Report for Experiment #7

Work and Energy on an Air Track

Abstract

The purpose of this lab experiment is to prove the work-energy theorem by analyzing
velocity vs. average position graph of the motion of a glider along an air track with no friction,
once without a weight, and once with added weight. Using the knowledge of the relationship
between the dimensions of the air track, acceleration due to gravity, and trigonometry of an
incline, the value of gravity and its respective error can be solved for. Based on the results of this
experiment, the theorem was not verified, because the average gravities came to 11.48
±0.0682 sm2 and 0.6161 ±0.0077 sm2 , with respective percent errors being 17% and 93.7%
respectively. The actual gravity value, 9.81 sm2 , did not fall into either range of uncertainty, so
neither investigation proved the work-energy theorem.

Introduction

According to the work-energy theorem, all of the work done on a system is transformed
into kinetic energy. This being sad, the work is equal to the change in kinetic energy, which is
demonstrated by the equation F x ∆x = 12 mv f 2 − 12 mv i 2

Since the equation for kinetic energy is KE = 12 mv 2 , the change in kinetic energy (work) is
found by subtracting the initial kinetic energy from the final as demonstrated in the theorem
above. The work-energy theorem is also be represented in the motion of an object on an incline
plane, taking into consideration its angle relative to the horizontal. This is shown in another
derivation of the theorem, mgsinθ (x− xi ) = 12 mv 2 − 12 mv i 2 , where g is the acceleration due to
the force of gravity.

In this experiment, the work-energy theorem will be quantitatively proven though

investigations 1 and 2, which will be testing the relationship between average position and
velocity squared, and the acceleration due to gravity that causes a difference in slope of the v^2
vs. average position graph.

Investigation 1

To set up this experiment, an air track was used with a metal glider, and a PASCO motion
sensor was at the end of the track. The application used was PASCO Capstone. The air source
was then turned out to allow air to come out of the small holes on the track to enable the glider to
move along it without friction. Next, to level the air track, the screw at the end of it was adjusted
until it was level enough to allow the glider to stay in place when put in the middle. In order to
create an incline of the air track, a block was then placed underneath the screw, after its height
was measured using a ruler to get the value h. The value d is the distance between the screw at
the top of the air track to the motion sensor at the bottom, the tracks length, and its value and
respective uncertainty was given to be 1 ± 0.002m. At this point, with the block under the
screw at the beginning of the air track, it should be on an incline. (h and d shown in Figure 1)

h​ (meters) 0.036

d ​(meters) 1 ± 0.002

Investigation 1 – Figure 1
 Once this was all set up, the PASCO Capstone application was used in order to record the
relationship between time and the glider’s distance relative to the motion sensor. In Capstone, the
measurements for time and position were placed into the two columns as the selected quantities
that were to be measured by the program. On the graph, time was put onto the x axis, and
position was put corresponding to the y axis. Before proceeding with the experiment, in the
Properties tab under Hardware setup, the motion sensor was set to 20 Hz.

The glider was then held at the top of the incline touching the motion sensor, about 20 cm
from the reflector. Then, it was released at the same time that the “Record” button was selected
in the program. This was stopped after it had bounced many times, and at this point the table had
automatically inputted values. The raw data taken from Capstone was then set to the thousandth
place, copied, and pasted into Excel so that it could be analyzed. (Appendix, ​Figure 2​)

A position vs. time graph was then made using these values, and this is shown below in
Figure 2.

Investigation 1 – Figure 3
 Next, the graph was visually analyzed to observe when a collision occurred, which is
characterized by the points in which the position changes direction when it reaches the end of the
track after bouncing back. Two consecutive collisions were then chosen, coordinates (4, 1.319)
and (7.35, 1.313), and the data for position & time between these points were placed into a new
table (Figure 4). From there, velocity was calculated in a new column by using the equation

xn+1 −xn
v= ∆t . These values were squared to get v 2 values. Then, the error in v 2 was found using
the equation δv 2 = √8v 2 ( δx
∆t
), where the error in position, δx = is 0.0005 m, the smallest
increment on the ruler. ​**error in v squared was recalculated outside of lab​ Next, the average
xn+1 +xn
position between each point interval was calculated using the equation xavg = 2
. Using the
rules of propagation, the following equation was derived to find the error in average position:
2 2

