Mini Lab #6

pdf

School

Texas A&M University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

201

Subject

Physics

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by PresidentKnowledge16163

Laboratory Report: Lab Date: October 17, 2023 Experiment’s Title: Friction Forces Course/Section #: PHYS 201-400 Station #: 1 Names of students (who performed the experiment): Natalie Hesterman & Holly Pawlowski & Alejandro Mapula Names of missing students: N/A TA’s Name: Mahmodul Maheen Lab Partners: Natalie Hesterman & Holly Pawlowski & Alejandro Mapula

Introduction: In this lab, we familiarized ourselves with friction forces. Friction forces are contact forces that arise due to imperfections of the surfaces in contact. There are three types of frictional forces. These are static, kinetic, and rolling friction. A static friction force is present when the object does not slide with respect to its surface. The kinetic friction force is used when the object is sliding. Lastly, rolling friction is present when the object has wheels. For this lab, we observed some of the properties of these frictional forces. To conduct this experiment, we placed a cart of mass (m) on a dynamic track and connected a string to a mass (m) hanging over a pulley when the hanging mass was released and started to fall the cart slid across the track on the table. When this happens, the 4 forces acting on this are the force of gravity pulling the hanging mass, the weight of the cart, the normal force applied on the cart, and the frictional force acting on the cart. There were several equations that we had to learn. These include: The variables in these equations are: 1. F=(M+m)a a=acceleration f = friction force 2. F=m*g+ f F=force N = normal force 3. f =μ* N m=mass μ= coefficient of friction 4. N=M*g M= magnification 5. μ=(m*g-(M+m)a)/(M*g) g=gravity (9.81 m/s^2) Furthermore, in this lab, we studied the coefficient of friction between the cart and the track and its dependency on normal force. We used a dynamic track, cart, friction pad, photogate/pulley system, hanger/string, and a mass set to perform this experiment. Results: Activity #1: In Activity 1 of this experiment we did 3 cases including 5 trials each. We collected the force, measured acceleration, force/acceleration, friction coefficient, average, and the STD values which allowed us to make these tables below. Furthermore, for activity 1 we took friction into consideration by estimating the force that drives the motion of the cart. Table 1. Case #1(155g) Item: Trial #1: Trial #2: Trial #3: Trial #4: Trial #5: Average: STD: Force (stat): 0.9049 0.8704 0.8869 0.9683 0.7529 0.87668 0.07851109476 Measured Acceleration (stat): 1.605 1.74 1.585 1.56 1.597 1.6174 0.07061373804 Force/Acceleration: 0.563 0.5002298 851 0.5595583 596 0.6207051 282 0.4714464 621 0.5420304192 1.111838814 μ (friction coefficent): 0.01

Table 2. Case #2(255g) Item: Trial #1: Trial #2: Trial #3: Trial #4: Trial #5: Average: STD: Force (stat): 1.702 1.987 1.913 1.78 1.904 1.8572 0.1142352835 Measured Acceleration (stat): 2.293 2.419 2.065 2.43 2.189 2.2792 0.1553164512 Force/Acceleration: 1.3472385 43 1.2174131 86 1.0794563 51 1.3651685 39 1.1496848 74 1.231792299 0.1237655908 μ (friction coefficent): 0.03 Table 3. Case #3(255g +100g on cart) Item: Trial #1: Trial #2: Trial #3: Trial #4: Trial #5: Average: STD: Force (stat): 1.96 1.914 2.09 1.975 1.901 1.968 0.07483648843 Measured Acceleration (stat): 2.158 2.182 2.178 2.167 2.172 2.1714 0.009423375192 Force/Acceleration: 0.9082483 781 0.8771769 019 0.9595959 596 0.9113982 464 0.8752302 026 0.906329937 7 0.03421889199 μ (friction coefficent): 0.01 Activity #2: For Activity 2, we did another 3 cases that each had 5 trials. These all collected the same data as above, however, the experiment run was different. The aim of Activity 2 was to redo Activity 1 but to add on the friction pad to the cart, which would apply the maximum friction between the cart and the dynamic track. Table 4. Case #4(155g) Item: Trial #1: Trial #2: Trial #3: Trial #4: Trial #5: Average: STD: Force (stat): 1.382 1.485 1.372 1.405 1.412 1.4058 0.04437003493 Measured Acceleration (stat): 0.9097 0.9166 0.9046 1.164 0.8934 0.95766 0.1156578921 Force/Acceleration: 1.5191821 48 1.6201178 27 1.5166924 61 1.2070446 74 1.5804790 69 1.488703236 0.1633527661 μ (friction coefficent): 0.09

