EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force
David Blades
1.
Experimental Introduction, Purpose and Hypothesis 1.1 Introduction: Centripetal force is the force that provides an object with its force to have centripetal acceleration and hence the abillity for an object to travel in a circular motion. Newton’s second law states that there must be an unbalanced force continuously acting on an object that is accelerating. In this case the unbalanced force is acting on the rubber stopper which is being

© All Rights Reserved

250 tayangan

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force
David Blades
1.
Experimental Introduction, Purpose and Hypothesis 1.1 Introduction: Centripetal force is the force that provides an object with its force to have centripetal acceleration and hence the abillity for an object to travel in a circular motion. Newton’s second law states that there must be an unbalanced force continuously acting on an object that is accelerating. In this case the unbalanced force is acting on the rubber stopper which is being

© All Rights Reserved

- Physi Fuk
- 403 Lab Report Circular Motion
- wb1b_test
- Fall Review Part A
- Investigation of Centripetal Force
- GM
- CH 1
- Bio Mechanics Lectures
- Ix Cbse Physics Motion Work Sheet
- AP Physics Mechanics
- IVYT Physical Science 101,Chapter 2 Quiz
- Force Concept Review Key
- mkiydy
- Newton's Laws of Motion
- Cp Phys Ch 2 Web Rev
- mechanicsforengi00morluoft
- Kinema Tics Review 1
- Grinding Mill Design
- Circular Motion.pdf
- Chapter 1

Anda di halaman 1dari 10

1.1 Introduction: Centripetal force is the force that provides an object with its force to have

centripetal acceleration and hence the abillity for an object to travel in a circular motion.

Newton’s second law states that there must be an unbalanced force continuously acting on

an object that is accelerating. In this case the unbalanced force is acting on the rubber

stopper which is being rotated around a pivotal point.

In this investigation the variables are

Fc = Centripetal Force - This is being kept constant by the constant mass of the hanging

mass.

M = Mass of the rubber stopper - This is constant throughout the experiment.

r = Radius - This is kept constant by the knot, the paper clip and the force applied to the

the rubber stopper to keep it in a constant velocity.

v = Velocity - This is dependent as it is being calculated from the period of rotation (time).

T = Time - This is indepedent as it is measured.

1.2 Purpose: To find the relationship between centripetal force and the velocity of an object

as it moves in its circular parth.

1.3 Hypothesis: When the results are graphed the graph of centripetal force (Fc) vs.

velocity (v) should be a or part of a quadratic graph. This hypothesis is made because the

relationship between centripetal force and velocity is which indicates

a quadratic relationship between cetripetal force and velocity. Hence when the graph of

centripetal force vs. (velocity)2 is graphed the relationship should be linear. In both of the

graphs mass(m) and radius(r) have no influence on the shape of the graph as they are

constants in our experiment.

Paper clip

String

Tube

Rubber stopper

2.2 Safe work practices: Perform this experiment outside. Safety glasses are to be worn so

no free flying rubber stoppers are projected into any persons eyes. If more than one group

is performing this experiment spread out so as no other unsuspecting person is hit by

free flying rubber stopper.

1. The experiment is to be conducted under the safe work practices in section 2.2

I

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

The string threaded through the tube.

Measure the length of 1 metre from the rubber stopper to the tube (This will give you the

radius of the circle).

When the radius is measured tie a knot in the string under the tube (so the radius can not

exceed the measured length) and place the paper clip there (so that it is visible to your

group member when enough force has been used to to accelerate the rubber stopper in a

circle) this is also done so that more string can not slide through the tube when it is being

swung.

Attach the weights to the string.

3. Spin the rubber stopper around in a horizontal direction. With a hanging mass of 50

grams.