δxavg = √(δx n+1 ) +(δxn )

which came out to be 0.0002501 m.
2

Investigation 1 – Figure 4
error in error in v 2
Time ∆t Position position δx xavg error in xavg δxavg δv 2
(s) x (m) V (m/s) v 2 (m/s)^2 (m) (m) (m) (m/s)^2
4 1.319 -0.74 0.5476 0.0005 1.301 0.000250125 0
4.05 1.282 -0.72 0.5184 0.0005 1.264 0.000250125 0.0001258
4.1 1.246 -0.62 0.3844 0.0005 1.231 0.000250125 0.000107
4.15 1.215 -0.62 0.3844 0.0005 1.199 0.000250125 0.0001057
4.2 1.184 -0.6 0.36 0.0005 1.169 0.000250125 0.0001011
4.25 1.154 -0.58 0.3364 0.0005 1.140 0.000250125 0.00009655
4.3 1.125 -0.56 0.3136 0.0005 1.111 0.000250125 0.00009213
4.35 1.097 -0.52 0.2704 0.0005 1.084 0.000250125 0.00008457
4.4 1.071 -0.5 0.25 0.0005 1.059 0.000250125 0.00008039
4.45 1.046 -0.48 0.2304 0.0005 1.034 0.000250125 0.00007631
4.5 1.022 -0.46 0.2116 0.0005 1.011 0.000250125 0.00007232
4.55 0.999 -0.44 0.1936 0.0005 0.988 0.000250125 0.00006841
4.6 0.977 -0.4 0.16 0.0005 0.967 0.000250125 0.00006152
4.65 0.957 -0.4 0.16 0.0005 0.947 0.000250125 0.00006086
4.7 0.937 -0.36 0.1296 0.0005 0.928 0.000250125 0.00005419
4.75 0.919 -0.34 0.1156 0.0005 0.9105 0.000250125 0.00005064
4.8 0.902 -0.32 0.1024 0.0005 0.894 0.000250125 0.00004716
4.85 0.886 -0.3 0.09 0.0005 0.8785 0.000250125 0.00004376
4.9 0.871 -0.26 0.0676 0.0005 0.8645 0.000250125 0.00003754
4.95 0.858 -0.26 0.0676 0.0005 0.8515 0.0002501 0.00003716
5 0.845 -0.24 0.0576 0.0005 0.839 0.0002501 0.00003396
5.05 0.833 -0.2 0.04 0.0005 0.828 0.0002501 0.00002802
5.1 0.823 -0.2 0.04 0.0005 0.818 0.0002501 0.00002774
5.15 0.813 -0.16 0.0256 0.0005 0.809 0.0002501 0.00002198
5.2 0.805 -0.14 0.0196 0.0005 0.8015 0.0002501 0.00001905
5.25 0.798 -0.12 0.0144 0.0005 0.795 0.0002501 0.00001617
5.3 0.792 -0.1 0.01 0.0005 0.7895 0.0002501 0.00001335
5.35 0.787 -0.08 0.0064 0.0005 0.785 0.0002501 0.00001058
5.4 0.783 -0.06 0.0036 0.0005 0.7815 0.0002501 0.000007861
5.45 0.78 -0.04 0.0016 0.0005 0.779 0.0002501 0.000005192
5.5 0.778 -0.02 0.0004 0.0005 0.7775 0.0002501 0.000002573
5.55 0.777 0 0 0.0005 0.777 0.0002501 0
5.6 0.777 0.02 0.0004 0.0005 0.7775 0.0002501 0.000002527
5.65 0.778 0.04 0.0016 0.0005 0.779 0.0002501 0.000005009
5.7 0.78 0.04 0.0016 0.0005 0.781 0.0002501 0.000004965
5.75 0.782 0.08 0.0064 0.0005 0.784 0.0002501 0.000009843
5.8 0.786 0.08 0.0064 0.0005 0.788 0.0002501 0.000009758
5.85 0.79 0.1 0.01 0.0005 0.7925 0.0002501 0.00001209
5.9 0.795 0.14 0.0196 0.0005 0.7985 0.0002501 0.00001679
5.95 0.802 0.14 0.0196 0.0005 0.8055 0.0002501 0.00001665
6 0.809 0.14 0.0196 0.0005 0.8125 0.0002501 0.00001651
6.05 0.816 0.18 0.0324 0.0005 0.8205 0.0002501 0.00002105
6.1 0.825 0.18 0.0324 0.0005 0.8295 0.0002501 0.00002088
6.15 0.834 0.22 0.0484 0.0005 0.8395 0.0002501 0.00002531
6.2 0.845 0.22 0.0484 0.0005 0.8505 0.0002501 0.00002510
6.25 0.856 0.24 0.0576 0.0005 0.862 0.0002501 0.00002717
6.3 0.868 0.26 0.0676 0.0005 0.8745 0.0002501 0.00002920
6.35 0.881 0.28 0.0784 0.0005 0.888 0.0002501 0.00003120
6.4 0.895 0.3 0.09 0.0005 0.9025 0.0002501 0.00003316
6.45 0.91 0.3 0.09 0.0005 0.9175 0.0002501 0.00003291
6.5 0.925 0.32 0.1024 0.0005 0.933 0.0002501 0.00003483
6.55 0.941 0.34 0.1156 0.0005 0.9495 0.0002501 0.00003672
6.6 0.958 0.38 0.1444 0.0005 0.9675 0.0002501 0.00004073
6.65 0.977 0.36 0.1296 0.0005 0.986 0.0002501 0.00003830
6.7 0.995 0.4 0.16 0.0005 1.005 0.0002501 0.00004224
6.75 1.015 0.4 0.16 0.0005 1.025 0.0002501 0.00004192
6.8 1.035 0.42 0.1764 0.0005 1.046 0.0002501 0.00004370
6.85 1.056 0.46 0.2116 0.0005 1.068 0.0002501 0.00004751
6.9 1.079 0.46 0.2116 0.0005 1.091 0.000250125 0.00004716
6.95 1.102 0.46 0.2116 0.0005 1.114 0.000250125 0.00004682
 7 1.125 0.5 0.25 0.0005 1.138 0.000250125 0.00005053
7.05 1.15 0.5 0.25 0.0005 1.163 0.000250125 0.00005017
7.1 1.175 0.52 0.2704 0.0005 1.188 0.000250125 0.00005181
7.15 1.201 0.52 0.2704 0.0005 1.214 0.000250125 0.00005145
7.2 1.227 0.56 0.3136 0.0005 1.241 0.000250125 0.00005502
7.25 1.255 0.42 0.1764 0.0005 1.266 0.000250125 0.00004098
7.3 1.276 0.74 0.5476 0.0005 1.295 0.000250125 0.000000008466
The following plot of velocity squared vs. average position was then made (Figure 5), with 2
series representing the values when the glider was moving toward and away from the ​end of the
air track. This data does not represent the motion of the glider toward/away from the
motion sensor, it represents the motion of the glider toward/away from the end of the
track. ​V squared was plotted instead of V, because v squared does no require the direction of the
motion to be taken into account (no negative values).

