lab 4

Physics Lab Report Title: Newton's Second Law Lab Number and Title: Lab 112 Newton's Second Law Name: Charmi Shah. Group ID: 2 Date and Experiment: 01/26/2023. Date of Report Submission: 02/22/2023 Course & Section Number: PHYS 111A-002. Instructor's Name: Bhairavi Apte Partner's Names: Ema Almeida Sales, Jose Rodriguez, Aditya jain 1. Introduction: 1.1 Objectives  To verify newton's second law in a one-dimensional motion system, where a glider of known mass on a frictionless air track is accelerated by a falling object connected to a glider with a string.  To learn how to construct a free-body diagram used to show all forces with the magnitude and direction acting on an object in the one-dimensional system mentioned above.  To understand how to derive the equation for theoretical acceleration from the free body diagram in the system and to compare the theoretical value of acceleration to the experimental one. 1.2 Theoretical Background  Newton's first law states that, if an object is at rest, it remains at rest until external forces are applied to it. If an object is moving at a constant speed, it will remain in the same state until external forces are applied.  F = ma, Newton's second law of motion. This defines a force as equal to a change in momentum (mass times velocity) per change in time.  Vr= Vo + at, this is the first kinematic equation. We will be using this equation to find the acceleration when we have the final and initial velocity and time. Experimental Procedure Part 1 (Horizontal air track):  Measure the total mass My of the glider with the flag and hook attachments that will be used in the experiment. Record in Data Table.  Weight the record the mass of one single glider weight M1. Record in the data table.  Measure Xo and L. Record in the data table. Part 2 (Inclined air track):  Place the small block to provide under one side of the air track so that the glider will be pulled up or down the incline by the mass M.  Measure the incline angle o of the air track using the gravitational protractor and record it in the data table II.  Follow the same procedure as in Part 1, and record all the data in data table II. 3. Result

3.1 Experimental Data Table 1 Total glider Mass (Kg) Hanging Mass m (Kg) Acceleration (m/s?) Time to travel distance L (s) Velocity at gate 1 VI (m/s) Velocity at gate 2 V2 (m/s) Mg 0.04 Theoretical Experimental 1.56 1.51 0.41 0.95 1.57 Mg+2M1 0.04 Theoretical Experimental 1.08 1.1 0.50 0.76 1.31 Mg + 4M1 0.04 Theoretical Experimental 0.87 0.86 0.56 0.68 1.16 Table 2 0 = 5 degree Total glider Mass (Kg) Hanging Mass m (Kg) Acceleration Time to travel distance L (s) Velocity at gate 1 V, (m/s) Velocity at gate 2 V2 (m/s) Mg 0.04 Theoretical Experimental 0.85 0.38 0.83 0.47 0.79 Mg+2M1 0.04 Theoretical Experimental 0.32 0.38 0.84 0.46 0.78 Mg + 4M1 0.04 Theoretical Experimental 0.09 0.11 1.51 0.27 0.44

glider weighs more because of the higher density of the cord. The formula of linear density is 2 = ML, where M and L are the mass and the length of the cord. With the same logic, if the mass of the object is heavier then it will affect the acceleration of the object. Newton's second law. 2. We are assuming that the table is leveled to measure the incline angle. How big would be the acceleration error if the table top is at the angle of 1 deg only? (+ or -I degree). It's possible that the experiment's accuracy could be compromised due to an inherent parallel gravitational force caused by a slightly tilted table top with a 1 degree angle. This will ultimately impact the glider's acceleration, which is dependent on the net force acting upon it. Although the resulting acceleration measurements may be only slightly incorrect, the overall reliability of the data may still be influenced. The degree of inaccuracy will be contingent on a multitude of factors such as the ramp's angle, the mass of the glider and hanging weight, as well as the string's length. Reports suggest that the inaccuracies will likely be modest, at under 0.2% margin of error. To ensure that the findings are precise, it's critical to confirm that the table is level and the ramp is angled appropriately. In order to minimize the potential for error, it's necessary to take all variables into account. Even a seemingly minor discrepancy could drastically impact the overall trustworthiness of the results, emphasizing the importance of paying close attention to detail in every experiment. 5.Conclusions The motive of this experiment was to study newton's second law of motion in different scenarios. In this experiment, a glider was attached to a hanging weight with a thin wire, passing through a pulley that was attached to the air track. The experiment was conducted under two different ways; when the ramp was at 0° and second when the ramp was at 5° angle from the table. The aim was to monitor the acceleration of the glider as it moved along the track under the influence of the net force generated by the hanging mass. The result showed that when the weights were added the acceleration decreased and the time between photo gate 1 and 2 increased. Our results came out to be accurate with the theoretical value and what we measured in the experiment. The difference is less than 1% in all cases. In addition, the experiment demonstrated how the addition of weights to the glider and the positioning of the ramp affected the acceleration of the glider, providing a practical illustration of mechanics concepts. However, it should be noted that the findings may not be generalize to other systems and situations.