2 attachmentsSlide 1 of 2

  • attachment_1attachment_1
  • attachment_2attachment_2


Name: Kendall Calhoun Title: Lab Activity: Kinematics Date: 9/14/21 Goals: – Determine the validity of the kinematic equations for a toy car rolling down a ramp Procedure: *same for every single attempt – Propped up a long flat piece of wood – Used a stack of different books to create the various angles – Measured and marked the stop and start line 70cm apart on the wood – Used a protractor to measure the angle between the wood and countertop – Adjusted height of book stacks to achieve the following angles: 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, and 15 degrees – Used leading edge of car to determine start and stop positions – Held car with leading edge at start line – Released car and started clock at same time – Stopped clock when leading edge of car passed stop line – Recorded the time – Adjusted the angle – Repeated until a time was recorded for all 7 different angles – Filled out data in the table below – Used data and kinematic formulas to calculate time – Compared experimentally measured time and calculated time and percent error based off of known formulas Data Table: Trial Ramp Angle Measured Time Calculated Time (s) (s) % Difference 1 5 degrees 1.59s 1.51s 5.3% 2 7 degrees 1.38s 1.28s 7.8% 3 9 degrees 1.22s 1.13s 8.0% 4 11 degrees 1.14s 1.02s 11.8% 5 13 degrees 1.06s 0.94s 12.8% 6 14 degrees 1.00s 0.90s 11.1% 7 15 degrees 0.91s 0.88s 3.4% Analysis of Data: After analyzing my data, it is clear that as the ramp angle increased, the time for the toy car to reach the stop line decreased. In addition, I was only a few seconds higher than the calculated time on all of the 7 trials. This is quite impressive because this entire experiment was completed by hand! Error Analysis: The main source of error is human error. First, there is a delayed reaction time from the time you release the car and press start. This applies to stopping the clock as well. If a device was used, like a photogate system, the time would be correct. There would be no possible way for human error to interfere. Secondly, there are inaccuracies when you eyeball when the car has crossed the start and stop line. Our eyes can be very deceiving and there can be a delay in our brain that processes the information. Third, there are inaccuracies when measuring the angle between the ramp and countertop. In addition, there could also be burrs or slight imperfections in the ramp which can affect the time it takes for the car to roll down. Argument Analysis: Based on the data in Chart A, claim 1 is correct. The uncertainty in the measurement of time is larger than the uncertainty in the measurement of angle. This can be justified through standard deviation, as it is one of the most important ways to measure certainty. Out of the data given, the standard deviation for measured time is 0.08. The standard deviation for the measured angle is 0.07. 0.08 is larger than 0.07, meaning that there is more uncertainty in the measurement of time than in the measurement of angles. Conclusions: This lab taught me how to experimentally investigate kinematic equations. I learned how you can find the “calculated time” it should take for the car to roll down. It was very interesting to see how my measured times differed from the calculated times. I also learned how to determine the sources of error in the data. For this experiment, the main source of error was human error. This could have been prevented if more devices were used, like a photogate system. There would be less room for human mistakes to be made! This lab also reassured my belief that as the ramp angle increases, the time it takes the car to cross the stop line decreases. Virtual Activity: Forces and Motion Basics Include the following in your lab report: 1. The title of the lab activity 2. The date the lab activity was performed 3. The goal(s) of the lab activity 4. A description of the lab activity (procedures, sketches or pictures) 5. Data collected in the lab activity 6. Analysis of data and sample calculations 7. Argument analysis (see below for details) 8. Conclusion(s) (discuss the results from both experiments described below) There is no error analysis in this lab activity. In this virtual lab activity you will investigate the relationships found in Newton’s 1st and 2nd Laws of Motion. The simulations are not built to test the 3rd Law. This activity is “inquiry-based.” Click here to see an overview of how inquiry-based labs work. You will see general guidelines for what you are expected to investigate, but the actual procedures will be guided by your own curiosity. There are 4 separate experiments in the simulation. They are: 1. Net Force 2. Motion 3. Friction 4. Acceleration Since we will be covering friction later in the course, there is no need to investigate this experiment yet. Your goal is to manipulate the forces and masses so as to verify the 1st Law in one of the experiments and the 2nd Law in one of the experiments. When using the acceleration simulation, set the friction value to “none”. Please record the details of your activities and your findings in your lab notebook for each experiment. Remember, since this is an “inquiry-based” lab, you can be creative, but still utilize accepted scientific practices: a. Pose a question (For example, how does the same force affect the acceleration of various masses?) b. Hypothesize an answer c. Devise a procedure to test your hypothesis d. Conduct an experiment to test your hypothesis e. Draw a conclusion based on the data from your experiment The final step in this lab is to create one valid scientific argument based on what you learned in the lab. Recall, that a valid scientific argument contains a claim, evidence, and justification. Without the argument included in the lab report, no credit will be earned.

Do you have a similar assignment and would want someone to complete it for you? Click on the ORDER NOW option to get instant services at We assure you of a well written and plagiarism free papers delivered within your specified deadline.