The slopes of these values did not have the same slope, because when the glider was moving
down the incline, the speed is greater due to the force of gravity acting in the downward
direction.

Investigation 1 –Figure 5
The equation for the work-energy theorem can be expressed using the form
v 2 = 2gsinθ(x − x0 ) on the incline plane, to the v 2 = B x + C form where B = 2gsinθ , the slope
of the line of best fit. Rearranging the equation, g, the acceleration due to gravity, was found to
B
be g = 2sinθ
. This is critical to the experiment because as was previously mentioned, the incline
causes gravity to have an effect on the speed of the glider. The angle θ was calculated by using
h 0.36
the values for d and h measured earlier in the investigation: sinθ = d
= 1
, getting 2.06 degrees
for θ, the angle of the incline which what was used in the equation. B is the slope of the line of
best fit on the graph, which was calculated for each branch of the graph using the IPL best fit
calculator to get 2 slope values, in addition to errors for the slope:

IPL slope toward bottom of incline: B= ​0.9616​ ± ​0​.​0002879

IPL slope away from bottom of incline: B= ​0.6886​ ± ​0​.​0001864

The two experimental values for g were calculated for each line:

B (0.9616) m
Toward the bottom of the incline​: g = 2sinθ
= 2sin(2.06)
= 13.38 s2

B (0.6886)
Away from the bottom of the incline: g = 2sinθ
= 2sin(2.06)
= 9.578 sm2

The averages of these 2 calculated values for g was found using the equation
g (toward)+g(away)
g avg = 2
= 11.48 sm2 . The uncertainty value for g was calculated based on the

