See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/296483615

Acceleration Experiment using the precision track with electronic box and
trolley

Experiment Findings · March 2016

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3048.9364

CITATIONS READS
0 1,518

1 author:

Leaname Thaolang
Botswana International University of Science and Technology
5 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE APPLICATIONS WITHIN AN INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Leaname Thaolang on 01 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

MECE 211
APPLIED MECHANICS LAB
EXPERIMENT 1 REPORT: HFC11
ACCELERATION

STUDENT NAME: Leaname Thaolang

ID NUMBER: 14001490
PROGRAMME: Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
DATE OF EXPERIMENT: 26 January 2016
DATE OF SUBMISSION: 02 February 2016
INTRODUCTION
The acceleration of an object depends on its mass. The magnitude of the acceleration of an object
is inversely proportional to its mass. Newton’s second law of motion state thus “When viewed
from an inertial reference frame, the acceleration of an object is directly proportional to
the net force acting on it and inversely proportional to its mass.” (Jewett, 2004)Traditionally
this was shown by considering a trolley towed along a flat plane by a constant force. A large area
of the trolley was in contact with flat plane which brought about some difficulties in the
interpretation of the experiment because of energy changes in the moving parts as well as friction

Some was considering applying a force (F) to a block of ice on a frictionless surface, the block
undergoes some acceleration (a). If the mass of the block is doubled, the same applied force
produces an acceleration (a/2). If the mass is tripled, the same applied force produces an
acceleration (a/3), and so on. (Jewett, 2004)

The process that have less friction had to be invented in order to make the experiment as accurate
as possible. In this case the trolley is mounted on a three ball bearing wheels running on some
slippery rails. The towing force was produced by a falling weight connected to the trolley
through a strip of paper on the precision track. The track was made slippery as possible in order
to produce little or no friction between the wheels as the trolley is being towed on it and this
improved the results of the experiment compared to the traditional method.

In this experiment the precision track will strike some marks of certain distances apart at regular
intervals of time which bring us to the simpler method of measuring velocity and acceleration at
regular intervals of time.

THEORY AND BACKGROUND

This experiment is undertaken to verify Newton’s Second law of motion as that states that “The
acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force acting on it, and is inversely
proportional to the object’s mass. The direction of the acceleration is in the direction of the net
force acting on the object.” (Giancoli, 2008)

The tape timer designed to bring out a motion diagram was used to verify the relationship
between mass, force, and acceleration. Due to the weights that are clipped to the strip paper, the
paper will fall and slide between the rollers at the same time the trolley will be towed on the
rails. These weights will fall under the influence of gravity. As the strip paper is passing the
electronic box consisting of the impact marker that leave a mark on the paper at time intervals of
0.2seconds as it slides across it. The speed can be calculated at each and every time interval.

According to Newton’s second law of motion:

𝒇 = 𝒎𝒂
where m is the trolley mass and f is the towing force.
𝒇
Solving for acceleration we have: 𝒂=
𝒎

𝟏
From the equations of motion we know that: 𝒔 = 𝒖𝒕 + 𝟐 𝒂𝒕𝟐
When the trolley starts from rest this means the initial velocity becomes zero (0) and the equation
becomes:
𝟏
𝒔 = 𝟐 𝒂𝒕𝟐

𝟏
Plotting s vs t 2 with assuming a straight line we get: 𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒅𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒕 = 𝟐 𝒂

With gradient of 𝑠 𝑣𝑠 𝑡 2 we can now find the acceleration: 𝒂 = 𝟐 × (𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒅𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒕)

(Elert, 1998)

OBJECTIVES
The main objective of this experiment is to verify that acceleration of a mass in the case of a
trolley is directly proportional to the applied force and inversely proportional to the mass of the
object. In this method that we are u sing we are going to make sure that the towing/ pulling force
is kept constant and only the mass of the trolley will be changed.

