Sample Lab Reports 2010

Sample Lab Reports 2010 - Imperial Valley College Science,...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Imperial Valley College Science, Math, and Engineering Division Physics Sample Lab Reports The following pages show actual lab reports written by Physics 200 and 202 students who graciously agreed to share them with all students. Under no circumstances you are expected to duplicate them. They are being provided to give you an idea of what is expected from you. You may see that two of them are more concise and the other two are more elaborated. Please keep in mind that we are not looking for quantity but rather quality. Please use the rubric and decide how many points you would assign to each one.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Lab #3: Newton's Second Law Objective/Summary: The objective of this lab is to study the legitimacy of Newton's Second Law by observing the relationship between force, mass and acceleration. To test , we performed five separate experiments, each with a cart on a level track. The cart is attached to a string that is guided over a pulley and attached to a vertically hanging mass, and is accelerated when the mass is allowed to free-fall to the ground. For the first three experiments, we simply used different masses for the free-falling mass. For the last two, we used the same free-fall mass and added mass to the car. The data we collected from the experiments include the masses used, and the displacement of the car as it moved along the track. The displacement was measured by a tape-timer set at 0.1 Hz. This data was then used to calculate the experimental acceleration vs. the theoretical acceleration. Experimental errors are given per experiment, listed within the corresponding data tables below. Our results coincide very well with Newton's second law, with the exception of sets #1 and #2 (their %errors are very large). This is probably due to human error in either the execution of the experiment or the recording of the data, or due to friction. Sets #3, #4, and #5, however, quite agree with . This can be seen by their percent errors (6.0%, 8.3%, and 5.6%, respectively). These %errors are likely due to our non-inclusion of friction into our calculations. Further, as is expected, as more mass is added to the system, and the applied force is kept constant, the magnitude of acceleration decreases. This can be seen in a quick comparison between sets #3, #4, and #5: Set Total Mass Acceleration #3 455.670 g 4.042 m/s 2 #4 705.670 g 2.546 m/s 2 #5 955.670 g 1.937 m/s 2 I think there is little practical improvement to be made to this experiment, as it serves well to give a better understanding of Newton's second law (without terribly expensive/accurate equipment). If some improvement could be made, it would be to allow a little more time so that perhaps 2 runs for each set of masses can be performed. Data:
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 13

Sample Lab Reports 2010 - Imperial Valley College Science,...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online