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

Table #2. Case #5(255g) Item: Trial #1: Trial #2: Trial #3: Trial #4: Trial #5: Average: STD: Force (stat): 2.046 2.188 1.972 2.16 2.31 2.1352 0.1309091288 Measured Acceleration (stat): 1.803 1.818 1.886 1.797 1.711 1.803 0.06247799613 Force/Acceleration: 1.1347753 74 1.2035203 52 1.0455991 52 1.2020033 39 1.3500876 68 1.1842484 75 0.111598641 μ (friction coefficent): 0.09 Table #3. Case #6(255g + 100g on cart) Item: Trial #1: Trial #2: Trial #3: Trial #4: Trial #5: Average: STD: Force (stat): 2.244 2.206 2.181 2.159 2.162 2.1904 0.03534543818 Measured Acceleration (stat): 1.549 1.546 1.549 1.535 1.561 1.548 0.009273618495 Force/Acceleration: 1.4486765 66 1.4269081 5 1.4080051 65 1.4065146 58 1.3850096 09 1.415022829 0.02395967856 μ (friction coefficent): 0.09 Discussions/Conclusions: 1. From activities 1 and 2, how does the average Force/Acceleration compare for the different cases 1, 2, and 3 and for cases: 4, 5, and 6? From activities 1 and 2, the average Force/acceleration compares for the different cases 1, 2, and 3 and for cases: 4, 5, and 6 by increasing with the comparable weights from the hanging masses. For cases 4, 5, and 6 the Force/Acceleration increased a lot due to cases 1, 2, and 3. This is due to actually calculating the friction. 2. Can you compare the results from case 1 to the results from case 1 of lab #5? Yes, you can compare the results from case 1 to the results from case 1 of lab #5. With my results from the previous lab, the data was way less than what our data is from lab #6. In this lab, our force, measured acceleration, and force/acceleration were all increased than what we had collected from lab #5. This may be a result of calculating the role of friction instead of ignoring it. 3. How does the coefficient of friction force vary with the cart's mass? The coefficient of friction force varies with the cart's mass by it being an independent relationship. This means that the coefficient of friction force is only specific to the type of surface it is acting on.

4. How does the coefficient of friction vary as the speed is varied due to the different hanging masses? In other words, how does the coefficient of friction force vary with the hanging masses? The coefficient of friction does not vary as the speed is varied due to the different hanging masses because it is more dependent on the type of surface. In other words, the coefficient of friction force varies with the hanging masses by having no effect due to the independent relationship it has with surfaces. 5. When the mass of the cart is increased, does the force of friction increase? Why? When the cart's mass is increased, friction's force increases as well because friction is heavily dependent on the normal force, which means it relates to the object’s weight and overall depends on mass. The increased weight between the two surfaces increases the mass and friction. In conclusion, this lab taught us how to calculate the coefficient of friction along with working more on Newton’s Second Law. With our results in mind, we definitely noticed that when calculating friction, it does differ from our results from lab #5. The friction coefficient allowed us to find how much friction was in the system.There were many equations we used and that is how we collected our data. Furthermore, we noted that friction does play a role in measuring acceleration and force. We did not feel that we had any issues in collecting our data. Friction plays an important role when it comes down to objects moving along a surface and this can be shown with our different tables.

Related Documents

Electric Fields of Dreams Lab.docx

Concept Check #6.docx

Quiz-Ch10-quakes-FA23.pdf

PHYS1200Fall2021_ActivityClass24_WaveParticleDuality.pdf

PCN 481 Topic 8 Benchmark Process Addictions Treatment Paper.docx

Mini Lab #8.pdf

Lab07-Crash Lab-Capstone.pdf

Lab06_Conservation of Energy 2.pdf

Recommended textbooks for you

Principles of Physics: A Calculus-Based Text

Physics

ISBN:9781133104261

Author:Raymond A. Serway, John W. Jewett

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Inquiry into Physics

Physics

ISBN:9781337515863

Author:Ostdiek

Publisher:Cengage

Physics for Scientists and Engineers: Foundations...

Physics

ISBN:9781133939146

Author:Katz, Debora M.

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Astronomy

Physics

ISBN:9781938168284

Author:Andrew Fraknoi; David Morrison; Sidney C. Wolff

Publisher:OpenStax

Modern Physics

Physics

ISBN:9781111794378

Author:Raymond A. Serway, Clement J. Moses, Curt A. Moyer

Publisher:Cengage Learning

College Physics

Physics

ISBN:9781938168000

Author:Paul Peter Urone, Roger Hinrichs

Publisher:OpenStax College

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Principles of Physics: A Calculus-Based Text
Physics
ISBN:9781133104261
Author:Raymond A. Serway, John W. Jewett
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Inquiry into Physics
Physics
ISBN:9781337515863
Author:Ostdiek
Publisher:Cengage
Physics for Scientists and Engineers: Foundations...
Physics
ISBN:9781133939146
Author:Katz, Debora M.
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Astronomy
Physics
ISBN:9781938168284
Author:Andrew Fraknoi; David Morrison; Sidney C. Wolff
Publisher:OpenStax
Modern Physics
Physics
ISBN:9781111794378
Author:Raymond A. Serway, Clement J. Moses, Curt A. Moyer
Publisher:Cengage Learning
College Physics
Physics
ISBN:9781938168000
Author:Paul Peter Urone, Roger Hinrichs
Publisher:OpenStax College