IMG_1470

D= [(X2-X1)//2 —[0.012 - 0.01)/2=0.001 m Run 2: Ip = Mg(R,2 + R2) + MpD? — %(0.470)(0.025% + 0.035%) + (0.470)(0.001%) = 4.35x10"* kgm? =1+ > 1.13x 10*+4.35x10*= 5.48x 10" kgm? Lo, = (1.13x10*)(18) = 2.0x10~ kgm? rad/s L= (5.48x107%)(4) = 2.1x10” kgm? rad/s KE, = 4(1.13 x 10*)(18%) = 0.02J KE, = Y (5.48x10*)(4%) = 0.004] Percent Gain: Run 1: (Final - Initial)/(Initial) x 100 — (3.8x10° — 3.8x107)/3.8x10” x 100 = 0% KE (Run 1): (Final - Initial)/(Initial) x 100 — (0.07 — 0.01)/0.01 x 100 = —600% Run 2: (Final - Initial)/(Initial) x 100 — (2.1x107 - 2.0x107)/2.0x10~* x 100 = 5% KE (Run 2): (Final - Initial)/(Initial) x 100 — (0.02 — 0.004)/0.004 x 100 = -400% Sources of Error: The errors that were present during this lab were very unusual especially with regards to the kinetic energy even if it is not meant to be conserved. I believe that the reason these errors happened were due to the measurements that were made on the rings, the radii, and the measurement of the angular speed in the videos that were provided. These were never going to be exact measures but the human error has caused for the errors to be much larger than what an exact measurement of the actual equipment would give. Conclusion: Overall this lab helped me view how the angular momentum stays conserved due to the absence of external torque on this system with the ring and the disk. It helped me understand why the kinetic energy was not conserved as well, due to this lab being an example of an inelastic collision. It was a bit difficult having to measure without having the actual devices on hand, but overall the calculations and equations used were not complicated at all and allowed for a simple lab. This lab took very little time and was a nice break to just strengthen understanding; I look forward to the next lab. A v S