated with the volume of a set of cylinders, and the other was calculated using a set of cardboard blocks. was used in both parts of the ρ experiment to represent density. The errors in this lab stemmed from improper measuring. To be repeated with greater accuracy, the lab should be redone with measurements taken on a flat surface. 5. Data Sheet: Next Page under Density of Matter
Experiment one: Hooke’s Law 1. Introduction:
The purpose of this experiment was to study Hooke’s Law and its properties. This lab explores the opposing directions of force and the change in position of the spring. Force and the change in distance (extension) of springs were found with differing weights. The further a spring’s position changes from equilibrium, the greater the resultant force will be. The equation to calculate the change in distance (position) is: (4) ∆? = ? 𝑓 − ? 𝑖 Where is the change in position, is the final position, and is the initial position of ∆? ? 𝑓 ? 𝑖 the spring. The equation to calculate the force of a spring is: (5) 𝐹 =− ?∆? Where F is the spring force, k is the spring constant, and is the change in position. ∆? 2. Experimental Procedures: Materials and equipment needed for this procedure are: a force sensor, 850 Universal Interface, PASCO Capstone software (on computer), 2 springs (with different spring constants), and a set of weights. - Step 1: Connect the force sensor to the 850 Universal Interface. - Step 2: Open the PASCO Capstone software on a computer. - Step 3: Locate the TOOLS tab and click Hardware setup, then choose the port that is connected to the force sensor, and select the correct sensor from the dropdown menu. - Step 4: Find the Displays tab (far right of the window) and click “graph” twice for a force versus time graph. - Step 5: Hook the 50 gram weight holder to the force sensor. - Step 6: Click “Record” to collect data. - Step 7: Press the tare button on the force sensor to set the sensor to zero. - Step 8: Measure the position of the spring as the initial position. - Step 9: Add 40 grams of weight to the holder, then measure the change in distance once the spring has finished oscillation. - Step 10: Repeat step 9 four more times. - Step 11: With a different spring, repeat steps 7-10. 3. Results, analysis, and questions: Table 1: Table 1 shows the change in position and the spring force of Spring 1 with an initial position of 0.449 meters from the force sensor when the 50 grams of the weight
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
holder on it. (40 grams is added each time to change the position of the spring.) The calculated spring constant is also included. Force (N) Change in position (m) Spring constant (k) 0.396 0.029 13.7 0.784 0.059 13.3 1.165 0.085 13.7 1.557 0.122 12.8 1.946 0.155 12.6 Based on table 1, graph 1 shows the relationship between the change in position and force on Spring 1. From graph 1, the line of best fit is 0.0814, which represents (based on equation 4). 1 ? Therefore, the spring constant of Spring 1 is theoretically 12.3. The average experimental spring constant of Spring 1 was found to be 13.2, which means that there was around a 7.32% error. The coefficient of determination was calculated to be 0.997. This demonstrates that the data from this part of the experiment is relatively accurate. A source of error is likely due to inexact estimations of the spring force from failing to exactly determine the value on the computer.
Table 2: Table 2 shows the change in position and the spring force of Spring 2 with an initial position of 0.464 meters from the force sensor when the 50 grams of the weight holder is on it. (40 grams is added each time to change the position of the spring.) The calculated spring constant is also included. Force (N) Change in position (m) Spring constant (k) 0.423 0.067 6.31 0.816 0.125 6.53 1.203 0.192 6.27 1.608 0.239 6.73 1.995 0.307 6.5 Based on Table 2, graph 2 shows the relationship between the change in position and spring force of Spring 2. From graph 2, the slope of best fit was found to be 0.151, which represents (based on 1 ? equation 4). Therefore, the spring constant of Spring 2 is theoretically 6.62. The average experimental spring constant was calculated to be 6.41, meaning that there was a 3.17% error. The coefficient of determination was calculated to be 0.997. This demonstrates that the data from this experiment was very accurate. A possible source of error was likely
due to inexact estimations of the spring force from failing to exactly determine the value on the computer. 4. Conclusion: Through this experiment, spring force and displacement were explored. The slopes of the force versus change in position were (as seen with equation 4). This law 1 ? determined that Hooke’s Law is dependent on which spring is used as springs have varied properties, such as their durability and stiffness. Springs have different spring constants that determine the amount of force needed to displace their position from equilibrium. Hooke’s Law was found to not hold for larger forces as there is a point that a mass so significant will be enacted on the spring that it either deforms it or will break the spring. The errors in this experiment were due inexact estimations from computer rapid computer readings. To increase the accuracy of the data, the lab should be repeated with spring’s measurements being taken when the spring is completely done oscillating. 5. Data sheet: See above under Hooke’s Lab
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