BCC g Project

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,...

Today, the group continued to work on the presentation for this Thursday; we added photos taken from Summer II including a photo with Dr. Sivo and Dr. Martin doing the experiment. We also established the order of who's presenting and which slides they must do. Figure 1: Sneak Peak of PowerPoint Later this week, we will start analyzing the linear momentum videos. However, we will prioritize finishing the presentation first. 

After the presentations, we got back to work on our presentation and made the corrections to the manual based on yesterday's trial with Professors Sivo and Marton.

Professors Sivo and Marton carried out the g experiment successfully.  It took the whole 2 hours, partially due to slowdowns emailing the data from the cellphone to the computer.  They also pointed out some improvements we are making to the manual.  They are very excited about implementing the lab with actual classes.

Today, the team started working on the presentation and poster. This includes creating an outline on what we have to talk about. A rough outline is listed below: Introduction  Recap Changes in the procedures and equipment What we need to do next Introduction of the future projects From there, the team started to design the power-point presentation. We are using the previous presentation done on Summer I as reference material to keep the design consistent. A preview is shown below: Figure 1: Presentation Preview For the poster, we ideally want to include a photo of the old experiment and our new experiment to showcase the differences between them. An estimated cost comparison between old and new experiments (such as equipment used) should also be implemented in the poster design. 

Today, we began to modify our next experiment: Conservation of Momentum. This experiment was previously done using a timer, PASCO linear air track, air pump and some gliders, which didn't produce expected results. In this experiment, students are asked to glide several gliders on the air track and analyze the data upon the collisions. However, we noticed that the gliders currently being used for the experiment don't produce the expected results because they jump up slightly upon collision. Thus, we explored all the different gliders available to see which ones might be best to use. Figure 1. The Air Track Gliders Video 1. The collision between two yellow gliders moving toward each other. Video 2. The collision between two black gliders (with rubber bands) moving toward each other. To obtain even better measurements and results, we considered doing the experiment using the PASCO Capstone software. Similar to the Measurement of  g experiment, we...

Today the team took photos for the poster we will create by August 9th. The poster will be for the 3sp summit and must include an overview of the research done by the team. So, the team took photos of the old equipment to showcase how broken it is, and we also took photos of the team conducting the experiment. Figure 1:  Old Experimental Equipment We also updated the aesthetics of the blog. By next week, we will hopefully have the physics professors conduct the experiment, and have the surface plate finished by Professor Balzarette!

Today we continued to work on the  Uniformly Accelerated Motion: Measurement of g  manual entry. We finally finished the edits. A major change that we made in the procedure was laying the meter stick flat on the ground instead of holding it vertical to avoid confusion in the wording, or having to 3D print stands to hold the meter stick perfectly vertical. Initially, we avoided laying the meter stick horizontally thinking that there weren't enough spots in the classroom for 6 groups to carry out the experiment conveniently while making sure that the videos captured both: the horizontal meter stick and the ball falling next to it. However, after moving a few things out of the way, we figured out a way for 6 teams to do so. After changing the procedures, we also replaced the diagrams with new ones having the meter stick laid down on the ground to avoid any confusions in execution. We're currently waiting on responses from physics professors to try out our experiment before subm...

Today the team tested out whether placing the four sided meter stick flat on the ground would affect any of the measurements in Pasco Capstone. We did around eight trials with the meter stick is lying flat on the ground. All procedures were kept the same as always, but it was just the meter stick we positioned differently. If the data collected from these trials are accurate, we will rewrite the procedure instructing students to lay the four sided meter stick on the floor, making sure that the meter stick is placed on a line of tile. We wanted to change this part of the procedure because it was confusing many of the students who tested out the experiment. Hopefully by making the steps shorter, it could also make it easier to understand. Once all trials were captured, we then analyzed them using Pasco Capstone such as any other time before. For example, the data for the ping pong ball is shown below. Figure 1: Ping Pong Ball With Horizontal Meter Stick Other trials were done ...

The team picked up from where they left last week. While one of the members continued analyzing the recorded videos from last week, the other worked on finishing the lab manual revisions after the second practice trials. Moving forward, the plan is to gather some physics professors to try out the experiment to receive more feedbacks for the final testing. Over the weekend, Jan Mark 3-D printed a sample of the phone holder. Materials bought last week have been delivered. What's more, the members finished analyzing all the videos and created a chart to compare the values and determined the average gravitational acceleration of all the different angles. As you see from the screenshot above, the average gravity value (the slope) was determined to be 9.83 m/s² which is relatively close to the accepted value.

