physics 2 lab 3

docx

School

University of Nebraska, Omaha *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1154

Subject

Physics

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by madisonmaewalker

Report
PHYS 1154: Testing Experiment Report Template Acceleration Of an ioLab up and down a ramp Madi Walker, Zoe Sundermeier, Luke Hemmingsen I. The Hypothesis The acceleration of the ioLab will be the same up the ramp as it is down the ramp. II. Procedure We first set up a ramp using the ioLab box and a piece of smooth wood (Figure 1). After calibrating the ioLab, we set up five trials, then started pushing the ioLab up the piece of wood, and letting it fall back down. The wheel sensor was used to record the velocity, and acceleration as functions of time. Figure 1: The ioLab pushed up a ramp and allowed to roll up and then down the ramp. The acceleration was measured. III. Results Figure 2: Wheel sensor data for trial 1 velocity and acceleration as a function of time. When the velocity is positive, the ioLab is rolling up the hill. When negative is rolling down the hill. University of Nebraska Omaha
PHYS 1154: Testing Experiment Report Template Figure 3: Wheel sensor data for trial 2 velocity and acceleration as a function of time. When the velocity is positive, the ioLab is rolling up the hill. When negative is rolling down the hill. Figure 4: Wheel sensor data for trial 3 velocity and acceleration as a function of time. When the velocity is positive, the ioLab is rolling up the hill. When negative is rolling down the hill. Figure 5: Wheel sensor data for trial 4 velocity and acceleration as a function of time. When the velocity is positive, the ioLab is rolling up the hill. When negative is rolling down the hill. University of Nebraska Omaha
PHYS 1154: Testing Experiment Report Template Figure 6: Wheel sensor data for trial 5 velocity and acceleration as a function of time. When the velocity is positive, the ioLab is rolling up the hill. When negative is rolling down the hill. Table 1 shows an example of how to organize your data into a useful table. In the example shown, the student group did multiple trials so that they could measure the uncertainty. (Refer to the Pre-Lab Videos on how to calculate absolute uncertainty for multiple trials.) Table 1: Acceleration of the ioLab going up the ramp and down the ramp, and the average uncertainty. Trial a up (m/s 2 ) a down (m/s 2 ) 1 -1.73 -1.354 2 -1.583 -1.189 3 -2.147 -1.045 4 -1.709 -1.252 5 -1.606 -1.316 Avg. -1.755 0.282 m/s 2 -1.231 0.155 m/s 2 IV. Discussion Our hypothesis stated that the acceleration would be the same both up and down the ramp. The outcome does not agree with the prediction and, therefore, the hypothesis is not supported. While the accelerations were close, they were not the same, according to our data in the table that was taken from our graphs in figures 2-6. To modify this claim, we say instead, that the accelerations of the ioLab going up the ramp will be similar to those going down the ramp. V. Co-Author Roles Madi typed up the lab report, Zoe pushed the ioLab up and down the ramp and read the graphs, and Luke helped calibrate the ioLab and calculated the data for our table. University of Nebraska Omaha
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