Day 9: Trials with Camera Angles

By -

Figure 1. The Setup

The team continues to use PASCO to analyze videos and continues to write the lab manual. Additional videos were recorded today with the camera tipped at different angles in different dirctions to see how the gravitational data would be affected. We took approximately 30 videos. Before performing the trials, we noticed the meter stick we were about to use is bent and not straight. Since this may have caused the error in g that we saw yesterday.  We replaced the bent meter stick with a straight one for our measurements today. The first angle was to pitch the camera back using two tabs as seen in Figure 1. The purpose of this is to study and compare the effects of the data with the camera at different positions.
Figure 2. Camera Pitched Back

Next, the tab tilts the phone holder forward. See Figure 3 for visualization.  
Figure 3. Camera Pitched Forward

Later, the phone was angled at 20 degrees and then 30 degrees to the right. A protractor aided the camera man to position the phone at the desired measurement in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Camera Angled to the Right

The level instrument, as displayed in Figure 5, guaranteed the phone camera to be perfectly straight. 

Figure 5. Level Instrument

The team returned to their office after the trials took place to analyze the new videos and continue to write the lab manual. 


Blogged by Jennifer Mikulko

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Day 40: Analyzing Conservation of Momentum videos

By -
At 1 pm, the team attended the 3SP meeting today. After returning to the office an hour later, the team began to analyze the videos for the Conservation of Linear Momentum experiment recorded last Monday, July 23rd. Since the free software trial expired on both member's personal computer, they set up the software on mentor Dr. Epstein's office computer. They were able to analyze one of the slow-motion videos of the colliding gliders. It was confirmed that using the software is indeed a better way to produce the expected results. As claimed, the initial velocity of glider 1 was approximately equivalent to the final velocity of glider 2 after the collision:    Pᵢ = P f         (initial momentum = final momentum) ∴   m v ᵢ = m v f   ∴ v ᵢ =  v f          (when masses of both the gliders are equivalent) Meanwhile, progress is being made on the presentation for 3SP meeting on Thursday. It is almost done,...
Read more

Day 15: Drag Calculation + Progress on Manual

By -
Image
Day 15:  Drag Calculation + Progress on Manual After watching (and for Jan Mark, participating in) the afternoon presentations, we worked on 2 projects.  We are nearly done editing the experimental procedure section of our lab manual write-up of the Free-Fall experiment.  The complete write-up should be ready by early next week so that we can get volunteers to try the experiment. We were also able to use the ping pong ball data to calculate the drag coefficient, C, for a ping pong ball. Ping Pong ball data When air resistance is taken into account, the equation for acceleration of a falling body becomes: where ρ air is the density of air, A is the cross sectional area of the falling object and v is its instantaneous velocity. By plotting a vs the velocity squared, C can be derived from the slope. For typical falling objects, the range of C values is from 0.4 to 1. This graph is seen (will be inserted) below and the calculations give: Givin...
Read more

Day 7: Microsoft Excel

By -
Image
The last videos were analyzed using PASCO Capstone. We notice inconsistence in g values for different masses. Thus, we plan to study the results for particular masses by performing additional trials on Monday. Image 1 displays a screenshot of a table in Excel. The table mentions the object's (ball's) type including lead, steel, golf, wood, and hollow plastic toy ball corresponding to it's experimental gravitational acceleration value.  Image 1 . Screenshot of Excel Table The first graph, Figure 1, was created using Microsoft Excel. It displays data with the relationship between gravitational acceleration and mass of lead, steel, wood, golf, and hollow plastic toy ball.  Figure 1. Gravitational Acceleration vs Mass of Various Balls. As described in yesterday's blog, we measured the effect of dropping the ball not even with the meter stick. Figure 2 presents the second graph created on Microsoft Excel. Our data for the steel ball is exhibited below. Neg...
Read more