√
2
(δg towards ) +(δg away )
2

equation for the average g, to obtain δ g avg = 2 . Solving this equation requires
the values of δ g , which was calculated for both series in the v^2 vs. position graph using the

√( δBB )
g 2 2
propagation of g = B
2sinθ
= 12 ( sinθ
B
) , which comes out to be δ g = 2
+ ( δsinθ
sinθ ) . The values

for B, δB , and g have already been established for each direction, so using the definition of sin,
h
sinθ = d
, the propagated error would be

√( δh 2 2
δsinθ
sinθ
= h ) + ( δdd ) , making the uncertainty of average g equal to the following:

√( δhh ) √( δhh ) √( 0.0005

2 2 2 2 2 2
δsinθ = sinθ + ( δdd ) = sinθ + ( δdd ) = sin⁡(2.06) 0.036 )
+ ( 0.002
1 ) = 0.0005044
Toward the bottom of the incline​:

√( δB 2
√(
g 2 0.0002879 2 2
δg = 2 B ) + ( δsinθ
sinθ )
= 13.38
2 0.9616 ) + ( 0.0005044
0.03540 )
= 0.0953 sm2

Away from the bottom of the incline​:

√( δB 2
√(
g 2 0.0001864 2 2
δg = 2 B ) + ( δsinθ
sinθ )
= 9.578
2 0.6886 ) + ( 0.0005044
0.03540 )
= 0.0682 sm2

√
2
(δg towards ) +(δg away )
2

= √(0.0953) 2+(0.0682) = 0.0586 sm2 .

2 2
δ g avg = 2

Therefore, the average value for g (with uncertainty) = 11.48 ± 0.0682 sm2 .

The actual value for g, 9.81 sm2 , does not fall into the range of uncertainty, because 11.48-0.0682
= 11.41 sm2 , which is still greater than 9.81 sm2 , meaning that the work-energy theorem was not
verified.

The percent error of this experimentally determined average value came out to be
|9.81−(11.48)|
% dif f erence = 9.81 * 100 = 17%.
The work-energy theorem was not verified by this experiment because of the relatively large
percent error value, and the experimental g does not fall into the uncertainty range.

The velocity squared vs. position plot showed lines of best fit that had corresponding slopes
that caused the experimental values of g to be calculated. The g for the glider moving away from
the bottom of the incline, 9.578 ± 0.0682 sm2 , was much closer to 9.81 sm2 , but still does not fall
into the uncertain range. The g for the glider moving towards the bottom of the incline made the
data much further from the actual value, with g being 13.38 ± 0.0953 sm2 . This could be attributed
to experimental error possibly due to air resistance or an uneven AC draft in the room.

Investigation 2
 For the second investigation in this experiment, it was conducted using a setup similar to that
of Investigation 1, except this time, a piece of paper tape is clipped to the front of the glider, with
a weight clipped to the other end of the tape and hanging off the edge of the air track that will
pull the glider down the incline upon release, this time 40 cm from the motion sensor.

The raw data for position vs. time is also located in the Appendix of this report (Figure 6), and
Figure 7 below shows the position vs. time plot.

Investigation 2 – Figure 7

Once this was done, two points of collision were then again chosen, (2.55, 1.11) and (4.3, 1.1).
The same data analysis and calculations were done to the data between these coordinates, and is
shown in the table below.
Investigation 2 – Figure 8

