Nicholas Crum

Mr. Yackuboskey

APP1

2/16/2020

Purpose:

The purpose of this lab was to investigate the effect of the distribution of mass on an object’s

final linear speed.

Variables:

Independent - Shape + Mass of an object

Dependent - Final linear velocity of the object

Procedure:

1. Position a long, flat board or slanted surface with enough friction between the object and

ramp for rotational motion to occur.

2. Position a motion sensor at the bottom of the ramp, and position the object to be tested

at the top.

3. Turn the motion sensor on and release the object from rest at the top of the ramp.

4. Record the data given and repeat with different objects, ensuring that each object is

rolled multiple times to reduce uncertainty.

Data Collected:
Golf Balls:

Golf Ball Mass (g) Velocity Velocity Avg. Accelerat Accelerat Average

Type Y1 (m/s) Y2 (m/s) Velocity ion 1 ion 2 Accelerat

(m/s) (m/s)​2 (m/s)​2 ion (m/s)​2

Soft 2.69 2.49 1.852 2.17 .38 .45 .83

Solid 45.59 1.24 1.3 1.27 .3 .36 .33

Pipe type Mass (g) Velocity Velocity Avg. Accelerat Accelerat Average

Y1 (m/s) Y2 (m/s) Velocity ion 1 ion 2 Accelerat

(m/s) (m/s)​2 (m/s)​2 ion (m/s)​2

PVC 157.3 1.39 .77 1.08 .4115 .407 .409

Metal 318.6 .395 .7152 .5551 .52 .35 .435

Data analysis:

While examining the data from table one, it is evident that the object’s final linear velocity and

acceleration decrease relative to the mass of the object. The soft golf ball, which has a

significantly lesser mass than the solid golf ball - a difference of 42.9 grams - had a noticeable,

greater difference in velocity than the solid golf ball. This same trend can also be seen when the
data from the two pipes is observed. The pipe with the lesser mass (PVC) had a greater final

linear velocity at the end of the ramp.

Conclusion:

The trend that was observed in the data was not a surprise. This is because wehen an object

has a greater mass, it also has a greater inertial value, or its ability to resist a change in motion.

The acceleration values shown in the data table do not match up correctly with the expected

results, however. This could be due to a possible systematic error in the way the data collected,

or the motion sensor failed to do its job correctly while collecting data.

Discussion Questions:

1. When mass of an object is increased, the rotational inertia of an object is greater and it

results in a lower final velocity at the bottom of the ramp.

2. Because the ramp would be frictionless, the mass of the cubes would not matter,

because they would be experiencing uniform gravitational acceleration when sliding

down the ramp.

3. Some of the uncertainty in our data came from a relatively small sample size, whereas

more trials should’ve been done, however time did not allow; and a possible flaw in the

way the data was collected evident by inconsistencies in the acceleration values of the

pipes.
4. To find angular acceleration, which is used to find net torque, we can divide the linear

acceleration value by the radius of the object. We can then multiply by rotational inertia,

which gives us net torque, as follows:

a. Soft Golf Ball = .000018 N/M

b. Solid Golf Ball = .00012 N/M

c. PVC Pipe = .0549 N/M

d. Metal Pipe = .11756 N/M

5. We can solve for the change in energy by taking gravitational potential energy of the

object and subtracting the value of the rotational energy from it.