4. Have one person in your group timing how long it takes for the rubber stopper to do 5

full circles. (5 full circles are recorded so that an average can be taken)

6. Repeat the steps 3 - 5 increasing the hanging mass by 50 grams each time.

4. Results Collection:

4.1

Mass of rubber stopper= 23.66g ±0.005g (0.02366kg ±0.000005kg)

Radius= 1m ±0.0005m

Acceleration due to gravity= 9.8 m/s2

Known values: when Fc = 0, therefore v and v2 must also equal 0

Hanging Fc=W T(x5) T V V2

Trial W=mg (N)

mass(g) (N) (s) (s) ms-1 m^2s-2

1 100 0.98 0.98 3.54 0.71 8.88 78.76

(m)1/2 m and a reaction time uncertainty of ±0.3s

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

Figure 2

4.2 Graph 1:

4.3Graph 2:

Figure 3

III

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

5.Uncertanties:

5.1

The weight of the rubber stopper is measured to the nearest hundredth of a gram. Time

was measured to the nearest hundredth of a second. Distance was measured to the

nearest millimetre.

Any uncertainty in the weight is due to mechanical limitations of the scales used only

allowing us to measure to the closest hundredth of a gram.

Any uncertainty in the results for the time would come from:

Human error: the reaction time of those conducting the experiment and their ability to

judge correctly that the rubber stopper has completed the full 5 revolutions required.

Mechalical limitations: There have been two decimal places used as this is the time given

on the stopwatch but along with human error there is the mechanical limitations of the

stopwatch of δ±0.005 as the stopwatch only goes to a measure of a hundredth of a second

there is the uncertainty of half the last digit measured, this is because the stopwatch must

round the time to the closest available digit.

The uncertainty in the distance measured is due to the ruler used.

Since there is an uncertainty in the time then there is also an uncertainty in the v and v^2

values.

There would also be some form of uncertainty in the lines of best, because they have been

measured to such a small value and the values that have been recorded are not that

precise.

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

b. Time uncertainty percentage = 0.0014%

c. Measured uncertainty percentage = 0.0005%

d. Reaction time uncertainty percentage = 12.5%

Total uncertainty percentage = a + b + c = 12.50211%

6.Observations:

6.1

The improvments that could be made to this experiment could include weighing the

weights with a more accurate scale. If the human factor was also taken out of the whole

experiment this would improve the accuracy. If there was a laser measuring system that

took the time readings. Also if a machine was made to rotate the rubber stopper around

the pivital point with an angle of 90 ° this would also help to improve the accuracy of the

results.

Relationship between force and velocity2 is . Therefore Fc is

theoretically linear to v2, because the mass of the rubber stopper is constant as is the

radius.

Weight equals the centripetal force because the rubber stopper is not moving closer or

further away from the pivot point of the circle.

The rubber stopper was not always kept at a constant angle of 90°. This was difficult to

achieve because it is controled by how much force is applied by the person rotating the

rubber stopper.

The condition given was that the graph was to go through the point (0,0). This

Figure 6 is shown in figures 2 and 3. Figures 4 and 5 have been drawn without the point

(0,0). This allows the gradient of the line of best fit to be closer to the

theoretical calculations of m/r. The gradient of figue 5 is 0.0234 ±12.50211% which is

extremly close to that of the thoretical gradient of 0.0236, this is only 0.85% from the

predicted theoretical value. This therefore is very misleading data, if the point (0,0) is not

added to the graphs.

If the point (0,0) is added to the graph then the gradient becomes 0.0177 ±12.50211%

which is 25.35% away from the predicted theoretical value.

There was a substatial difference of 25.35%, this would be acceptable as we were relying

completly on human reaction time to record the times. In figure 6 it states that we have a

reaction time of 150 ms for what we see, therefore each time we recored a time, we have a

human error of at least 300 ms added or taken away from our time. It is for this reason that

we do not time the rubber stopper for just one rotation and we do it for five, so that the

reaction time has less impact on the results. The time recorded for trial six was 2.38

seconds and when divided by 5 to give the time of a single rotation the time is 0.48

seconds, therefore if only one rotation was recorded there could potentially be an impact of

V

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

0.3 seconds on the result now there is potentially an impact of 0.06 seconds (±12.5%)

which is considerably less impact than 62.5%.

