Exploring the Effect of Bungee Length Manipulation on Acceleration Applied to Jumper

Similar documents
A Case Study of Hooke s Law and the Variation of Spring Constant

Jamie White Partner: Victor Yu Section 5 November 19, 2014 Modeling the Relationship between Bungee Cord Length and Displacement

Determining the Relationship Between Elastic String Length and Maximum Acceleration

Modelling Elastic Cord as an Ideal Spring: The Relationship Between Spring Constant k and Equilibrium Length l Kalady Osowski

Characterizing the Behavior of an Elastic Cord Using the Conservation of Work and Energy Theorem

Dynamic Relationship between Bungee Cord s Length and Tension Force

How the Length of the Cord Affects the Value of K. Summary:

Modelling the Spring Constant with the Classical Work-Energy Theorem Aaron Jeong & James McCullum

Name: Ryan Lesher Lab Partner: Brian D Ostroph Section: PHYS Date: 10/31/2017

Name. VCE Physics Unit 3 Preparation Work

Relationship Between Spring Constant and Length of Bungee Cord

At the end of this project we hope to have designed a quality bungee experience for an egg.

Relationship between mass, height of drop, and bungee cord length in a bungee drop. I. Introduction

Physics lab Hooke s Law and Pendulums

PRELAB IMPULSE AND MOMENTUM

LAB 4: FORCE AND MOTION

= 40 N. Q = 60 O m s,k

D. Experiment Summary

Lab #7: Energy Conservation

BUNGEE PART 2: DETERMINING THE EMPIRICAL AND THEORETICAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INITIAL BUNGEE LENGTH AND DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM POSITION

Work and Energy. This sum can be determined graphically as the area under the plot of force vs. distance. 1

Lab #5: Newton s First Law

Constant velocity and constant acceleration

What are Numerical Methods? (1/3)

Lab: Simple Harmonic Motion: Pendulum Mr. Fineman

Semester I lab quiz Study Guide (Mechanics) Physics 135/163

Chapter 4. Forces and the Laws of Motion. CH 4 Forces and the Laws of Motion.notebook. April 09, Changes in Motion. A. Force

Precalculations Individual Portion Correlation and Regression: Statistical Analysis of Trends

Your name and your lab partner(s): John and Joe Carmody Section:

EVEN MORE ACCELERATION LAB (1/2 Point Each, 16 Points Total)

Q2. A book whose mass is 2 kg rests on a table. Find the magnitude of the force exerted by the table on the book.

Forces and Newton s Laws Reading Notes. Give an example of a force you have experienced continuously all your life.

Lab Report Outline the Bones of the Story

Experiment P-9 An Inclined Plane

Applications of Newton's Laws

NEWTON S LAWS OF MOTION

A student suspended a spring from a laboratory stand and then hung a weight from the spring. Figure 1

5. All forces change the motion of objects. 6. The net force on an object is equal to the mass of the object times the acceleration of the object.

Force and Motion 20 N. Force: Net Force on 2 kg mass = N. Net Force on 3 kg mass = = N. Motion: Mass Accel. of 2 kg mass = = kg m/s 2.

1/9/2017. Newton s 2 nd Law of Motion, revisited

Motion on a linear air track

LABORATORY VII MECHANICAL OSCILLATIONS

Work and Energy. W F s)

Dynamics & Kinematics: Newton s Laws of Motion in One-Dimensional Motion

Driveway Races Acceleration

What does the lab partner observe during the instant the student pushes off?

Static and Kinetic Friction

Dynamics: Newton s Laws of Motion

LAB 6 - GRAVITATIONAL AND PASSIVE FORCES

Lab: Newton s Second Law

Lab 10 - Harmonic Motion and the Pendulum

Physics 1050 Experiment 3. Force and Acceleration

Physics 1020 Experiment 6. Equilibrium of a Rigid Body

Lab: Simple Harmonic Motion: Pendulum Mr. Fineman

Torque and Rotational Equilibrium

Lab: Vectors. You are required to finish this section before coming to the lab. It will be checked by one of the lab instructors when the lab begins.

The Spring: Hooke s Law and Oscillations

Foundations of Physical Science. Unit One: Forces and Motion

Mechanical Behavior of a Spring R. Hooke, DePotentia Restitutiva (1678)

AP1 WEP. Answer: E. The final velocities of the balls are given by v = 2gh.