APPARATUS
1. Precision track with electronic box and trolley

1. Trolley 2. Precision 3. Electronic

track box

4. Trolley
Weights
(0.29kg)
5. Towing
Weights and
Weight
Hanger

6. Paper Clip
 8. Locking 7. Paper
Pin Strip

PROCEDURE
The paper strip was inserted between the roller and the marker and one end of it was clamped to
the trolley while the other end was clamped to the weight hanger. The weight hanger was
connected through the hole in the paper clip. The reference load was added to the weight hanger
in such a way that the trolley will move slowly at a constant speed maintaining the strip paper at
its maximum level of straightness throughout the trial. This weight was recorded in Table 1 of
each and every trial performed.

The mass of the trolley was also recorded into Table 1 of each and every trial performed. The
trolley was brought to the back of the track and was kept in position using the lock pin through
the holes in the precision track. The lock pin was removed and the trolley was allowed to move
with a constant speed on the precision track. The trolley was returned to the rest position and the
lock pin was again placed to keep the trolley in position.

The 5×0.29 kg (2.9N) weights was added to the trolley and 0.4N was added to the towing
weights on the weight hanger. This added 0.4N is sufficient to overcome the friction in the
moving parts of the setup. The marker was turned on by switching on the electronic box and at
the same time releasing the lock pin for the trolley to start moving. The trolley accelerated as the
weight hanger falls to the ground. As the paper strip was passing through the marker, the marks
was made on it at regular intervals of time (about 0.2seconds). The actual towing weight was
recorded in Table 1 and the same weight will be used in all the trials.

At the end of every trial the paper strip was removed and marked to identify points of reference.
The 0.29 kg weights were removed one by one and each trial was repeated following the
procedure above with the same acceleration weights. The last trial was made with no weight on
the trolley making all trials to be 6.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
TABLE 1
TRIAL 1 TRIAL 2 TRIAL 3 TRIAL 4 TRIAL 5 TRIAL 6

Trolley Mass, kg 0.932 0.932 0.932 0.932 0.932 0.932

Weights on trolley, kg 1.45 1.16 0.87 0.58 0.29 0.00
Total trolley mass 2.382 2.092 1.802 1.512 1.222 0.932
including weights, kg
Hanger mass for 0.0981 0.0981 0.0981 0.0981 0.0981 0.0981
constant speed, N
Added towing 0.80 080 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80
mass(above constant
speed), n

TABLE 2
Towing Force F (N)
Interval Linear Distance s, m Time, Time2,
Number t(s) t2(s)
TRIAL TRIAL TRIAL TRIAL TRIAL TRIAL
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.20 0.04
2 0.017 0.011 0.009 0.016 0.019 0.040 0.40 0.16
3 0.042 0.031 0.029 0.045 0.053 0.095 0.60 0.36
4 0.075 0.061 0.057 0.086 0.100 0.171 0.80 0.64
5 0.116 0.099 0.096 0.138 0.165 0.262 1.00 1.00
6 0.164 0.150 0.147 0.200 0.242 0.364 1.20 1.44
7 0.217 0.208 0.207 0.272 0.330 0.480 1.40 1.96
8 0.278 0.277 0.281 0.359 0.405 0.6055 1.60 2.56
9 0.341 0.353 0.362 0.460 0.495 1.80 3.24
10 0.404 0.452 0.452 0.560 0.616 2.00 4.00
11 0.469 0.545 0.555 2.20 4.84
12 0.533 0.640 0.658 2.40 5.76
13 0.596 0.741 2.60 6.76
14 0.658 0.832 2.80 7.84
15 0.717 3.00 9.00
16 0.770 3.20 10.24
17 0.822 3.40 11.56
RESULTS ANALYSIS
TRIAL 1

GRAPH OF DISTANCE (m) AGAINST TIME^2 (s^2)

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Distance (m)

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
t^2 (s^2)

TRIAL 2

GRAPH OF DISTANCE (m) AGAINST TIME^2 (s^2)

