Your 'energy conversion 1' report has been received. Scroll down through the document to see any comments I might have inserted, and my final comment at the end.
Your optional message or comment:
Hello Prof. Smith,
Here is my Energy conversion 1 lab.
Tanya
How far and through what angle did the block displace on a single trial, with rubber band tension equal to the weight of two dominoes?
7 mm, 20 deg
5 trials, distance in cm then rotation in degrees, with rubber band tension equal to the weight of two dominoes:
10, 21
9, 18
8.6, 18
9.2, 19
9, 19
Rubber band lengths resulting in 5 cm, 10 cm and 15 cm slides:
8.8, 9.7, 10.9
18, 35, 45
5 trials, distance in cm then rotation in degrees, with rubber band tension equal to the weight of four dominoes:
11, 1
10, 0
9.7, 0
9.5, 0
10.5, 0
5 trials, distance in cm then rotation in degrees, with rubber band tension equal to the weight of six dominoes:
12.5, 0
11.3, 0
12, 0
12, 0
11.8,0
5 trials, distance in cm then rotation in degrees, with rubber band tension equal to the weight of eight dominoes:
13, 0
13, 0
12.8, 0
13.1, 0
12.9, 0
5 trials, distance in cm then rotation in degrees, with rubber band tension equal to the weight of ten dominoes:
13.5, 0
13.6, 0
13.5, 0
13.4, 0
13, 0
Rubber band length, the number of dominoes supported at this length, the mean and the standard deviation of the sliding distance in cm, and the energy associated with the stretch, for each set of 5 trials:
2, 9.4, 9.16, .5177, 86.104 J
4, 9.3, 10.14, .6107, 94.302 J
6, 9.3, 11.92, .4324, 110.856 J
8, 9.1, 12.96, .1140, 117.936 J
10, 9, 13.4, .2345, 120.6 J
Slope and vertical intercept of straight-line approximation to sliding distance vs. energy, units of slope and vertical intercept, description of the graph and closeness to line, any indication of curvature:
9.5, 95
J/mm, J
about 3 mm in average, straight line - from 0 to 11, curvature from 11 to 14
curvature appears to indicate upward concavity from 11 to 14; it is increasing at a decreasing rate
Lengths of first and second rubber band for (first-band) tensions supporting 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 dominoes:
8.33, 85
j/mm, j
about 06 mm in average, from 0 to 13 it a straight line, from 13 to 20 it curves.
it is increasing at an increasing rate
Mean sliding distance and std dev for each set of 5 trials, using 2 rubber bands in series:
2, 8.8, 9
4, 8.9, 9.2
6, 9.2, 9.4
8, 9.3, 9.5
10, 9.4, 9.6
Slope and vertical intercept of straight-line approximation to sliding distance vs. energy, units of slope and vertical intercept, description of the graph and closeness to line, any indication of curvature:
9.56, .5128
11.02, .4025.
12.7, .4062
13.7, .7517
14.9, .5148
1-band sliding distance and 2-band sliding distance for each tension:
9.16, 9.56,
10.14, 11.02
11.92, 12.7
12.96, 13.7
13.4, 14.9
Slope and vertical intercept of straight-line approximation to 2-band sliding distance vs. 1-band sliding distance, units of slope and vertical intercept, description of the graph and closeness to line, any indication of curvature:
1.08, 8.5
mm, mm
about 0.2 mm in average
the data points seem to indicate a straight-line relationship from 0 to 14
for this increasing graph
Discussion of two hypotheses: 1. The sliding distance is directly proportional to the amount of energy required to stretch the rubber band. 2. If two rubber bands are used the sliding distance is determined by the total amount of energy required to stretch them.
I support this statement: If two rubber bands are used the sliding distance is determined by the total amount of energy required to stretch them.
How long did it take you to complete this experiment?
about 3 hours
Optional additional comments and/or questions:
Your data do not support the hypothesis that rubber band energy and sliding distance are proportional.
I'm not sure you have the right rubber band energies. Have you done the experiment Force vs displacement 1 on work, energy and rubber bands from Assignment 17. You need to have done that experiment to know how to relate energies to sliding distance.