Abstract This experiment aimed at measuring the acceleration due to gravity of a cart moving freely on an inclined slope using

the kinematic equations. These values were found to be different when the cart had different initial velocities. The final results were g = 9.6 0.2 ms-2 when initial velocity was zero, and g = 8.70 0.08 ms-2 for the same cart at non-zero initial velocities. These values showed a deviation of 2.1 % and 11.3% respectively from the known literature value of 9.81 ms-2, and this could be due to certain experimental errors. Introduction Galileo proposed that freely falling objects will always move with a constant acceleration as no forces are acting on them, and thats the acceleration due to gravity, which Galileo hypothesized was constant all over the earth. To test his hypothesis, Galileo performed experiments with freely falling objects, but because their motion was too fast to be analysed, he used inclined planes instead. Inclined planes offer a good alternative for free fall experiments, because the acceleration is lowered on inclines and using smooth inclines that produce negligible friction, provides more accuracy. Kinematics is a branch of mechanics that ignores any forces acting on a moving object, while analyzing its motion. Galileo found that the acceleration of an isolated object freely moving down a slope was constant. This acceleration is called acceleration due to gravity, and was found to have a value of 9.81 m s-2 on the earth surface. Here, the same experiment was performed and the acceleration of a moving cart was determined. When released from rest, the motion of the cart at different distances traveled was followed. Also, the motion of the same cart was analyzed but with a non-zero initial velocity. From the data collected, and the kinematic equations below, the value of the acceleration due to gravity was calculated.

The following equations were used: 1) v = v0 + at , 2) s = (v0+vf) t , 3) s = v0t + at2 , 4) v2-v02 = 2as where, v, v0, s, a and t represent the final velocity, initial velocity, the displacement, acceleration and the time, respectively. Since g cannot be measured directly because theres no motion in its downward direction, its horizontal component a, could be measured and the equation below was used to calculate g from the value of a found using data on height and length of ramp, data obtained while cart was moving and the kinematic equations, 5) a = g sin , where is the angle of inclination (the angle made by the incline with the horizontal). Method: Please refer to lab manual. Data and analysis Because isolated objects moving freely with no applied force have a constant acceleration the kinematic equations were used here to find acceleration of a cart moving on an incline, and then calculating the gravitational acceleration of the cart. In exercise 1 of this lab, the acceleration of a cart initially at rest (V0= 0 m/s) was calculated. Figure 1 shows the straight line plot obtained by plotting the distance moved by the cart against the square of the time taken to travel that distance. This shows a strong, linear and a positive relationship between distance traveled and time taken. Equation 3(s = v0t + at2) was used to manipulate the graph. When V0 = 0 m/s, the equation takes the form of a straight line equation with slope = a. Using the regression analysis feature in Excel the slope along with its uncertainty value were determined. To calculate a, a = 2 x slope = 2 x 28.4 0.6 = 56.8 1.2 cm s-2 = 0.57 0.01 m s-2 In order to calculate the acceleration of gravity ( g) of the moving cart, measurements of the length of the incline and its height were used to calculate the angle of inclination ,

tan = (Opposite/adjacent) = Height/length of incline =

7.15 0.07 = tan 1 = 3.40 0.02 120.50 0.05

7.15 0.07 120.50 0.04

Now g the downward acceleration of the cart was computed using Equation 5,
2 a = g sin g = sin = sin(3.4) 0.02 = 9.6 0.2ms

0.57 0.01

% Deviation of the calculated g value from the literature value was then found using the equation, % deviation =
calculated literature literature 100 .

Table1. Results showing analysis of the motion of the cart in Exercise 1

Slope 28.4 0.6 Height of ramp/cm 7.15 0.07 Length of ramp/cm 120.5 0.05 Angle of inclination 3.40 0.02 a/ m s-2 0.57 0.01 g/ m s -2 9.6 0.2 %Deviation 2.1%

For the 2nd part of the experiment, the motion started with a non-zero initial velocity. Two clocks/gates were placed on different positions on the slope and were used to measure the time taken for the length of the cart (the distance between the 2 points where the photocell gates engage) to travel through each clock. From this data, the initial velocity (V0) was calculated using the time recorded by the clock at the top of slope (G1), while the final velocity (Vf) was calculated using the time recorded by the second photocell gate (G2), placed further down the slope. The velocities were calculated for 5 different separations between the two photocell gates. The difference of the squares of the average final and initial velocities was then calculated for each gate separation in order to plot Figure 2, that shows a linear, strong and positive relationship between (V2f V20) and the gate separation. Equation 4 (v2-v02= 2as) was used to describe the graph. As shown by the equation, the slope = 2a, and therefore to calculate the acceleration of the cart, slope = 2a a = slope/2 = (103.10.9)/2 = 51.6 0.5 cms-2 = 0.516 0.005 m s -2 The acceleration due to gravity, g, on the cart was calculated the same as it was for Part 1,

2 a = g sin g = sin = sin(3.4) 0.02 = 8.70 0.08ms .

