Rolling motion- experimental data differs from expectation

In summary, the experiment tested the validity of the equation a = 2/3 g sin∅ for a rolling cylinder. A hockey puck was rolled down a wooden ramp at 5 different inclination angles, and the time it took to roll down the length of the board was recorded. ∅ was found using trigonometry, acceleration via L= 1/2 at^2, with L the length of the board. The five points were plotted and linear best fit line was drawn.
  • #1
Persimmon
22
0

Homework Statement



An experiment was done to test the validity of the equation a = 2/3 g sin∅ for a rolling cylinder. A hockey puck was rolled down a wooden ramp at 5 different inclination angles, and the time it took to roll down the length of the board was recorded. ∅ was found using trigonometry, acceleration via L= 1/2 at^2, with L the length of the board. The five points were plotted and linear best fit line was drawn.

Homework Equations



Expected result:

a = 2/3 g sin∅

Experimental results:
a = 0.92 gsin ∅ -0.05

The Attempt at a Solution



I can't quite figure out why such a large difference arose. The value for slope should be closer to 0.67, but it's actually much larger. If anything, I would have thought it would be smaller due to friction acting on the puck, but the puck actually accelerates faster than it should. Granted, the measured times were very small, the largest less than 1.5 seconds, so I suppose it could be that all of the times were a bit short but this still seems like a rather large discrepancy. I've already done the experiment twice and I keep getting similar results.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If the puck accelerates faster than expected, are you sure the moment of inertia isn't less than expected? Is the puck a uniform cylinder?
 
  • #3
I believe so, what else could it be? That is the closest shape I can think of, unless the non-uniformity of it drastically changes the moment of inertia. In any case, the experiment specifically asks for a comparison between the equation for the rolling motion of a solid cylinder so I believe it's meant to be done assuming that's what it is? This question is driving me bonkers.
 
  • #4
I've never seen a hocky puck up close but I would bet it is not a true uniform cylinder, there is no other explanation other than measurement error. Something like ice sliding down a flat surface would have little moment of inertia and should accelerate much faster.
 
  • #5
Please share both sets of data with us. The time vs the angle will be adequate. Thanks.
 
  • #6
so I suppose it could be that all of the times were a bit short

How are you measuring the time from start to finish?
If you are using a stopwatch, perhaps your start of the stopwatch is always after the puck has started rolling and you click stop( in anticipation ) before the puck has actually reached the end.
 
  • #7
That's it, thanks! I re-did it, beginning the stopwatch just as the puck began motion and it worked. Since the times were so small, the measurement error was screwing it up quite a bit. Thanks for all the help!
 

Related to Rolling motion- experimental data differs from expectation

1. Why does the experimental data for rolling motion differ from the expected data?

The experimental data for rolling motion may differ from the expected data due to various factors such as experimental errors, imperfections in the materials used, and external forces acting on the object.

2. How can we minimize the discrepancies between experimental and expected data for rolling motion?

To minimize the discrepancies, it is important to carefully control and reduce experimental errors, use high-quality materials, and eliminate any external forces that may affect the motion of the object.

3. What are some potential sources of error in experimental data for rolling motion?

Potential sources of error in experimental data for rolling motion include measurement errors, friction between the rolling object and the surface, air resistance, and inaccuracies in the initial conditions or setup of the experiment.

4. Can the differences between experimental and expected data for rolling motion be attributed to the object's shape?

Yes, the shape of the object can affect its rolling motion and lead to differences between experimental and expected data. For example, a perfectly spherical object will roll differently compared to an object with uneven or asymmetric shapes.

5. How can we improve the accuracy of our experimental data for rolling motion?

To improve the accuracy of experimental data, it is important to repeat the experiment multiple times and take an average of the results. Additionally, using more precise measuring tools and reducing any external factors that may impact the motion can also improve the accuracy of the data.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
890
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
3K
Back
Top