error in error in v 2
Time ∆t Position x v2 error in position xavg δv 2
(s) (m) V (m/s) (m/s)^2 δx (m) xavg (m) δxavg (m) (m/s)^2
2.6 1.112 -0.06 0.0036 0.0005 1.1105 0.00025 0.0000163
2.65 1.109 -0.08 0.0064 0.0005 1.107 0.00025 0.0000214
2.7 1.105 0.12 0.0144 0.0005 1.108 0.00025 0.0000314
2.75 1.111 0.02 0.0004 0.0005 1.1115 0.00025 0.00000515
2.8 1.112 0.02 0.0004 0.0005 1.1125 0.00025 0.00000505
2.85 1.113 -0.02 0.0004 0.0005 1.1125 0.00025 0.00000496
2.9 1.112 0.02 0.0004 0.0005 1.1125 0.00025 0.00000488
2.95 1.113 -0.1 0.01 0.0005 1.1105 0.00025 0.000024
3 1.108 0.06 0.0036 0.0005 1.1095 0.00025 0.0000141
3.05 1.111 -0.14 0.0196 0.0005 1.1075 0.00025 0.0000325
3.1 1.104 -0.46 0.2116 0.0005 1.0925 0.00025 0.0001
3.15 1.081 -0.26 0.0676 0.0005 1.0745 0.00025 0.0000584
3.2 1.068 -0.28 0.0784 0.0005 1.061 0.00025 0.0000619
3.25 1.054 -0.24 0.0576 0.0005 1.048 0.00025 0.0000522
3.3 1.042 -0.18 0.0324 0.0005 1.0375 0.00025 0.0000386
3.35 1.033 -0.12 0.0144 0.0005 1.03 0.00025 0.0000253
3.4 1.027 -0.1 0.01 0.0005 1.0245 0.00025 0.0000208
3.45 1.022 -0.04 0.0016 0.0005 1.021 0.00025 0.0000082
3.5 1.02 0 0 0.0005 1.02 0.00025 0
3.55 1.02 0.04 0.0016 0.0005 1.021 0.00025 0.00000797
3.6 1.022 0.04 0.0016 0.0005 1.023 0.00025 0.00000786
3.65 1.024 0.08 0.0064 0.0005 1.026 0.00025 0.0000155
3.7 1.028 0.1 0.01 0.0005 1.0305 0.00025 0.0000191
3.75 1.033 0.12 0.0144 0.0005 1.036 0.00025 0.0000226
3.8 1.039 0.14 0.0196 0.0005 1.0425 0.00025 0.0000261
3.85 1.046 0.16 0.0256 0.0005 1.05 0.00025 0.0000294
3.9 1.054 0.2 0.04 0.0005 1.059 0.00025 0.0000363
3.95 1.064 0.2 0.04 0.0005 1.069 0.00025 0.0000358
4 1.074 0.24 0.0576 0.0005 1.08 0.00025 0.0000424
4.05 1.086 0.22 0.0484 0.0005 1.0915 0.00025 0.0000384
4.1 1.097 0.12 0.0144 0.0005 1.1 0.00025 0.0000207
0.000006.8
4.15 1.103 0.04 0.0016 0.0005 1.104 0.00025 2

Investigation 2 – Figure 9
 **​NOTE:

This was done wrong in the lab—raw data sheet shows graph with points plotted including the
coordinates, this shows graph with only points between chosen collision coordinates

The values for position and velocity squared, were again placed onto a plot, and the slopes of the
series were calculated using the IPL line of best fit again.

IPL slope toward bottom of incline: B= -​0.1100​ ± ​0​.​0002419

IPL slope away from bottom of incline: B= ​0.2879​ ± ​0​.​0006952

Next, rewriting the work-energy theorem to take into account the mass of the hanging weight,
2m′g
the equation would come from the derivation v 2 = m+m′
(x − x0 ) , where m is the mass of the
glider, and m’ is the mass of the hanging weight. If this was to be re-written in y = Bx + C form
 B(m+m′)
such as in Investigation 1, the equation would become g = 2m′
, with B being the slope of the
line of best fit for each series (motion toward & away bottom of incline). The masses were
measured to be m = 372.7 g = 0.3727 kg, and m’= 29g = 0.029 kg.

Using all these values, the two experimental values for g were calculated for each line:

B(m+m′) −0.1100 (0.3727+0.029) m

Toward the bottom of the incline​: g= 2m′
= 2(0.029)
=− 0.7618 s2

B(m+m′) 0.2879 (0.3727+0.029)

Away from the bottom of the incline: g= 2m′
= 2(0.029)
= 1.994 sm2

Again, the average g values for the second investigation was calculated to be:
g (toward)+g(away)
g avg = 2
= 0.6161 sm2 . To find the error of the average g, δ g avg , the same equation

√
2
(δg towards ) +(δg away )
2

was used as in Investigation 1, δ g avg = 2 , so the errors of g for towards and

away from the end of the air track are:

Toward the bottom of the incline​:

√( δB 2
√(
g 2 .0002419 2 2
δg = 2 B ) + ( δsinθ
sinθ )
= −0.7618
2 −.11 ) + ( 0.0005044
0.03540 )
= 0.00549 sm2

Away from the bottom of the incline​:

√( δB 2
√(
g 2 .0006952 2 2
δg = 2 B ) + ( δsinθ
sinθ )
= 1.994
2 .2879 ) + ( 0.0005044
0.03540 )
= 0.0144 sm2

These values were used to solve for error in average g just like in Investigation 1:

√
2
(δg towards ) +(δg away )
2

= √
(0.00549)2 +(0.0144)2
δ g avg = 2 2
= 0.0077 sm2 .

