IZMIR INSTITURE OF TECHNOLOGY

GENERAL PHYSICS
LABORATORY REPORT

Experiment 6
Conservation of Mechanical Energy
Bench 3
Group Members
Aysu GÜLER 290202048
Bahar ATALIK 300202051
Barış Kaan ERDOĞAN 300204022
Batıkan BALTACI 300204062
Batuhan GÜRHAN 300204078
Aynur BİLİM 300204086
Ayşe SÜLEYMANOĞLU 310202051

Experiment Date: 21/11/2023

 Introduction
The expression "preserving of mechanical energy" is frequently used to refer to the physics
fundamental principle of energy conservation. It is fundamental to being able to understand a
wide range of physical events. According to this principle, a system's total potential as well as
kinetic energy don't change over time. The two fundamental elements of mechanical energy—
kinetic energy, which comes from an object's motion, and potential energy, which comes from
the object's position in a gravitational field—are the subject of this experiment.
Our objective in this particular experiment is to examine the complex energy conversion
process that occurs when an air track glider glides smoothly down an incline. Since there isn't
much friction between the glider and the track, we can anticipate that the kinetic energy gained
by the glider as it descends the track would almost exactly balance the gravitational potential
energy lost. This relationship can be simply written as follows: ∆𝐸𝑘 = ∆𝑚𝑔ℎ where 𝑚𝑔ℎ is
the glider's altered gravitational potential energy and ∆𝐸𝑘 is its changed kinetic energy.
We used specialized tools, such as a photogate timer, an additional photogate, an air track
system with a glider, and a block with defined thickness, to carry out this experiment. The air
track system reduces frictional forces, enabling us to examine the laws of energy conservation
with greater accuracy, while the photogate timer helps with accurate time measurements. To
further enhance the comprehensiveness of our experimental setup, the addition of a block with
a specified thickness adds a controlled variation aspect. We hope to learn more about the
dynamic interaction between kinetic and potential energy during the glider's fall down the
incline track by doing this investigation.

Data

M(kg) t1 (s) t 2 (s) V1 (m/s) V2 (m/s) 𝐸𝑘1 (J) 𝐸𝑘2 (J) ∆𝐸𝑘 (J) ∆(mgh) J
0,19 kg 0,247 s 0,187 s 0,404 m/s 0,534 m/s 0,0155 J 0,0270 J 0,0115 J 0,0102 J
0,20 kg 0,249 s 0,187 s 0,401 m/s 0,534 m/s 0,0153 J 0,0270 J 0,0117 J 0,0107 J
0,21 kg 0,249 s 0,186 s 0,401 m/s 0,537 m/s 0,0153 J 0,0274 J 0,0121 J 0,0113 J
0,22 kg 0,250 s 0,186 s 0,400 m/s 0,537 m/s 0,0152 J 0,0274 J 0,0122 J 0,0118 J
0,23 kg 0,250 s 0,187 s 0,400 m/s 0,534 m/s 0,0152 J 0,0270 J 0,0118 J 0,0124 J
0,24 kg 0,250 s 0,187 s 0,400 m/s 0,534 m/s 0,0152 J 0,0270 J 0,0118 J 0,0129 J

Table1: Experimental Data for Conservation of Mechanical Energy Experiment

M(kg) 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24

Different% 12.7 % 9.3% 7.1% 3.4% 4.8% 8.5%
Table2: Error Percentage Table for Different Masses
Calculations
𝑚𝑔𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑟 : 0.19 kg

𝐿: 10 cm= 0.10 m
𝜃 = 0,630°
h=1.1cm
g=9.8 m/s2
D=50 cm = 0.5 m
d=100 cm = 0.10 m

Used Formulas

L𝑚
𝑉= ⁄𝑠
t
1
𝐸𝑘 = 𝑚𝑉 2 𝐽
2
1
𝐸𝑘1 = 𝑚𝑉12 𝐽
∆𝐸𝑘 = 𝐸𝑘2 − 𝐸𝑘1 { 2
1
𝐸𝑘2 = 𝑚𝑉22 𝐽
2
1
∆𝐸𝑘 = 𝑚(𝑉22 − 𝑉12 ) 𝐽
2

