Copy of Lab 5 Uniform Circular Motion Report

docx

School

Temple University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1061

Subject

Mechanical Engineering

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BaronMoonDeer7

Lab 5 Uniform Circular Motion - Goals - The goal of this experiment was to test that friction is the source of centripetal force in a circular motion and to visualize vector components of circular motion Procedure - In part I, we placed two cubes on the edge of the turntable in their designated areas with different roughness and then we made the turntable rotate through Pasco Capstone. We did a test run to estimate at what voltage each cube would fall off by increasing the voltage in 0.1 V increments. We then repeated the steps while capturing the video from above. - In part II, we tracked the locations of both cubes and made separate radius vs. time graphs of them. - In part III, we made velocity vT vs. time graphs for each cube. Error and Precautions - In this lab, we had to be careful that the blocks were placed in the right areas. If the blocks were not placed in the middle of the two different areas, they may fly off too early or we may get an incorrect value. - We also had to be careful not to increase the speed to a point where they were both just flying off. We had to make sure that the speed was increasing at a normal pace. - It is also a good idea to make sure your x and y axis are in the right places to make sure you get accurate values. Results

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

r V t #1 0.01m/s -0.05m/s #2 0.01m -0.10m/s μ = v 2 rg r V T μ #1 0.01m/s -0.05m/s 0.0255 #2 0.01m -0.10m/s 0.102

Questions Question 1. What force or forces are acting on the cube as it rotates in a circle at constant speed? Draw a free-body diagram for the cube as seen from the side. → Question 2. How can the hypothesis for this lab be tested experimentally? In a few sentences, describe at least one way to test the hypothesis experimentally by using the rough and smooth surfaces available on the turntable. - The hypothesis can be tested experimentally by placing a cube on a rough surface with more friction which will cause the cube to fall off slower and a cube on a smoother surface with less friction which will cause the cube to fall off at a faster rate. Question 3. When the cube falls off the edge of the turntable, which path will it take according to Newton’s 1st Law? Use the figure at right showing the top-down view of the turntable to select a path A through E. Consider the horizontal plane only (not vertical motion). - The cube will take path B. Question 4. Angle in radians is often an unfamiliar unit, so let’s gain more familiarity by looking at our graph of radians vs. time. About how many radians did your cube move through from start to finish of your tracking? Check for internal consistency: How many radians are there in a circle? Is the number you are reporting reasonable? - Cube 1 on the smooth surface moved about -1.84 radians from start to finish and cube 2 on the rough surface moved about -2.19 radians from start to finish. There are 2 π radians in a circle so our numbers are reasonable because a rotation would have been half a circle, which is π = 3.14 , but the cube moved negatively because it fell off. Question 5. What simplified expression did you obtain for the coefficient of friction? Does expression depend on the mass of the cube? - We obtained μ = v 2 rg . The expression does not depend on the mass of the cube because the mass is canceled out from the original expression. Discussion - Our results seem to be uniform with respect to our data. When working with friction coefficients in class, they all tend to be under 1. Our coefficients successfully are under 1. However, there is a chance that the scale was slightly off due to human error so we may not have gotten as accurate as we could have. If we did this again, it is very likely that we would get the same results. A surprise was that cube 1 flew off at 6.7V and cube 2 flew off at 11.0V in our practice. When completing our actual experiment, cube 2 fell off at 8.7V. This could be due to human error and speeding up the turntable too fast, or it could have been the placement of the block being different than in practice.