0.8
Distance (m)

0.6

0.4

0.2

-0.2

t^2 (s^2)
TRIAL 3

GRAPH OF DISTANCE (m) AGAINST TIME^2 (s^2)

0.8
Distance (m)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 1.44 1.96 2.56 3.24 4 4.84 5.76
-0.2
t^2 (s^2)

TRIAL 4

GRAPH OF DISTANCE (m) AGAINST TIME^2 (s^2)

0.8
Distance (m)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 1.44 1.96 2.56 3.24 4 10.2411.56
-0.2
t^2 (s^2)
TRIAL 5

GRAPH OF DISTANCE (m) AGAINST TIME^2 (s^2)

1.2

0.8
Distance (m)

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 1.44 1.96 2.56 3.24 4 6.76 7.84 9 10.2411.56
-0.2
t^2 (s^2)

TRIAL 6

GRAPH OF DISTANCE (m) AGAINST TIME^2 (s^2)

1.6
1.4
1.2
Distance (m)

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.04 0.16 0.36 0.64 1 1.44 1.96 2.56
-0.2
t^2 (s^2)
CALCULATIONS
TRIAL 1
y2 − y1 0.5m − 0.1m 0.4m
gradient = = 2 2
= = 0.1 m⁄s2
x2 − x1 4.42s − 0.5s 3.92s 2

a = 2 × (gradient) = 2 × 0.1 m⁄s 2 = 0.2 m⁄s2

f 0.80N + 0.0981N 0.8981N

a= = = = 0.3 N⁄kg
m 1.45kg + 0.932kg 2.382kg

TRIAL 2

y2 − y1 0.6m − 0.05m 0.55m

gradient = = = = 0.129 m⁄s 2
x2 − x1 4.42s 2 − 0.16s2 4.26s2

a = 2 × (gradient) = 2 × 0.129 m⁄s 2 = 0.258 m⁄s2 = 0.3 m⁄s 2

f 0.80N + 0.0981N 0.8981N

a= = = = 0.424 N⁄kg = 0.4 N⁄kg
m 1.16kg + 0.932kg 2.092kg

TRIAL 3

y2 − y1 0.5m − 0.1m 0.40m

gradient = = = = 0.109 m⁄s 2
x2 − x1 4.00s 2 − 0.36s2 3.64s2

a = 2 × (gradient) = 2 × 0.109 m⁄s 2 = 0.218 m⁄s2 = 0.2 m⁄s 2

f 0.80N + 0.0981N 0.8981N

a= = = = 0.498 N⁄kg = 0.5 N⁄kg
m 0.87kg + 0.932kg 1.802kg

TRIAL 4

y2 − y1 0.4m − 0.025m 0.375m

gradient = = = = 0.174 m⁄s2
x2 − x1 2.26s 2 − 2.16s2 2.16s 2

a = 2 × (gradient) = 2 × 0.174 m⁄s 2 = 0.348 m⁄s2 = 0.3 m⁄s 2

f 0.80N + 0.0981N 0.8981N

a= = = = 0.594 N⁄kg = 0.6 N⁄kg
m 0.58kg + 0.932kg 1.512kg
TRIAL 5
y2 − y1 0.4m − 0.1m 0.30m
gradient = = 2 2
= = 0.176 m⁄s 2
x2 − x1 1.96s − 0.26s 1.70s2

a = 2 × (gradient) = 2 × 0.176 m⁄s 2 = 0.352 m⁄s2 = 0.4 m⁄s 2

f 0.80N + 0.0981N 0.8981N

a= = = = 0.735 N⁄kg = 0.7 N⁄kg
m 0.29kg + 0.932kg 1.222kg

TRIAL 6
y2 − y1 0.4m − 0.05m 0.35m
gradient = = 2 2
= = 0.297 m⁄s 2
x2 − x1 1.22s − 0.04s 1.18s2

