FIE- School of Engineering 1

Taylor’s University

Physics Practical Report 2

Name : Natasha Anne Binti Mohammed Noor Azam

Student ID : 0326416

Group Members : 1. Natasha Anne Binti Mohammed Noor Azam

2. Shoban Raja A/L Sivaji Raja

3. Saniika A/P Renganadan

4. Mong Jia Ai

Date of Experiment:2nd March 2016

Report due date: 14th March 2016
Report submission date: 9th March
2016
Checked by:
Foundation of Science
Item/marks
School of Biosciences Format/10
Abstract and Introduction/10
Taylor’s University Figures and Diagrams/15
Materials and Method/10
Malaysia Results Discussions/45
References/10
Total
FIE- School of Engineering 2
Taylor’s University

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................3

1.0 Introduction...............................................................................................................................3

2.0 Experimental Design.................................................................................................................4

2.1 Materials................................................................................................................................4

2.2 Methods..................................................................................................................................4

2.3 Procedure...............................................................................................................................5

3.0 Results and Discussion..............................................................................................................6

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations..........................................................................................7

References.......................................................................................................................................8
FIE- School of Engineering 3
Taylor’s University

ABSTRACT

This lab report is to study the relationship between displacement, velocity and acceleration of a
student during a 50m sprint. In this report, two students will sprint to make a data comparison
between them. Each experiment that is conducted three times to obtain average measurement.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This experiment studies motion in a straight line, i.e., one-dimensional motion. A good
understanding of this is important because the physics of motion in one dimension can be
generalised to higher dimensions, as well as to rotational and other types of motion.

We investigated how do displacement, velocity, and acceleration change with time over the
course of a 50-metre sprint. From direct observation, a qualitative description should be possible.
Deeper analysis of the kinematics requires quantitative measurements. The displacement from
the initial position and the time taken are directly measurable, so you will record the time taken
for a student to run a certain distance.

If the time taken by the student to travel from one point to another is known, the average
velocity between those points is found by dividing the difference in position by the difference in
time.

Once the velocity at a number of times is known acceleration may be found from velocities at
successive points in time in the same way that velocity was found from displacement. Similarly,
the average acceleration over an interval (generally) will be close to the acceleration at the
midpoint of the time interval than the acceleration at any other instant during that interval.

It is easier to see meaning in your experimental results if the data is presented as a graph, rather
than as a table of numbers. Creating and interpreting graphs are important skills for all involved
in science. Here you’ll use graphs to identify trends, draw quantitative conclusions from data,
and critically analyse the methodology of the experiment. For this experiment, the slope of the
graphs have particular meaning. When drawing a line of best fit or curve fit to the data, keep in
mind how precise (or imprecise) the data is. Here, you may need to think about your qualitative
observations of the student to draw a reasonable curve of fit.

Almost all measures of the mechanics of movement in running are affected by speed (Nilsson et
al. 1985; Frederick & Hagy 1986; Mero & Komi 1986; Munro et al. 1987),

Albert Einstein derived the mass-energy equivalence equation which is described as

E=mc 2 ⋯( 1)
FIE- School of Engineering 4
Taylor’s University

2.0 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

2.1 Materials

 Stopwatch/iPad
 Measuring Tape
 Chalks

2.2 Methods

We marked a 50 metre track with ‘markers’ at every 5 metre interval using a chalk. We choose
two students to run the track for data comparison. We set the other students at each 5-metre
interval marker equipped with stopwatch. The first runner ran and his split times at 5-metre
interval was measured using stopwatches. The measurement was repeated 2 more times and an
average result was obtained. This experiment was then repeated with the other runner.

2.3 Procedure

1. A 50m “track” was marked out with chalk that has ‘markers’ at every 5 metre interval.

2. One student ran the track, while others time and record. Another student was chosen to
run for comparison with the first student.

3. The runner’s split times at 5-metre interval was measured. The split times for the runner
was tabulated in a table such as the one shown in Table 2.1 and Table 2.2.

4. The measurement was repeated 2 more times and the average results was obtained.

5. The experiment was repeated with the other runner.

6. The position vs time, velocity vs time and acceleration vs time graphs was plotted and
both runners were compared.
 FIE- School of Engineering 5
Taylor’s University

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1
  Runner 1     Runner 2  

Positio Avera Avera

Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
n (m) ge ge

Time Time Time Time Time Time Time Time

(s) (s) (s) (s) (s) (s) (s) (s)
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 1.19 1.37 1.38 1.31 1.37 1.38 1.22 1.32
10 1.36 2.09 2.03 1.83 2.25 2.25 2.28 2.26
15 2.75 2.87 3.12 2.91 3.38 3.25 3.22 3.28
20 3.34 3.21 3.94 3.50 4.19 3.88 3.94 4.00
25 4.00 4.19 4.41 4.20 4.91 4.69 4.78 4.79
30 4.62 5.00 4.79 4.80 5.34 5.75 5.32 5.47
35 5.44 5.64 6.00 5.69 6.36 6.30 6.28 6.31
40 6.06 6.43 6.75 6.41 7.12 7.07 7.19 7.13
45 7.09 7.22 7.53 7.28 8.03 8.03 8.40 8.15
50 7.50 7.66 8.34 7.83 8.75 8.75 9.03 8.84

