Acceleration down an inclined plane

AI Thread Summary
Acceleration down an inclined plane should theoretically be inversely proportional to mass, but experimental data showed a direct proportionality. The discussion highlights the confusion around the relationship, emphasizing that according to Newton's second law (F=ma), an increase in mass should lead to decreased acceleration. The net force acting on the container is influenced by gravity and the angle of the incline, which complicates the expected outcomes. Additionally, the absence of a friction coefficient in the analysis may contribute to the unexpected results. Understanding these factors is crucial for accurately interpreting the experiment's findings.
Worfie
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
User informed about mandatory use of template in homework forums.
Hello,

After collecting data for the classic physics experiment - motion down an inclined plane, I assembled my graph, and found something startling; in my graph, acceleration is proportional to mass (use the attached file for reference).

Theoretically, my graph should resemble the inverse, by a ∝ 1/m.

Can anyone explain possible reasons for this?

The experiment was running a margarine container down a wooden slope, varying the mass of the margarine container by adding brass weights each time.
 

Attachments

  • Mass versus acceleration.png
    Mass versus acceleration.png
    48.4 KB · Views: 609
Physics news on Phys.org
Worfie said:
Theoretically, my graph should resemble the inverse, by a ∝ 1/m.

What makes you think so?
 
F=ma, therefore a=F/m, which implies as the mass increases, acceleration decreases.
 
What is F in your case?
 
F=mg(sinθ-cosθ)

where θ is the angle of the inclined plane.

This is the net force of the block down the plane.
 
And inserting this into your expression for the acceleration gives?

Edit: you are also missing a friction coefficient...
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top