𝑈 = mgh

∆𝑈 = 𝑚𝑔∆ℎ

∆ℎ = 𝐷 sin 𝜃

∆𝑚𝑔ℎ = 𝑚𝑔𝐷 sin 𝜃

ℎ
𝜃 = tan−1
𝑑
∆𝐸𝑘 − ∆𝑚𝑔ℎ
𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡% = | | × 100%
∆𝑚𝑔ℎ
Example Calculations

For m=0,19 kg

ℎ
𝜃 = tan−1
𝑑
1.1 𝑐𝑚
𝜃 = tan−1
100 𝑐𝑚
𝜃 = 0.630°

L 𝑚
𝑉1 = ⁄𝑠
t1

0.1 𝑚
𝑉1 = ⁄𝑠
0,247

𝑉1 = 0.404 𝑚⁄𝑠

L 𝑚
𝑉2 = ⁄𝑠
t2

0.1 𝑚
𝑉2 = ⁄𝑠
0.187

𝑉2 = 0.534 𝑚⁄𝑠
1
𝐸𝑘1 = 𝑚𝑉12 𝐽
2
1
𝐸𝑘1 = 0.19 × 0.4042 𝐽
2

𝐸𝑘1 = 0.0155 𝐽

1
𝐸𝑘2 = 0.19 × 0.5342 𝐽
2

𝐸𝑘2 = 0.0270 𝐽

∆𝐸𝑘 = 𝐸𝑘2 − 𝐸𝑘1

∆𝐸𝑘 = 0.0270 − 0.0155 𝐽

∆𝐸𝑘 = 0.0115 𝐽

∆𝑚𝑔ℎ = 𝑚𝑔𝐷 sin 𝜃

 ∆𝑚𝑔ℎ = 0.19 × 9.8 𝑚⁄𝑠 2 × 0.5 × sin 0.630°

∆𝑚𝑔ℎ = 0.0102 𝐽

∆𝐸𝑘 − ∆𝑚𝑔ℎ
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = | | × 100%
∆𝑚𝑔ℎ
0.0115 − 0.0102
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = | | × 100%
0.0102
0.0013
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = | | × 100%
0.0102
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 0.127 × 100%
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 12.7%

Question
1. Compare the kinetic energy gained with the loss in gravitational potential energy.
Was mechanical energy conserved in the motion of the glider?

To compare the kinetic energy gained with the loss in gravitational potential energy, we need
to consider the principle of conservation of mechanical energy. Mathematically, it is expressed
as ∆𝐸𝑘 = ∆(𝑚𝑔ℎ). When we look at the experimental data, we do not see this equality, we see
that differences appear. This is because the experimental setup is not a completely error-free
system. In other words, the mechanical energy in the movement of the glider could not be
maintained 100%. The main reason for this is that the friction in the system has not completely
disappeared and there is air resistance. Friction converts kinetic energy into heat energy, while
air resistance reduces the speed of the glider over time. Therefore, in the absence of external
forces, mechanical energy will be conserved. But in most practical scenarios, these forces exist,
which leads to a loss of mechanical energy.

Conclusion
Firstly, we are levelled the air track as accurately as possible. We placed a block of known
thickness under the support leg of the track, setted up the photogate timer and accessory
photogate. Then we measured and recorded the distance between the air track support legs, the
distance the glider moves on the air track from where it first triggers the first photogate to where
it first triggers the second photogate and measured and recorded the effective length of glider.
After we measured and recorded the mass of glider. In this experiment we used GATE and
MEMORY mode. We holded the glider and then released it so it glides freely thorough the
photogates. We repeated the measurement several times by changed the mass of the glider by
adding weights and repeat steps.

The conservation of mechanical energy experiment demonstrated that, ideally, the total
mechanical energy in a closed system remains constant. However, errors can occur due to
factors such as friction, air resistance, and imperfections in equipment. These errors may lead
to discrepancies between the calculated and expected results. Judging by the data we obtained
in the experiment, the fourth part of the experiment gave quite accurate and precise results with
a very low percentage error (3.39%).

To reduce errors, meticulous attention to experimental setup and equipment calibration is

crucial. Minimizing friction, using precise measuring instruments, and conducting multiple
trials can help enhance accuracy. Additionally, acknowledging and accounting for potential
sources of error in the analysis can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the
results.