MAPUA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Department of Physics

E202:: CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM: THE BALLISTIC

PENDULUM
GAERLAN, Marc Erick S.
meg_khul8@yahoo.com/2011108047/CEM-3
meg_khul8@yahoo.com/2011108047/CEM
PHY11L-B3 Group 4

SCORE
Signed Data Sheet
=
(5) ____
Materials and
=
Methods(15) ____
Observations & Results
=
(10) ____
Graphs
=
(10) ____

Conclusion(15) =
____
References
=
(5) ____

Performance
=
(40) ____

TOTAL ____
(100) =

03 August 2016
 E202: CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM: THE BALLISTIC
PENDULUM

Gaerlan, Marc Erick S.

School of Civil, Environmental, and Geological Engineering, Mapúa Institute of Technology
658 Muralla St., Intramuros, Manila City, Philippines
meg_khul8@yahoo.com

Materials and Methods

Figure 1. Experiment Materials (Ballistic Pendulum with accessory, and Meter Stick)

Figure 2. Loading of the Steel Ball in the Ballistic Pendulum

Figure 3. Ballistic Pendulum mechanism captured during motion

Figure 4. Setting up the Ballistic Pendulum for projectile firing

 Figure 5. Steel Ball in mid-air fired using the Ballistic Pendulum

Figure 6. Landing spots of the steel ball marked using the carbon paper
 Figure 7. Members computing for the velocity and making the excel

Figure 8. The group presenting the slow motion video of the experiment
 OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS

equation(1): = 2 (1)

equation(2): =x (2)

equation(3): u = 2 (3)

After performing the experiment and gathering the necessary data, we now proceed to computing
the velocity using two different methods which will have to be almost equal or somehow close to
each other to verify that the what we did on the experiment is right.

Figure 9. Table 1. Getting the Initial Velocity of the Steel Ball, Ballistic Method

mass of the steel ball = 65.875 g mass of the pendulum, = 240 g

TRIAL Angle
1 26.5° Initial height of the pendulum = 7.5 cm

2 27° Final height of the pendulum = 10 cm

3 26° Increase in height, y = − y = 3 cm

Velocity of the steel ball and the pendulum right
4 26.5° u = 76.6812 cm/s
after collision, equation(3)
5 26° Velocity of the pendulum before collision = 0 cm/s

Velocity of the steel ball before collision,

Average angle: 26.4° = 356.0508 cm/s
equation(1)

Sample Computation:

Given:
= 65.875 g
= 240 g
y = 3 cm

using equation(3):
u = 2 ∗ 980 / ∗3
u = 76.6812 cm/s

using equation(1):
.
= * 2 ∗ 980 / ∗3
.

= 356.0508 cm/s
 Figure 10. Table 2. Getting the Initial Velocity of the Steel Ball, Trajectory Method

Gravitational constant, g = 980 cm/

TRIAL Horizontal Distance, x

1 159.3 cm
Height from the reference point to the
2 159.5 cm y = 89 cm
ground
3 159.9 cm
4 161.3 cm
5 160 cm
Velocity of the steel ball before collision, = 375.4249 cm
equation(2)
Average angle: 160 cm

Sample Computation:

Given:
y = 89 cm
x = 160 cm

using equation(2):
/ 2
= 160cm
( )
= 375.4249 cm/s

Figure 11. Table 3. Determining the Percentage Difference

Percentage Difference,
| | Percent Difference = 5.2972 %
% diff = * 100%

Sample Computation:

Given
= 356.0508 cm/s
= 375.4249 cm/s

Percent Difference:
| . / . / |
% diff = . / . / * 100%

% diff = 5.2972%

As expected from the computed velocities, we got values close to each other so we can say that
we properly conducted the experiment and prove that the two equations are almost the same.
CONCLUSIONS

In this experiment we were assigned to do two different methods in finding the velocity, the
Ballistic and the Trajectory Method. Both methods gave us values close to each other hence
either of the two equations is accurate. We did this experiment with human errors included so
there is a bit of error in the values.

On the first part of the experiment we did the Ballistic Method which requires us to measure the
height of the pendulum before and after collision. Getting the height before the collision is easy
but getting the height before is not that easy. To get the height of the pendulum after the collision
we need to somehow suspend the pendulum to where the angle indicator stopped and measure the
height there. It is pretty straight forward but what gives us errors is getting the final height of the
pendulum which takes a stable hand suspending the pendulum to where the angle is. While on the
second part of the experiment, we remove the pendulum out of the way and performed the
Trajectory Method. This method only requires us to set a landing point for the steel ball which
will be marked upon impact so we used carbon paper with bond paper attached to the floor and
load the steel ball and fire. This method is much harder to do because of the space we have but
we did pulled it off and the method is easy and fun to do. We got roughly 5% percent difference
between the two values so we can say that we did great with the experiment.

In conclusion, I can say that through experience the Trajectory Method is more accurate. We
know that human errors in the experiment is a huge factor in committing errors in values thus
leading to an inaccurate answers. The Ballistic Method requires human hands that are stable so
the final height of the pendulum will be read as ease. While the Trajectory Method Requires
almost no human interaction except in measuring the distance travelled by the steel ball which the
accuracy would be dependent on the technique of measuring.

REFERENCES

(2011, May 10). Ballistic vs Trajectory. Retrieved from

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/ballistic-vs-trajectory.497569/

R. Nave (2006, March). Ballistic Pendulum. Retrieved from

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/balpen.html

(2015, June). Trajectory of a projectile. Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajectory_of_a_projectile
SAFE ASSIGN VALUE: 29%