Since the known value for g is 9.81 sm2 , the percent error of this experimentally determined
average value came out to be
|9.81−0.6161|
% dif f erence = 9.81 * 100 = 93.7% error.
Based on this characterization, the work-energy theorem was not verified, suggesting a very
significant source of experimental error. Referring back to Figure 9, it appears that the data trend
appears constant and in the expected pattern (towards the end of the track having a larger slope).
However, the outliers of each series seem to skew the data points towards v^2 values of zero at
the positions furthest from the motion sensor on the x axis. These outliers are what caused the
unusually small values for B, which in turn yielded inaccurate results for g that certainly do not
fall into the range of uncertainty (; this did not prove the work-energy theorem.

A possible reason that this occurred is due to the weight at the end of the paper tape
connected to the glider – it is possible that when the weight was released, it bounced and fell
back down, causing the glider to stay at the end of the air track for longer than if this had not
happened.

The value for C, the y-intercept in the y= Bx+ C form, was not analyzed during this
investigation, however, C reflects the position of the glider after bouncing back from the end of
the track, so it can be used to make sure the data is consistent at each point, if the slope was
within the range of uncertainty.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it cannot be said that this experiment proved the validity of the work-energy
theorem, because the value for g (acceleration due to the downward force of gravity) was not
correctly obtained using the equation that relates the average slope B (motion both towards and
away from the end of the air track) with the angle of the incline causing gravity to act.

The first investigation’s calculated average g had a value of 11.48 ± 0.0682 sm2 , a 17% error
m
in comparison to the expected value, 9.81 s2
. The g did not fall into the range of uncertainty, so
the theorem was not mathematically verified. The second part of the experiment incorporated a
hanging weight, and yielded an average g value of 0.6161 ±0.0077 sm2 and a 93.7% error
respectively. This did not prove the work-energy theorem either, so it is apparent that there was a
prominent experimental skewing the slope due to peculiarly small values for velocity squared at
points furthest from the motion sensor, closest to the end of the track. The pattern was very much
expected in the distances closest to the motion sensor, so it could be estimated that such a large
percent error was potentially due to the hanging weight bouncing and pulling back down on the
glider a second time. This could be improved in the future by using a less flexible piece of paper
tape that would prevent the tape from bouncing up and skewing the data.

Questions

1. The accuracy of the motion sensor decreases when the glider’s velocity increases in
magnitude. This is due to the ultrasound pulse that is emitted behind the glider, which is
required to chase after the glider, making this harder when it is further away.
2. In the setup of Investigation 1, friction acts as a nonconservative force in the opposite
direction of the glider’s motion in both upward and downward motion. This being said, it
decreases the total energy of the glider.
3.

If m’ is approaching infinity, the acceleration of the glider can be derived from the equation
2m′g v 2 (m+m′) ′
v 2 = m+m ′ (x − x0 ) to get g = 2m(x−x )
= g av ( m+m
2m′
) . Using this derivation, the value of g as m’
0

approaches infinity can be written as: g av ( m

2m′
+ 1
2 )= g av
2 .
4. In Investigation 2, the change in potential energy between the times of release and
collision is based on gravity’s influence on the mass of the hanging weight, so the
equation for potential energy, ∆P E = mg∆h could be used, which is equal to
∆P E = (0.3727 (9.81) (1.101 − 1.112) =− 0.0402J . This value is negative because as time goes
on, the glider’s kinetic energy increases since the velocity is increasing due to the
acceleration of the force of gravity. This relationship takes place due to the law of
conservation of energy.

Acknowledgements
References
[1] J.M. Mínguez, The Work–Energy Theorem and the First Law of Thermodynamics, Sage
Journals, 33 77-82.

[2] N.U. IPL Staff, Straight Line Fit, Northeastern University, Introductory Physics Laboratory,
2019.