Table 2.1
Displacemen Duratio
Mid- a Mid-
t, n
interva interva
Positio Δx (m) of Velocit l time, (m/s2) l time,
Time, Δv
n, x y, t’ Δt’ (s) t‘’ (s)
t (s) (m/s)
(m) v(m/s)
interval
(s)
s,
Δt (s)
0 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 1.31 5 1.31 3.82 0.66 3.82 0.66 5.83 0.33
10 1.83 5 0.52 9.62 1.57 5.80 0.92 6.34 0.79
15 2.91 5 1.08 4.63 2.37 -4.99 0.80 -6.23 0.86
 FIE- School of Engineering 6
Taylor’s University

20 3.50 5 0.59 8.47 3.21 3.84 0.84 4.60 0.82

25 4.20 5 0.70 7.14 3.85 -1.33 0.65 -2.06 0.74
30 4.80 5 0.60 8.33 4.50 1.19 0.65 1.83 0.65
35 5.69 5 0.89 5.62 5.25 -2.72 0.75 -3.64 0.70
40 6.41 5 0.72 6.94 6.05 1.33 0.81 1.65 0.78
45 7.28 5 0.87 5.75 6.85 -1.20 0.80 -1.51 0.80
50 7.83 5 0.55 9.09 7.56 3.34 0.71 4.71 0.75
Table 2.2
Displacement, Duration Mid- a Mid-

interva interval
Δx (m) of l time, Δv (m/s2) time,
Position Time, Velocity, Δt’
t’ (m/s t‘’ (s)
, x (m) t (s) v(m/s) (s)
)
intervals
(s)
,
Δt (s)
0 0.00 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5 1.32 5 1.32 3.79 0.66 3.79 0.66 5.74 0.33
10 2.26 5 0.94 5.32 1.79 1.53 1.13 1.36 0.90
15 3.28 5 1.02 4.90 2.77 -0.42 0.98 -0.43 1.06
20 4.00 5 0.72 6.94 3.64 2.04 0.87 2.35 0.93
25 4.79 5 0.79 6.33 4.40 -0.62 0.76 -0.82 0.81
30 5.47 5 0.68 7.35 5.13 1.02 0.74 1.39 0.75
35 6.31 5 0.84 5.95 5.89 -1.40 0.76 -1.84 0.75
40 7.13 5 0.82 6.10 6.72 0.15 0.83 0.17 0.80
45 8.15 5 1.02 4.90 7.64 -1.20 0.92 -1.30 0.88
50 8.84 5 0.69 7.25 8.50 2.34 0.86 2.74 0.89
FIE- School of Engineering 7
Taylor’s University

Positi on vs. Time

60

50
f(x)==6.54
f(x) 5.85 xx −−2.23
2.4
40
Runner 1
30
Position
Linear (Runner 1)
20 Runner 2
Linear (Runner 2)
10

0
0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0
0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. .0
10

Time

Velocity vs. Time

12.00

10.00
f(x) = 5 x^-1
8.00 Runner 1
Velocity

f(x) = 5 x^-1 Power (Runner 1)

6.00
Runner 2
4.00 Power (Runner 2)

2.00

0.00
40 50 60 70 80 .90 .00 .10 .20 .30 .40
0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0Time1 1 1 1 1

Accelerati on vs. Time

8.00
6.00
4.00
Acceleration

2.00
Runner 1
0.00 Runner 2
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
-8.00
Time

DISCUSSION
FIE- School of Engineering 8
Taylor’s University

1. Comment on the performance of the runner in terms of trends in velocity and

acceleration apparent in your data.
The velocity of the runner increase over time while the acceleration of the runner
decreases over time

2. What was the maximum velocity experienced by the runners? Compare this with the
Olympic athletes in the sample given. What was the average velocity from your own data
over the entire 50m run?
The maximum velocity of the runner is

3. We know that the runner begins the sprint from a stationary start, so on the velocity
versus-time graphs, the origin (0, 0) is a justifiable data point. However, the origin is not
allowable as a data point on acceleration-versus-time graphs. By extrapolating your curve
fit, determine the initial acceleration of the runner.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The report may be concluded by presenting answers to the problems stated in the introduction.
Conclusions may be based on the analysis presented in the previous section and use this to
reaffirm the stated results in the abstract. Understand that the conclusions from one experiment
form basis to perform future experiments. Show an awareness of the limitations of the
experiment and explain the rationale behind the generalizations from the results. Clearly explain
any ambiguities or complications encountered during the experiment as this is very useful in
modifying the experiments in the future.

Suggest possible improvements to the experiment and describe these enhancements in detail.
Restate the problem under investigation and conclude with a condensed summary of the solution
obtained from the experimental investigation.

REFERENCES

Reference styles that can be used are IEEE or the Harvard referencing style. The examples
below use the Harvard Referencing Style. You may opt to use Microsoft Word’s build in
referencing system to achieve this or may type it manually.

Zatsiorsky, V., 2008. Biomechanics in Sport. Wiley-Blackwell. Chichester, GB.

Seborg, D. E., 2004. Process Dynamics and Control. John Wiley. New Jersey.