a = 2 × (gradient) = 2 × 0.297 m⁄s 2 = 0.594 m⁄s2 = 0.6 m⁄s 2

f 0.80N + 0.0981N 0.8981N

a= = = = 0.964 N⁄kg = 1.0 N⁄kg
m 0.00kg + 0.932kg 0.932kg

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
From the graphs of different trials above we can calculate the velocity at which the trolley was
moving along the rail path. From the equations of motion: 𝒗 = 𝒖 + 𝒂𝒕. (Jewett, 2004) Since the
trolley started from rest in all the trials this means that our initial velocity 𝑢 = 0 hence 𝒗 =
𝒔
𝒂𝒕.We also have the values of distance at regular time intervals therefor we can also use 𝒗 =
𝒕
where (s) is the distance in meters (v) is speed and (t) is time.
The graph of 𝒔 𝒗𝒔 𝒕𝟐 is often confused with that of 𝒔 𝒗𝒔 𝒕 but they are totally different. The
difference is in terms of their gradients. The gradient of 𝒔 𝒗𝒔 𝒕𝟐 gives us acceleration in
𝒂 in 𝒎⁄ 𝟐 while that of 𝒔 𝒗𝒔 𝒕 gives us the velocity v in 𝒎⁄𝒔.
𝒔
Acceleration like any other quantities can be measure in different ways. There are two newly
invented methods that can be used to measure acceleration where electrical sensors are used.
These are using:
The Piezoelectric Accelerometer – Among others the desirable features of the piezoelectric
(PE) accelerometer are accuracy, durability, large dynamic range, ease of installation, and long
life span.
Surface Micro-machined Accelerometers - In recent years, silicon micro-machined sensors
have made tremendous advances in terms of cost and level of on-chip integration for
measurements such as acceleration and/or vibration. These products provide the sensor and the
signal conditioning circuitry on chip, and require only a few external components. (LLC, 2016)

Acceleration is useful in many engineering fields for example:

In cars- when the driver press the accelerator in the car and it starts to increase in velocity. That
increase in velocity is acceleration. In cars the acceleration depends on how much load (Force) is
in the car which also involves the mass. The car with less load will accelerate faster that the car
with more load on it. (Engineering toolbox, 2016)
CONCLUSION
We learned that our prediction at the start of this experiment was proven to be correct. We
hypothesized that as the mass on the hanger increases, the air resistance, will decrease, thus the
acceleration of the object towards the center of the earth would be increased. The relationship
between the acceleration and mass is proportional. It shows that the acceleration is directly
proportional to the mass. This experiment proved our point, but many possible errors were
overlooked.
Throughout the experiment we have not considered the force of friction. Even though this
experiment has not included friction, it was present in between the cart’s wheels and along the
surface of the track. Even though it is treated as frictionless, friction is always present
everywhere, even if it is regarded as not present. Another force that we excluded was air
resistance. During the experiment the window in the classroom was open and wind was blowing,
changing the air resistance in the room. Even though the change in air resistance might be minor,
it is still another source of error that can lead to miscalculation. The last source of error we
overlooked is that the car was not always placed in the exact same place on the track. Since it
was not placed on the same spot every time, the friction and air resistance was not always exactly
the same but still close enough to prove Newton’s Second Law.
 References
Elert, G. (1998). The Physics HyperTextbook. Retrieved from http://physics.info/motion-equations/

Engineering toolbox. (2016). Retrieved from www.engineeringtoolbox.com/car-acceleration-

d_1309.html

Giancoli, D. C. (2008). Physics for Scientists and Engineers (4th Edition ed.). London: Pearson Education
Inc.

Jewett, S. (2004). Physics for Scientists and Engineers (6th Edition ed.). (P. a. InfoTrac, Ed.) California
state: California State Polytechnic University.

LLC, Q. (2016). Sensors Online. Retrieved from Sensor Magazine:

http://www.sensorsmag.com/sensors/acceleration-vibration/two-approaches-measuring-
acceleration-1072

View publication stats