Appendix

Investigation 1 – (Figure 2)
Positio Time
n (m) (s)
0.135 0
0.137 0.05
0.138 0.1
0.138 0.15
0.138 0.2
0.138 0.25
0.138 0.3
0.138 0.35
0.138 0.4
0.138 0.45
0.138 0.5
0.138 0.55
0.138 0.6
0.138 0.65
0.138 0.7
0.138 0.75
0.138 0.8
0.138 0.85
0.138 0.9
0.138 0.95
0.138 1
0.138 1.05
0.138 1.1
0.138 1.15
0.138 1.2
0.137 1.25
0.137 1.3
0.137 1.35
0.138 1.4
0.139 1.45
0.142 1.5
0.143 1.55
0.146 1.6
0.148 1.65
0.151 1.7
0.158 1.75
0.159 1.8
0.157 1.85
0.166 1.9
0.18 1.95
0.191 2
0.201 2.05
0.214 2.1
0.224 2.15
0.239 2.2
0.252 2.25
0.268 2.3
0.283 2.35
0.302 2.4
0.321 2.45
0.342 2.5
0.363 2.55
0.385 2.6
0.409 2.65
0.431 2.7
0.455 2.75
0.48 2.8
0.509 2.85
0.535 2.9
0.563 2.95
0.592 3
0.621 3.05
0.651 3.1
0.682 3.15
0.714 3.2
0.747 3.25
0.78 3.3
0.814 3.35
 0.85 3.4
0.886 3.45
0.922 3.5
0.96 3.55
0.998 3.6
1.037 3.65
1.077 3.7
1.118 3.75
1.159 3.8
1.201 3.85
1.244 3.9
1.286 3.95
1.319 4
1.282 4.05
1.246 4.1
1.215 4.15
1.184 4.2
1.154 4.25
1.125 4.3
1.097 4.35
1.071 4.4
1.046 4.45
1.022 4.5
0.999 4.55
0.977 4.6
0.957 4.65
0.937 4.7
0.919 4.75
0.902 4.8
0.886 4.85
0.871 4.9
0.858 4.95
0.845 5
0.833 5.05
0.823 5.1
0.813 5.15
0.805 5.2
0.798 5.25
0.792 5.3
0.787 5.35
0.783 5.4
 0.78 5.45
0.778 5.5
0.777 5.55
0.777 5.6
0.778 5.65
0.78 5.7
0.782 5.75
0.786 5.8
0.79 5.85
0.795 5.9
0.802 5.95
0.809 6
0.816 6.05
0.825 6.1
0.834 6.15
0.845 6.2
0.856 6.25
0.868 6.3
0.881 6.35
0.895 6.4
0.91 6.45
0.925 6.5
0.941 6.55
0.958 6.6
0.977 6.65
0.995 6.7
1.015 6.75
1.035 6.8
1.056 6.85
1.079 6.9
1.102 6.95
1.125 7
1.15 7.05
1.175 7.1
1.201 7.15
1.227 7.2
1.255 7.25
1.276 7.3
1.313 7.35
1.298 7.4
1.279 7.45
1.256 7.5
1.239 7.55
1.221 7.6
1.204 7.65
1.188 7.7
1.174 7.75
1.16 7.8
1.148 7.85
1.137 7.9
1.127 7.95
1.119 8
1.111 8.05
1.104 8.1
1.096 8.15
1.094 8.2
1.091 8.25
1.089 8.3
1.087 8.35
1.087 8.4
1.088 8.45
1.089 8.5
1.091 8.55
1.093 8.6
1.097 8.65
1.101 8.7
1.107 8.75
1.113 8.8
1.12 8.85
1.127 8.9
1.135 8.95
1.145 9
1.155 9.05
1.166 9.1
1.177 9.15
1.189 9.2
1.202 9.25
1.216 9.3
1.231 9.35
1.242 9.4
1.262 9.45
1.276 9.5
1.294 9.55
1.314 9.6
1.294 9.65
1.281 9.7
1.275 9.75
1.263 9.8
1.254 9.85
1.248 9.9
1.241 9.95
1.236 10
1.231 10.05
1.228 10.1
1.226 10.15
1.224 10.2
1.224 10.25
1.225 10.3
1.226 10.35
1.229 10.4
1.231 10.45
1.235 10.5
1.24 10.55
1.245 10.6
1.251 10.65
1.259 10.7
1.266 10.75
1.271 10.8
1.277 10.85
1.294 10.9
1.302 10.95
1.311 11
1.283 11.05
1.291 11.1
1.287 11.15
1.282 11.2
1.27 11.25
1.272 11.3
1.273 11.35
1.263 11.4
1.27 11.45
1.269 11.5
1.273 11.55
1.271 11.6
1.275 11.65
1.277 11.7
1.286 11.75
1.284 11.8
1.297 11.85
1.302 11.9
1.306 11.95
1.303 12
1.298 12.05
1.294 12.1
1.295 12.15
1.287 12.2
1.279 12.25
1.29 12.3
1.292 12.35
1.294 12.4
1.293 12.45
1.305 12.5
1.303 12.55
1.296 12.6
1.303 12.65
1.292 12.7
1.303 12.75
1.298 12.8
1.288 12.85
1.296 12.9
1.301 12.95
1.303 13
1.299 13.05
1.303 13.1
1.304 13.15
1.293 13.2
1.302 13.25
1.304 13.3
1.297 13.35
1.308 13.4
1.305 13.45
1.305 13.5
1.309 13.55
1.293 13.6
1.308 13.65
1.309 13.7
1.287 13.75
1.301 13.8
1.305 13.85
1.308 13.9
Investigation 2 – Figure 6