The experimental limitations faced are that of human error and a time constraint where the

experiment was to be completed by. If there were computers and machines used then

there would not be the problem of a reaction time influencing the results. If the experiment

was not conducted under time constrants then there could have be many results taken,

then the average could have be used from that. To make the reaction time of the time

recorder negligible the object could be rotated for a longer time, this has it’s own problems

that would need to be taken into consideration including random errors such as: friction, air

resistance and the ability for the person rotating the object to keep the object at a constant

speed and at an angle of 90° .

7.1

Data calculations:

W=mg

v = (Fcr)1/2

(m)1/2

2

v =Fcr

m

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

Examples:

Velocity2 and Velocity Weight

Fc= 0.98 W= ?

m= 23.66 m= 100

r= 1 g= 9.8

v= ? W=mg

W= 100 x 9.8

W= 98 N

1 T(x5)= 3.54

2

v = 78.76 T= 0.71s

v= 8.88 m/s

Error bars can not be shown for the Centripetal force as they are too small.

Graph 1:

The graph drawn closely resembles that of a linear graph when the point (0,0) is not part of

the graph (figure 4), but when this point is added to the graph the now shown graph

resembles that of a quadratic. With an R2 value of 98%.

The quadratic line of best fit resembles a quadratic but can not be true as the force can not

be negativly applied to the rubber stopper.

VII

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

Graph 2:

This graph (figure 5) looks very similar to the above graph (figure 4) when the point (0,0) is

not included in the graph.

The graph (figure 3) resembles a linear graph (given that there are the uncertainties of

human error). The line of best fit has an R2 value of 0.96. The value 0.96 tells us that the

variation in the centripetal force and be 96% explained by the variation in velocity. This is a

very high value so this means that it is a very close fit. If a value was to be calculated from

the line of best fit it would be very close to the true value.

Figure 4

7.3 Analyisis:

The gradient of the line of best fit for the graph (figure 3) should be theoretically equally to

the mass of the rubber stopper divided by the radius of the circle.

1 Figure 5

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

This does not seem like a substantial difference but when it is put into its original units

there is a difference of 6 grams/metre. Since the total mass is is 23.66 grams this is a

difference of 25.35%. Therefore this is a substantial difference.

8.Conclusion:

The relationship between centripetal force and velocity was found. The relationship is

centripetal force is linearly proportional to (velocity)2.

The results of the pratical experiment have been graphed as centripetal force vs.

velocity and centripetal force vs. (velocity)2. The first graph (figure 2) did turn out to

resemble the rough shape of a parabola. The second graph (figure 3) has a linear

resemblence and has an r2 value of 0.96 so it is very close to being linear. Both of these

graphs support what was hypothesised earlier in part 1.3.

The gradient of the graph centripetal force vs. (velocity)2 is 0.0177 ±12.50211% which is

25.35% away from the predicted theoretical value of 0.02366.

Including the point (0,0) made the shape of the graph true but increased the difference

from the theoretical value of the gradient.

The part of the experiment that has the biggest influence on the final result is the timing

which is the biggest source of error due to reaction time.

Bibliography:

Figure 1: Handout given to the class. Circular Motion. Experiment 41 Centripetal Force.

Figure 6: Dehaene S (1997) The number sense. New York: Oxford University

Press. 274 p.

