Newtons Second Law (Predicting Acceleration)

JEMIE ROSE PAULINE P. JALEA

Experiment No. 8
NEWTONS SECOND LAW (Predicting Acceleration)

Jemie Rose Pauline P. Jalea

BSOT2-1
Group No. 1

VERONICA BERNAS
PHYSICS I

December 2016

Newtons Second Law (Predicting Acceleration)

JEMIE ROSE PAULINE P. JALEA
Abstract
We analyzed the motion of two objects in a frictionless environment that are connected
by a string. By recording changes in the motion as the tension of the string acts on each object
we use our results to visualize the relationship between force, mass and acceleration as stated by
Newtons Second Law of Motion.There were two parts to the experiment. For the first part, we
had to find the experimental mass using the slope of the velocity vs. time graph and plugging
those values into the acceleration vs. applied net force graph. Since the slope of the v vs. t graph
is the acceleration, it made sense to use those values and then take the regression line of that new
graph to find the experimental mass. We got the experimental mass to be 626.17g, with a percent
discrepancy of 12.06% when compared to the theoretical mass of 558.79g. For the second part of
the experiment, we had to calculate the experimental gravity and we did that by first running the
experiment and measuring the slope for both, when the cart goes towards the motion sensor and
when it goes away from it. We ran through this experiment six times to get accurate results. The
acceleration was slightly bigger when the cart was going towards the motion sensor, since we
had to give it a push every time. In the end, we got the experimental gravity to be 9.58 +/- 0.05
with a percent discrepancy of 2.3% when compared to the theoretical gravity of 9.84. Overall in
the experiment, there were a few experimental errors, especially in the first part of the
experiment. However, next time we will do the experiment more carefully and will make sure
that our numbers make sense. All in all, we understood what was asked of us and achieved our
objective of learning about Newtons Second Law and understood the relationship among all
variables in the equation. For example, from the calculations that we did, we figured out that
mass and acceleration are inversely proportional because as you increase mass, the acceleration
decrease and vice versa, if force is constant

Newtons Second Law (Predicting Acceleration)

JEMIE ROSE PAULINE P. JALEA

Introduction
In this experiment we explore the application of Newtons second law of motion and in
particular the relationship between force, mass and acceleration. We used a configuration in
thelab similar to an Atwood machine for the acquisition of our results which allowed us to
observe changes in motion that occurred when applying various forces. Changes in the motion of
an object are the result of changes in the forces acting on the object. Newtons first law of motion
in essence tells us that an object which has no force acting on it will also have zero acceleration
[1]. To change the motion of an object, a force needs to be applied to the object and naturally
when the motion of an object changes there is an associated acceleration.
Newtons second law of motion tells us that this acceleration resulting from a change in
motion is directly proportional to the net force acting on the object and it is inversely
proportional to the mass of the object . Mathematically this gives us, = and is stated as the
sum of the net forces are equal to the product of mass and acceleration

Newtons Second Law (Predicting Acceleration)

JEMIE ROSE PAULINE P. JALEA
Schematic Procedure:

Set Up

Obtaining Experimental Data

Set up the pulley, cart and a bumper at the end
Level the table until cart has no tendency to
drift
Put a loop and string for the release of trigger
Hang the masses.

Determine the distance x and

record your data
Determine the average Time for
the cart
Determine the total mass of the
system.

Computation

Compute for the experimental and Theoretical Values

using the gathered data
Compute for the Percentage Error.

Newtons Second Law (Predicting Acceleration)

JEMIE ROSE PAULINE P. JALEA
Results and Discussion
Hanging
Mass
Trial

Mtotal

Time (s)

aexperimental atheoretical

(g)

(cm/s2)

(g)

(cm/s2)

Percent
Error

Ave

1
10 g

725,15

3.81

3.81

3.68

3.77s

9.85

13.15

27.09%

20 g

735.15

2.38

2.38

2.31

2.36s

25.14

26.66

30 g

745.15

1.90

1.97

1.91

1.93s

37.58

39.46

4.76%

50kg

765.15

1.47

1.47

1.38

1.44

67.52

64.04

5.43%

60kg

775.15

1.31

1.31

1.37

1.33

79.15

75.86

4.34%

2
5.70%

d=

70

cm

Mass of cart=

200

Newtons Second Law (Predicting Acceleration)

JEMIE ROSE PAULINE P. JALEA
The results gathered were determined because of time and the set of masses given
which will help to predict the carts acceleration. The percentage error for the 50g mass is correct
which has 5.05% but the other two masses has high percentage higher than 15 %.

Conclusion
In this experiment, I learned that there should be lesser source of error because this
experiment involves acceleration which if you got wrong data the error would be high. In our
given data, the percentage error were all low percentage like the mass of 20kg which has 5.70 %,
mass 30kg which has 4.76%, 50kg which has 5.43% and 60kg which has 4.43% but the other
one got more than 15% which is the mass of 10kg it means there is a wrong procedure done or
wrong instruction given. This experiment requires time and also the masses for the acceleration
of the cart.
.

I.
References:
Abugao Jr. G. M. &Tibayan Jr. E. B. Discovering Physics with Xplorer GLX; Physics
Laboratory Manual in Mechanics & Energy

J Agassi, The ideological import of Newton, Vistas Astronom. 22 (4) (1978),

419-430.

Newtons Second Law (Predicting Acceleration)

JEMIE ROSE PAULINE P. JALEA

E J Aiton, The solution of the inverse-problem of central forces in Newton's

'Principia', Arch. Internat. Hist. Sci. 38 (121) (1988), 271-276.