Time (s) Position (m)

0 0.15
0.05 0.149
0.1 0.148
0.15 0.148
0.2 0.148
0.25 0.146
0.3 0.146
0.35 0.145
0.4 0.145
0.45 0.149
0.5 0.148
0.55 0.148
0.6 0.146
0.65 0.152
0.7 0.159
0.75 0.158
0.8 0.143
0.85 0.135
0.9 0.139
0.95 0.143
1 0.15
1.05 0.159
1.1 0.177
1.15 0.199
1.2 0.218
1.25 0.236
1.3 0.253
1.35 0.274
 1.4 0.294
1.45 0.319
1.5 0.345
1.55 0.373
1.6 0.401
1.65 0.43
1.7 0.46
1.75 0.492
1.8 0.524
1.85 0.557
1.9 0.594
1.95 0.63
2 0.666
2.05 0.704
2.1 0.742
2.15 0.782
2.2 0.823
2.25 0.865
2.3 0.907
2.35 0.951
2.4 0.996
2.45 1.042
2.5 1.09
2.55 1.112
2.6 1.112
2.65 1.109
2.7 1.105
2.75 1.111
2.8 1.112
2.85 1.113
2.9 1.112
2.95 1.113
3 1.108
3.05 1.111
3.1 1.104
3.15 1.081
3.2 1.068
3.25 1.054
3.3 1.042
3.35 1.033
3.4 1.027
3.45 1.022
3.5 1.02
3.55 1.02
3.6 1.022
3.65 1.024
3.7 1.028
3.75 1.033
3.8 1.039
3.85 1.046
3.9 1.054
3.95 1.064
4 1.074
4.05 1.086
4.1 1.097
4.15 1.103
4.2 1.105
4.25 1.105
4.3 1.112
4.35 1.109
4.4 1.174
4.45 1.194
4.5 1.225
4.55 1.113
4.6 1.116
4.65 1.105
4.7 1.287
4.75 1.283
4.8 1.1
4.85 1.251
4.9 1.113
4.95 1.111
5 1.2
5.05 1.2
5.1 1.119
5.15 1.116
5.2 1.113
5.25 1.109
5.3 1.112
5.35 1.112
5.4 1.111
5.45 1.193
 5.5 1.205
5.55 1.12
5.6 1.116
5.65 1.108
5.7 1.231
5.75 1.25
5.8 1.116
5.85 1.116
5.9 1.116
5.95 1.113
6 1.117
6.05 1.111
6.1 1.116
6.15 1.115
6.2 1.117
6.25 1.108
6.3 1.116
6.35 1.116
6.4 1.113
6.45 1.116
6.5 1.116
6.55 1.119
6.6 1.119
6.65 1.108
6.7 1.248
6.75 1.119
6.8 1.107
6.85 1.251
6.9 1.108
6.95 1.123
7 1.116
7.05 1.104
7.1 1.256
7.15 1.115
7.2 1.108
7.25 1.259
7.3 1.112
7.35 1.107
7.4 1.268
7.45 1.112
7.5 1.119
7.55 1.112
7.6 1.131
7.65 1.099
7.7 1.278
7.75 1.106
7.8 1.28
7.85 1.115
7.9 1.253
7.95 1.119
8 1.116
8.05 1.112