IX

EPI Circular Motion: Centripetal Force David Blades

David Blades

- Physi FukDiunggah olehSiegfred Laborte
- 403 Lab Report Circular MotionDiunggah olehalkyone_n
- wb1b_testDiunggah olehapi-3705610
- Fall Review Part ADiunggah olehjkeelen
- Investigation of Centripetal ForceDiunggah olehmattcee
- GMDiunggah olehMrAnderson Neo
- CH 1Diunggah olehyanichik20
- Bio Mechanics LecturesDiunggah olehKiran Barde
- Ix Cbse Physics Motion Work SheetDiunggah olehdayanandan1
- AP Physics MechanicsDiunggah olehNate Vojtik
- IVYT Physical Science 101,Chapter 2 QuizDiunggah olehwxcar08
- Force Concept Review KeyDiunggah olehJean Marsend Pardz Franza
- mkiydyDiunggah olehKei Dee
- Newton's Laws of MotionDiunggah olehChinmay Sharma
- Cp Phys Ch 2 Web RevDiunggah olehMichelle Muliawidjaja
- mechanicsforengi00morluoftDiunggah olehGaurav Binaykiya
- Kinema Tics Review 1Diunggah olehAlex
- Grinding Mill DesignDiunggah olehsanjibkrjana
- Circular Motion.pdfDiunggah olehARKO KASHYAP
- Chapter 1Diunggah olehLakshmi C KV
- creativity assignment-andrew wagnerDiunggah olehapi-365139420
- Physics.pdfDiunggah olehhasnain ghazala
- Notes 10Diunggah olehEnger Alingasa
- Lorentz Force Lp DONEDiunggah olehDave Cercado Bugador
- Equilibrium MultDiunggah olehJeffrey Salgado
- projmotnDiunggah olehsgsddhfn
- Dynamics_Chapter_2_Kinematics_of_Particles rectilinear motion to normal tangential coordinates.pdfDiunggah olehJP Nieles
- Circular Motion Notes for website 2016.pdfDiunggah olehNEHA YADAV
- lp3Diunggah olehGina More Dee
- 4 Motion in two dimensions.pdfDiunggah olehDea Amalia Putri

- student_solutions_ch02.pdfDiunggah olehLaloFlándezGuerrero
- Lista 4 SolutionDiunggah olehGuilherme Duenhas Machado
- Chapt11 LectureDiunggah olehAdar Os
- BERNOULLI’S THEOREMDiunggah olehNur Falini Mohd Sukkri
- 1126751 bDiunggah olehAnonymous OhAy5G
- Spin-orbit coupling effects in zinc blende structuresDiunggah olehCharles Marcotte Girard
- Lecture 20 – ColumnsDiunggah olehQuang Hoành Lê
- CM1din2012Diunggah olehAurel Zimbru
- 01 Casing Dimensions, Materials & StrengthsDiunggah olehAli
- Lecture 5Diunggah olehMeshal Al-mutairi
- 1719335040000_solidDiunggah olehJon Jimmy
- Resume CondensedDiunggah olehgeorgemarian
- Compre 16Diunggah olehShravan Kumar
- Design and Thermal Analysis of Segmental Baffle and Helical Baffle in Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers Using Kern MethodDiunggah olehIJAERS JOURNAL
- Large Capacity Screw PilesDiunggah olehAnonymous P73cUg73L
- AspenPhysPropMethodsV7_2-RefDiunggah olehowais12345
- 4 Pure BendingDiunggah olehBharat Jajoria
- AGE 204Diunggah olehUsman Samuel Babalola
- Earthquake Descriptors 1 (1)Diunggah olehCarl Patrick Cruda
- Weight Volume RelationshipDiunggah olehNico Geotina
- FrontMatter_Giancoli7e_Manual.pdfDiunggah olehAndi Rodik
- SOAL.docxDiunggah olehFebryn Ngk
- tmp37E4.tmpDiunggah olehFrontiers
- Design Appendix for Structural Steel Design (1)Diunggah olehridzwan
- Nptelhrd - YouTubeDiunggah olehSanand M K
- 08-02-ja-n-p2-qDiunggah olehRahul Aryan
- fugsDiunggah olehFaisal Mumtaz
- CABLE DESIGN.xlsxDiunggah olehxtian
- Docslide Us List of Definition of Spm Physics NewDiunggah olehJames Chua Hong Kheng
- WCEE2012_1620Diunggah olehTarak A Positive