Engineering/Physics Department

Physics 201 Fundamentals of Physics I Lab

FALL 2016

Name:
W#:
Section: Time: Date:
Lab partner

Lab # 5

I
Coefficient of Static Friction

Introduction:

If you place an object on an incline path with a non-smooth surface, the objected will
suffer a static frictional force (keep it from sliding down). A thorough analysis of the
situation shows that:

Σ Fy = 0  FN = mg cosθ
Σ Fx = 0  Ffr = mg sinθ

But
Ffr = μs FN = μs mg cosθ

μs = tanθ Eq. 1

μs is the coefficient of static friction

of the maximum static frictional force
when the object is about to move.
Procedure:

Data
Mblock = 125 g

1) Wooden surface 2)
M (g) θ(o) tanθ μs felt surface
125 19 0.34 0.34

625 17 0.31 0.31

1125 16 0.29 0.29

1625 13 0.23 0.23

Analysis and discussion

Conclusion:
As mass increases angle theta decreases and as a result coefficient of static
friction decreases. Coefficient of friction on felt surface is observed to be
less than that on wooden surface.
 II
Motion with Friction on an Inclined Plane and the
Coefficient of Sliding Friction

Objective:
To find out coefficient of static friction by considering Newton’s second law (F=ma) and
by comparing force body diagram of the setup.
To study effect of parameters such as m, M and angle θ on coefficient of kinetic friction

Introduction:
In class, we found that the system shown
can accelerate CCW (with sufficient mass m)
according to:

[mg  M .g sin    k Mg cos  ]

a Eq.1
[m  M ]

This equation could be solved for μk

[m  M . sin  ] g  [m  M ] a
k  Eq. 2
Mg cos 

In this lab, we will vary all the parameters in Eq 2. (mass m, M, angle θ) and see how that
impacts μk, we will also vary the surface of the mass M and verify the relation with μk

Procedure:
Data

I)
m = 250 g θ = 10o Mblock = 125 g wood surface
2
M (g) a1 ( cm/s ) a2 ( cm/s2 ) aavg ( m/s2 ) μk
125 1581.1 1469.3 15.252 -2.881647
375 459.6 363.6 4.116 -0.20945

II )
m = 250 g M = 125 g wood surface
θ (o ) a1 ( cm/s2 ) a2 ( cm/s2 ) aavg ( m/s2 ) μk
10 1444.0 1500.8 14.724 -2.717688
5 1496.7 1599.8 15.4825 -2.832644

III )
M = 125 g θ = 5o wood surface
2
m (g) a1 ( cm/s ) a2 ( cm/s2 ) aavg ( m/s2 ) μk
250 1418.6 1494.7 14.5665 -2.551452
150 1108.2 1098.3 11.0325 -1.366515

IV )
M = 125 g m=150 g θ = 5o
2
a1 ( cm/s ) a2 ( cm/s2 ) aavg ( m/s2 ) μk
Wood 1091.3 1042.1 10.667 -1.284234
Felt 1086.0 1069.7 10.7785 -1.309335
Analysis and discussion:
- Use Eq. 2 to calculate μk
- Show a couple of sample calculations

[m  Msin  ]g  [m  M]a
k 
Mg cos 
For m  250 g   10 o M block  125 g
[0.25  0.125sin100 ] �9.81  [0.25  0.125] �15.252
k 
0.125 �9.81cos100
k  2.88

For m  250 g M  125 g   5o

[m  Msin  ]g  [m  M]a
k 
Mg cos 
[0.25  0.125sin 50 ] �9.81  [0.25  0.125] �14.724
k 
0.125 �9.81cos 50
k  2.55

Conclusion
After calculation few unrealistic values of coefficient of kinetic friction are
observed. For felt, coefficient of kinetic friction is observed slightly less than
that for wood. If angle theta decreases, μk increases. If m decreases, μk
decreases. And if M increases, μk decreases.
 III
Uniform Circular Motion and the
Centripetal Force

Objective:
To verify relation between force and centripetal acceleration by graphical
method. In case of uniform circular motion tangential acceleration is zero, so
considering UCM, Establish relation between centripetal acceleration and
force.

Introduction:
Time taken by each mass to complete one revolution is noted and based on
that velocity is calculated using formula shown below,

v  rw
but ,
2p
Qw 
Tavg
2p r
\v 
Tavg

Velocity calculated by using above formula is then verified with velocity

from F= mv2/r formula at the end of experiment by plotting graph against F
vs v2/r.

Procedure:
Data

M = 209.3 g

m (g) r (cm) T1 (s) T2 (s) T3 (s) Tavg (s) v (cm/s)

25 16.5 3.772 3.437 3.73 3.65 43.97
35 16.9 4.58 4.98 4.98 4.85 52.65
45 17.6 5.42 5.5 5.32 5.41 60.93

v2 / r (m/s2) Fc = m g (N)

1.171763 0.2453

1.6404682 0.3434

2.1091734 0.4415

Analysis:
The relation mg = M v2/r can be made into a linear relation between the parameters (mg)
and (v2/r) as follows:
mg = M v2/r
y = slope . x
where y = F = mg and x = (v2/r).
Plot this linear relation and compare the slope to M
Conclusion

Mass from graph (slope = 0.209) is exactly equal to given mass value
(209g). Graphical representation and analytical calculations are perfectly in
agreement with each other.
 IV
Springs: The Spring Constant
and Hook’s law

Objective:
To evaluate spring constant by using graph of force vs displacement.
To verify Hook’s law (i.e. Force is directly propotional to displacement)

Introduction:
A weight is attached to spring and simultaneously readings of displacement
and load applied are noted. A graph of Force vs displacement is plotted and
slope of graph is measured by drawing a line passing through maximum
points. Slope of graph (F vs displ) is nothing but the spring stiffness.

Procedure

Data

Spring I)

m x F=mg
(g) (cm) (N)
150 30 1.4715
250 31 2.4525
350 33.4 3.4335
450 35.2 4.4145
550 37.3 5.3955
650 38.5 6.3765

Plot the relation between y = mg and x then extract the force constant k from the slope
Slope =F/x= 53.806 N/m
Hence spring constant = 53.806 N/m
Given K=50N/m

Analysis and discussion:

Conclusion
 From graph of Force vs displacement, it is clearly observed that force
and deflection are directly proportional to each other i.e. as force
increases deflection increases. Hence Hook’s law is verified
 Spring constant from graphical method(53.8N/m) is in close
agreement with given value (50N/m)