Lab 6 Formal

.pdf

School

Portland State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

212

Subject

Chemistry

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

pdf

Pages

9

Uploaded by meganelizabeth8911

Report
Lab 6: Centripetal Force—Formal Report Introduction: Objects in rotational motion require a force to constrain their motion to an axis. This is a widely applicable concept known as Centripetal Force (Smith, 2023). Some examples of where it occurs include launching a satellite in space, a banked roadway, the tension in the rope on a tetherball, and the spinning of tubes in a centrifuge (Tuskegee University, 2020). As an object rotates around an axis, its velocity is constantly changing in direction, and it also moves in a circular path at a constant speed. When the given object with mass (M) experiences a constant force (F c ) acting perpendicularly to this motion, these properties create uniform circular motion, which can otherwise be described as Centripetal Force. This motion can be further described by accounting for the distance from the axis of rotation (r) and the amount of time it takes to complete a full revolution (the period, T) (Portland State University: Department of Physics, 2023). Centripetal Force can be represented by the following equation, taking into account the previously described variables: (Eq. 1) ? 𝑐 = 2 ?𝑀 𝑇 2 The following experiment aims to verify the relationship between the variables of mass, force, and radius as represented by Equation 1 . It is hypothesized that the system will behave in accordance with the concept of centripetal force, as modeled by Equation 1 .
Experimental Procedure: The experiment requires the manipulation of the three variables Mass, Force, and Radius. These are manipulated one at a time, as the independent variable, and the other factors stay constant. In this case, the time it took to complete a full revolution, or the period, is the dependent variable. The experiment involves an apparatus that sits level on an axle, with a spring suspended from the center. This spring is connected to a mass denoted as (M), which hangs from the side at a distance of (r) centimeters from the center via a string and pulley system. At the opposite end of this apparatus, there is a second pulley, and a mass is attached to the central mass, as illustrated in Figure 1 . Figure 1. Diagram of the Centripetal Force apparatus used in the experiment. The initial variable tested was mass. Here, we incrementally increased the mass suspended from the side post in the experiment. Following the adjustment of the mass, the apparatus underwent recalibration before beginning the rotations. We started the experiments with a mass of 111 grams and subsequently increased it by approximately 50 grams for each of the five experiments, reaching a final mass of 313 grams. For the second independent variable tested, force, we altered the mass suspended from the side of the apparatus for each trial. As we increased the hanging masses, the applied centripetal
force needed to counteract the gravitational force from the hanging mass on the pulley also increased. The values used, progressing from the lowest to the highest, were 50 grams, 70 grams, 90 grams, 100 grams, and finally 120 grams. The last variable altered was the radius of the circular motion. To make this adjustment, we relocated the side post from which the central mass hangs to different positions away from the center of the apparatus. The radius values varied between 13 and 17 centimeters. The experimental process uses the following general steps: Modify the independent variable, which can be either the mass, the hanging mass (pertaining to force), or the radius of the circular motion. Attach a hanging mass to the central mass using a string to calibrate the experiment. For the first and third experiments, a consistent mass is employed, while for the second experiment, the hanging mass is changed in each trial. Adjust the marker plate until it aligns with the disc positioned below the spring hanging from the apparatus. Rotate the apparatus until the central mass aligns with the side post. Sustain the rotation and measure the time it takes for the apparatus to complete 10 revolutions, thereby obtaining an accurate measurement of the period (T). Repeat the aforementioned steps an additional four times, altering the independent variable in each trial, and meticulously documenting the data from each trial for subsequent analysis. Data & Analysis: During the data collection process in the lab, I noticed minimal variation in the motion as the centripetal force apparatus completed 10 revolutions while the variables were manipulated. This observation further reinforced my hypothesis that the system would adhere to the relationship described by Equation 1 , given the high degree of consistency in the motion.
Table 1. Mass Variable Data Trials Force (N) ± 0.25 N 1.08 Radius (m) ± 0.05 m 0.150 Mass (g) ± 5 g Mass (kg) ± 0.005 kg 10T (s) ± 0.5 s T 2 (s 2 ) ± 0.25 s 111 0.111 8.20 0.672 161 0.161 8.73 0.762 212 0.212 9.64 0.929 262 0.262 10.7 1.14 313 0.313 13.2 1.75 Expected slope (s 2 /kg) 5.49 Experimental slope (s 2 /kg) 5.03 Experimental uncertainty (s 2 /kg) ±1.12 Percent Error 9.15% Table 1 displays data from the mass variable trials. In this experiment, a constant force and radius of 1.08 N and 0.150 m were used, respectively. The time it took for 10 revolutions to be completed was measured, and then the value of T 2 was calculated. The Google Sheets LINEST function was employed to determine the experimental slope and its associated uncertainty, resulting in a value of 5.03 ±1.12 (Google). This was then compared to the expected slope of ? 2 𝑘𝑔 ? 2 𝑘𝑔 5.49, which was calculated by rearranging Equation 1 into a linear format for the mass variable data trials, given by , where is the slope, and m represents the mass variable. 𝑇 2 = 4π 2 ?? −1 · 𝑚 2 ?? −1 The experimental slope is relatively close to the expected slope. The percent error was also calculated using the formula , where δ represents the percent error, 𝑣 A δ = ν 𝐴 −ν ? ν ? | | | | | | · 100% represents the actual observed value, and 𝑣 E represents the expected value. From this calculation, the percent error was found to be 9.15%. To further display the linear relationship, the changing
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