LAB 5: Induction: A Linear Generator

Static and Kinetic Friction

What happens if one pulls on the spring? The spring exerts a restoring force which is proportional to the distance it is stretched, F = - k x (1)

General Physics I Lab. M1 The Atwood Machine

TIphysics.com. Physics. Pendulum Explorations ID: By Irina Lyublinskaya

Work and Energy. computer masses (200 g and 500 g) If the force is constant and parallel to the object s path, work can be calculated using

2. How will we adjust our fitting procedure to compensate for fact that the acceleration differs depending on the direction of motion?

PHY 221 Lab 9 Work and Energy

Jumping Up. PY205m. apply the Energy Principle to the point particle system of the jumper, and

Chapter 4. Forces in One Dimension

General Physics I Lab (PHYS-2011) Experiment MECH-2: Newton's Second Law

Simple Harmonic Motion and Damping

PH211 Chapter 4 Solutions

Lab 7. Newton s Third Law and Momentum

Force and Motion. Thought Experiment

Torque and Rotational Equilibrium

Equilibrium & Elasticity

Physics 101 Lecture 5 Newton`s Laws

Physics 1021 Experiment 1. Introduction to Simple Harmonic Motion

Materials: One of each of the following is needed: Cart Meter stick Pulley with clamp 70 cm string Motion Detector

Pendulums and the Acceleration of Gravity

PHYS 2211L Final Examination Laboratory Simple Pendulum.

Lab 17 Torques/Moments

θ Beam Pivot F r Figure 1. Figure 2. STATICS (Force Vectors, Tension & Torque) MBL-32 (Ver. 3/20/2006) Name: Lab Partner: Lab Partner:

FRANKLIN-SIMPSON HIGH SCHOOL

Experiment P30: Centripetal Force on a Pendulum (Force Sensor, Photogate)

The Coefficient of Friction

To verify Newton s Second Law as applied to an Atwood Machine.

Purpose of the experiment

PHY 221 Lab 7 Work and Energy

Developing a Scientific Theory

PHYSICS 220 LAB #3: STATIC EQUILIBRIUM FORCES

Lab 10: Harmonic Motion and the Pendulum

The Laws of Motion. Newton s first law Force Mass Newton s second law Gravitational Force Newton s third law Examples

Newton s Second Law. Newton s Second Law of Motion describes the results of a net (non-zero) force F acting on a body of mass m.

Second Law. In this experiment you will verify the relationship between acceleration and force predicted by Newton s second law.

2 o. (2) Here, the parameters vo and g are, respectively, the initial velocity and the acceleration.

Newton s First Law and IRFs

Dynamics: Newton s Laws of Motion


Transcription:

Ball 1 Stephen Ball Lab Partner: Gustavo Larramendi Bungee Report 6 November 2014 Exploring the Effect of Bungee Length Manipulation on Acceleration Applied to Jumper Introduction In order to experience a thrilling bungee jump, a jumper should experience as much time in free fall as possible. This parameter may be analyzed via the jumper s maximum deceleration during the jump; a higher amount of deceleration means the jumper was slowed down over a shorter distance, allowing for more relative time in free fall. However, the parameters of the Bungee Challenge dictate that the jumper may experience no more than three times acceleration due to gravity (3 X 9.81 m/s 2, or 29.43 m/s 2 ). In this experiment, we examined the relationship between bungee cord length and the maximum acceleration experienced by the jumper. This connection relates to Newton s second law of F total = mass X acceleration; acceleration is greatest when maximum force is applied, so maximum acceleration in a bungee system can be modeled via equation 1: F TOTAL = m X a, so a = F total /m F TOTAL = F bungee,max - mg Equation 1 : a max = (F b,max /m)-g Methods We approached the posed question with the following set up, outlined in Fig. 1. First, the analog force sensor was hung at a height of 2.14 m on a stand clamped to a lab table; the