0.516 0.005

% Deviation of the calculated g value from the literature value was then calculated as before. The summarized results of Exercise 2 are shown in table 2 below. Table 2. Results showing analysis of the motion of the cart whose V0 was a non-zero value Slope 103.1 0.9
Height of ramp/cm 7.15 0.07 Length of ramp/cm 120.5 0.05 Angle of inclination 3.40 0.02

a/ m s-2 0.516 0.005

g/ m s -2 8.70 0.08

%Deviation 11.3%

Y Error bars for Figure .1, and the error bars for Figure 2. were not shown on the graphs as they were too small to be visible. The associated uncertainties are shown on the data sheet in appendix 2. Appendix 1 shows sample error/uncertainty calculations for the measurements made. In order to reduce the measuring errors such as parallax error, during the experiment each measurement of the position of the photocell gates was repeated 5 times making it more reliable. Also, time measurements for the same distance were repeated five times and the average was computed, and used for calculations of t2 at each distance, S, to plot the graph, and was used for the calculations of velocity values in the 2nd part (Exercise 2). Regarding accuracy, the g value obtained from the first exercise was found to be 98% accuarate within the limits of experimental accuracy, while the 2nd value of g from the 2nd exercise was 89% accurate (11.3% deviation). These differences in accuracy could be due to certain experimental errors that induced more external influences on the carts motion in part 2 than it did for the first part , and are the major influence is discussed below. Discussion and conclusion Therefore from the experiment, two different g value were found for the moving cart, for the zero initial velocity, g = 9.6 0.2 ms-2 and when initial velocity was non-zero, g = 8.70 0.08 ms-2. According to the observation that isolated objects should have a constant acceleration the

two g values were expected to be equal. And since all isolated freely moving objects accelerate by the same amount towards the earth the values found were expected to be equal to the value of this constant acceleration which has a value of 9.81 ms-2. The difference in values from each other, and from the literature g value might have arose due to certain experimental errors. Friction was the most important source of error for this experiment . Friction was present between the slope and the wheels of the cart. As the cart started moving, the frictional force acting on it in the opposite direction increased, and thus reducing its acceleration. Therefore, this was the reason that both g values obtained from this experiment had a lower magnitude than the literature value of 9.81 m/s2. The difference in the two values obtained from the experiment performed could also be attributed to the frictional force. For the cart that started with initial velocity of 0 m/s2, initially when it was at rest the frictional force thats opposing its motion was negligible and as the cart started moving the frictional force increased as the velocity of the cart increased. This caused the car to accelerate to a lower value than would have if friction was absent. This frictional force was greater for the cart when its initial velocity wasnt zero. Because the car initially was at motion there was already a frictional force acting on it in the opposite direction, and as its velocity increased when moving down the slope the friction also increased till a constant acceleration was reached. Therefore, the friction that was acting on the cart with V0=0 was less than that acting on the same cart but with V0 0, and this greater friction caused a lower acceleration and hence a lower g value of 8.70 0.08 ms-2, thats 9.4 % lower than the value of g of the other cart (V0=0) Friction could have been reduced if the experiment was performed using a smoother slope thats polished or greased as oil greatly reduces friction. Also, if evacuated tubes were used to perform the experiment air resistance influences would be negligible on the motion of the moving cart.

In conclusion, the acceleration due to gravity obtained from the experimental analysis was different from the expected value of 9.81 ms-2, and this was due to friction, a major source of error. The final results are summarized below.

Initial velocity/ ms-1 0 Non- zero

Angle between inclination 3.40 0.02 3.40 0.02

Acceleration, a / ms-2 0.57 0.01 0.520 0.004

Gravitational force g/ms-2 9.6 0.2 8.70 0.08

Appendix 1 Error analysis 1. +/- sample calculation : To find height of ramp => (15.50.05) (8.350.05) = 7.15 Sz
S z = S x + S y = 2(0.05) 2 = 0.07
2 2

Height = 7.15 0.07cm

2. To find uncertainty in a mean :Consider the values of the first position of Gate 2 in
Exercise 1, the table below shows the 5 data points whose average is to be computed. After the mean was found, a value called the sample standard deviation (s) was then calculated using the formula below, where di represents the deviation of each data value from the mean.
s=
s =

1 2 d i n 1 1 ( 64.95 64.93) 2 + (64.95 64.93) 2 + (64.95 64.93) 2 + (64.85 64.93) 2 + (64.95 64.93) 2 = 0.045 5 1

Average s Error

64.95 64.95 64.95 64.85 64.95 64.93 0.044721 0.02

The error associated with the mean = s x =

s 0.044721 = = 0.02 n 5

Therefore the mean is reported as = 64.93 0.02 cm

3. When a variable is multiplied by a constant, To calculate the value a, for the

cart in exercise 1, the slope of the graph was multiplied by 2 (28.4 0.6) x 2= 56.8 Sz
Sz = Sx 0.6 z Sz = 56.8 = 1.2 x 28.4

The acceleration = 56.8 1.2 cm s-2

4. Division/multiplication : To find the velocity traveled in exercise 2, the length of the

cart was divided by the time (using the initial velocity of the first position)
V0 = 13.65 0.05 = 52.2 S z 0.2615 0.0005
2 2 2 0.05 0.0005 = 52.2 + = 0.2 13.65 0.2615

S 2 S y S z = Z x + y x V0 = 52.2 0.2cm / s

5. Raised to a power: To calculate the uncertainty for each value of the (velocity)2 in
Exercise2, the following steps were followed V0= 52.2 0.2 cm/s V20 = 2724.84 Sz

Sz = z a V0
2

Sx 0.2 = 2724.84 2 = 20.88 20.9 x 52.2 = 2724.8 20.9cm 2 / s 2