Lab 7- Problem 5

Conservation of Angular
By: Virna Cristina Lazo
Lab Partners: Ben Shaefer, Cody Sanberg
December 4, 2012
Professor: Marvin Marshak
TA: Abdul Malmi

Momentum

Procedure:
An apparatus, which can be seen on Figure A, was set up, with the ring
being held a couple of millimeters above the disk by a group member.
The radius of the disk was then measured, which came out to 11.3 cm.
The video recorder is then placed to where the view of the disk is from
directly above. Utilizing a small force, but enough of a force to spin the
apparatus more than four complete revolutions, one person starts
the rotation of the apparatus. At the exact moment, the recording
begins and after two revolutions, the ring is dropped onto the disk
exactly on-center. Throughout this whole process the time is also being
recorded with a stopwatch, first for the revolution prior to the disk
being dropped and again after it is dropped. The video is then analyzed
with the program Motion Lab to determine
its initial
Ring
and
final position and
velocity
function
Disk
Shaft

Spool
Stand

Figure 1 portrays the setup for the experiment.

Prediction:
In this experiment we are trying to calculate the how the angular
speed of a spinning object (the disk) changes when it is brought into
contact with another object at rest (the ring). Our prediction is that the
law of conservation of angular momentum will stand. This means that
the final angular momentum will equal the initial angular momentum.
This can then be related to in terms of angular velocity, which can be
seen in Formula 1.
I
Formula 1: ( disk + I ring) f =I disk i

This formula can then be simplified for final (or initial) angular velocity,
as seen in Formula 2.
1
f =
i
I ring
Formula 2:
1+
I disk

( ( ))

I ring =M R 2

1
I disk = M R2
2
To utilize this data, we first need to use Motion Lab to get the position
function, which can then be used to derive the velocity function.
For the position function:
p ( x )=rcos
p ( y )=rsin
2
where =t+ =
T
For the velocity function:
v ( x )=rsin
v ( y )=r cos
2
where =t+ =
T
For both the velocity and position function,
phase change.

=0 because there is no

Data:
For the first part of motion lab, we are only dealing with the disk. The
variable r that was utilized was 11.3 cm. The time that it took for it to
complete one revolution was .73 seconds.
2 2
=8.6 rad / s
To calculate := =
T .73
Function
Prediction
Motion Lab
P(x)
11.3 cos (8.6 x )
10 cos ( 8.9 x+.4 )
P(y)
11.3 sin ( 8.6 x)
10 sin ( 8.9 x +.2)
V(x)
97.18 sin ( 8.6 x )
78 sin ( 8.6 x +.4)
V(y)
97.18 cos (8.6 x)
81 cos (8.5 x+.6)
Table 1 shows the position and velocity function in both the x
and y direction, both predicted utilizing the prediction
equations and those derived from MotionLab.

G
raph 1 shows the predicted vs. motion lab equations for the
position function of only the disk spinning.

Graph 2 shows the predicted vs. motion lab equations for the
velocity function of only the disk spinning.
For the second part of motion lab, we are now dealing with the disk
and the ring as a system. The variable r that was utilized was 11.3 cm.
The time that it took for it to complete one revolution was 1.3 seconds.
Function
P(x)
P(y)

Prediction
11.3 cos ( 4.833 x )
11.3 sin ( 4.833 x)

Motion Lab
10 cos ( 5 x )
10 sin ( 5 x )

V(x)
V(y)

54.61 sin ( 4.833 x)

54.61cos ( 4.833 x)

51 sin ( 5 x)
51 cos ( 5.1 x)

Graph 1 shows the predicted vs. motion lab equations for the
position function after the ring was dropped.

Graph 2 shows the predicted vs. motion lab equations for the
velocity function after the ring was dropped.
Analysis:
Using the equations for the velocities we predicted, we can conclude
on the following values for .
rad
i of disk =8.6

i of ring =0

rad
s

fof system =4.833

rad
s

Using the equations for the velocities calculated in MotionLab, we can

conclude on the following values for .
rad
i of disk =8.725

s
rad
i of rin g=0
s
rad
fof system =5
s
*Since the initial angular velocity of the disk values differed for each
function in Motion Lab, we decided to average out the angular
velocities.
These values are then plugged into Formula 2 from the prediction
section,
For predicted values:
1
1
1
f =
i=
i =
8.6=
2
I ring
MR
( 1.42 )( 6.25 )2
1+
1+
1+
1
2
1
I disk
MR
( 1.5 ) ( 11.3 )2
2
2
f =5.4 rad /s
For MotionLab values:
1
1
1
f =
i=
i =
8.725=
2
I ring
MR
( 1.42 )( 6.25 )2
1+
1+
1+
1
2
1
I disk
MR
( 1.5 ) ( 11.3 )2
2
2
f =5.5 rad / s
To calculate this, we assumed that there was no friction between the
shaft, spool and disk. This was assumed due to short course of our
experiment; the frictional force would be so small that it is negligible.
We also assumed that when the ring was dropped there was no energy
dissipated as sound or heat. This was assumed because the drop was
only from a few millimeters and there was no noticeable change in
heat. We also had to assume that the disk followed the inertia of a disk
even though there were wedges in the disk that allowed the ring to sit
on.

( ( )) (

)(

( ( )) (

)(

Conclusion:

Our measurement of the final angular velocity did not agree with our
calculated value. Utilizing the predicted value, we had a percent error
of 10.55% and using the MotionLab values we had a percent error of
9.09%.
When measuring i , there is a large deviation between the predicted
and the MotionLab formulas. The deviation is the largest within the rvalue, which had a difference of 3 cm. The angle, on the other had, has
a small, but significant deviation. When measuring f , the deviation
for the angle is about the same as in when measuring i . An equal
deviation in the two trials signifies that there is either an error in the
formula used, which would most likely be based on our calculation of
time, or the calculations from MotionLab. The difference between the r
for the predicted vs. MotionLab when measuring f was much
smaller.
Human error can explain most of the deviations for all of the trials. The
difference between the r-values is the biggest sign that a human error
was made when setting up the camera. This was most likely due to a
calibration error in the camera and camera distortion. Also to drop the
ring correctly on the disk, it required that one person hold their arm in
the way of the camera; this caused for an approximation of points
when plotting in MotionLab. The theta value could have deviated from
the actual value due to an initial angle value, which could have
changed the formula to =t+ . There could also be a deviation
from the beam not rotating on a perfectly frictionless stand.
We could have easily measured enough information to use
conservation of energy to predict the final angular velocity, but that
would required for our data to be correct.