Ball 2 sensor was calibrated to tare for the mass of the hanging portion of bungee cord (2.00 m). Using the Capstone program, we changed the sensor s Gain Property to 10X for an improved signal to noise ratio, then changed its Sample Rate to 2.00 khz. A tape measure was then hung from the same stand with its zero mark exactly lined up with the bottom of the force sensor s hook (henceforth referred to as the zero point). We decided to test the bungee length jumper acceleration relationship over the course of five bungee length trial groups, with 5 trials in each group. L refers to the bungee length, including the loops tied on either end; for this experiment, our 5 trial Figure 1: Set-up parameters. groups are defined by L values of.11 m,.36 m,.66 m,.79 m, and.99 m. All loop lengths were kept under.02 m to minimize related interference. For each trial, one loop of the bungee cord was hung from the force sensor, while the hanging mass (henceforth referred to as the jumper ) was hung from the bottom bungee loop. We started recording the force sensor readings in Capstone, and then dropped the jumper from the zero point; all jumpers were dropped with the bottom of the bungee loop lined up with this zero point. Force recording was stopped after the first rebound; we determined the maximum upward force (F b,max ) by highlighting the entire data set and turning on the Maximum display within Capstone.

F b,max (N) Ball 3 Results Trial Group L F b,max a max (m, ±.01m) (N, ±.001N) (m/s 2, ±.01m/s 2 ) 1 0.11 1.574 21.67 2 0.36 1.540 20.99 3 0.66 1.508 20.35 4 0.79 1.472 19.63 5 0.99 1.448 19.15 We first present our results for the a max L relationship, which we found to have a negative linear correlation. In other words, as bungee length increased, the maximum acceleration experienced by the jumper decreased by 2.88 ±.21 m/s 2 for every additional meter of L. This relationship is depicted graphically in Fig. 3, a max (m/s 2 ) 22 21.5 21 20.5 20 19.5 along with equation 2 that describes the relationship. 19 Figure 2: Results Data Table. Table exhibits relevant bungee length, force exerted by the bungee cord, and the maximum acceleration experienced by the jumper. a max vs. L a max = -2.8795L + 22.033 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 L (m) Figure 3: a max vs. L. Graphical representation of the relationship between maximum acceleration experienced by the jumper and bungee cord length. Equation 2: a max = -2.8795L + 22.033 1.59 1.54 1.49 1.44 F b,max vs. L F b = -0.144L + 1.5922 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 L(m) A similar correlation exists for the F b,max L relationship. As bungee length increased, F b experienced by the jumper decreased by 0.144 ±.01 N for every additional meter of L. Figure 4:F b vs. L. Graphical representation of the relationship between F b,max and bungee cord length.

Ball 4 Fig. 4 depicts this association graphically, and equation 3 describes the relationship. Equation 3: F b,max = -0.144L + 1.5922 The uncertainty for the relationships given in both equations 2 and 3 is 7% based on an Excel linear regression. Discussion We should first emphasize that this data and our equations may only be applied to a system with a.050 kg jumper. However, our work shows that this small scale experiment with any mass can produce equations that are able to predict maximum acceleration experienced by a jumper of said mass. There is one major condition that must be met, however; F b,max must be greater than m jumper X g in order to guarantee rebound of the system. Once that condition has been met, calculated maximum acceleration values can be used to determine if the parameters of the bungee challenge have been met. In order for this to be true, a max must be less than three times acceleration due to gravity (29.43 m/s 2 ) so as to prevent any damage to the egg. Our a max of 21.67 m/ s 2 in the.050 kg system was only 74% of this maximum allotted acceleration; therefore, further research with regards to acceleration should incorporate static cords and packaged bungees in order to figure out how to create the most thrilling experience. Our experimentally determined equations both had uncertainties of 7%, leaving room for improvement to this experiment as well. My hands were not a completely reliable release system for the jumper; I was constantly straining to make sure the bungee loop lined up with the zero point and that I released the jumper from a stand-still. This variance most likely contributed the most to uncertainty, so an automated drop system could provide slightly more

Ball 5 accurate data. Additionally, we recognize that we may not be able to extrapolate acceleration rates for much higher L values. While a linear model works quite well for explaining the acceleration variance for L from.1 to 1 m (R 2 =.985), the relationship may change for much higher bungee lengths. Conclusion Our experiment demonstrates that one of the main parameters for the Bungee Challenge can easily be checked using small scale force sensor trials. Maximum force readings may be used to calculate the maximum acceleration of the egg, which can be compared against the 3 X g threshold to ensure safe acceleration rates. Seeing as larger bungee cords lead to smaller acceleration rates, the results of this experiment indicate that further research should be done regarding the effects of incorporating static cords and bungee bundling on overall acceleration. Keeping all of these factors in mind, we recommend that Bungee Challenge participants use Newton s second law and its derived experimental equations to determine a thrilling yet safe bungee cord length.