After meeting with machine shop manager at Bergen Community College, Mark Balzarette , we went ahead and bought acrylic sheets and machine screws from McMaster-Carr for the friction experiment apparatus. We also continued to analyse the recorded videos for the linear air track experiment. As expected, the experimental gravitational acceleration values for all of the different angles were relatively close the accepted value. Snapshot of the analysis when θ = 5°. We also began to do the stop watch calculations using excel spreadsheet.  g = a/ sin𝜃

From yesterday's trial with Deepa, the team found several flaws with the current procedures. One very important find from the focus group is that the procedures do not specify which highlighted points are needed in order to find the drag coefficient from the graph. After Deepa completed all the drag coefficient procedures, she found that her value for drag coefficient was .05, however, the correct range should be around 1 to 0.4. Upon further analysis of her data and graphs, we found that moving the highlighted area to include points near t = 0 resulted in the correct value. After adjusting, Deepa's value for drag coefficient changed to 0.4.  While Deepa was finishing the experiment, the team also began the rough design for the meter stick holder. The team decided that there should be a meter stick holder to simplify the procedure by eliminating a few lines from it such as making a person hold the meter stick upright. Furthermore, a meter stick holder will eliminate steps in...

Today the team gathered volunteers again to test out the free-falling object experiment after last round of revisions (with the addition of new diagrams). Last time, the students had not been able to finish the entire experiment, hence, we were not able to test part three of the experiment: calculating the drag coefficient. Again, revisions will be made to the lab manual entry based on the reactions and feedback. The volunteer finished analyzing the steel video today, and will continue from there tomorrow same time. Figure 1 shows a snapshot of the steel video analysis. Figure 1.  Steel ball data. As you see from the velocity vs time graph, the experimental acceleration is found to be 9.83 m/s 2 .

Today we started by taking more trials for the air track experiment to find its repeat-ability and to refine some of the procedures we did on the first set of trials. These include adjusting the track to be parallel with the camera and also adding a sign to indicate which trial we were testing. From these trials we got the data shown below: Figure 1: Trials Using Stopwatches We also took videos for all the trials and will compare the calculated g value from both methods. We expect that the method using Pasco Capstone will result in a more accurate value for g. As shown with one of the previous trials, the value of g found from Pasco Capstone was exactly at -9.81 but this may just be a fluke, therefore, it is necessary to do more trials. The group also worked with Professor Balzarette to help create new surface plates for the friction track. These new plates will hopefully be much more serviceable than what is currently used (the metal track surface itself) and will be easi...

Today we began analyzing the recorded videos of the car motion on the air track from Tuesday. Similar to the free-falling object analysis, we began by importing the video to Capstone, then changing the frame increment & playback frame rate, and eventually marking the car positions until it reaches the other end. We know that the slope (acceleration) of the graph Velocity vs Time graph can be used to calculate the experimental g  as follow: a (slope) = g sin θ g = slope / sin θ Figure 1. Snapshot of the video analysis of car motion on an air track when θ = 1.5°. To the right is the velocity vs time graph, with the displayed slope of 0.252 m/s 2 . As you see in figure 1, the acceleration found when  θ was 1.5° was 0.252  m/s 2 . Using the equations above, we calculated the experimental gravitational acceleration to be 9.63  m/s 2 . We will continue to analysis the rest of the videos tomorrow and compare these values to the calculations done by hand....

Yesterday, the team gathered and began to brainstorm on two new possible experiments to take on next. Today, we mainly focused on the Air Track experiment, section B of the Uniformly Accelerated Motion: measurement of g . Equipment needed for this experiment: a timer, a linear air track, an electric blower, a protractor, a meter-stick, and some weights to incline the track. Figure 1.  A Linear Air Track. An electric blower supplies air to the track through a hose on the right. The car will travel on a thin cushion of air, which greatly reduces friction. We ran a few trials of the current experiment with the track inclined at various angles (15°,10°,5°,2.5°,1.5°). Tomorrow, we will analyze the data collected using the current experimental procedures as well as analyze the recorded videos in the Capstone software to compare the results. What's more, we took the measurements of the inclined plane for the Friction coefficient experiment. Tomorrow, the college will...

The team brainstormed ideas for the next projects such as what to do for the friction track. We decided instead of revising the entire lab for calculating different coefficients of friction, we can make improvements on the current experiment and equipment used. For instance, the team will create new surface plates that will screw on to the existing platform. These new plates will act as an interchangeable and easily replaceable part, remedying the problem with the current platform where the surface was being damage over time thus creating a source of error in the experiment. Our proposed simple fix will save the college both time and money in the event that one of the platform surfaces needs to be replaced. We also changed some formatting in the lab procedure such as moving icons to look much more aesthetic. We did this by playing around with the image text wrap format and changing it to wrap to text with 0'' margins. An example is shown below. Figure 1: Revised Lab Proc...