Quintanilla 1
Atwood’s Machine
Bella Quintanilla
Tuesday September 24, 2024
Physics 101-3461
Professor Mark Maier
Abstract
George Atwood invented the Atwood’s machine in 1784 to test
the laws of motion with constant acceleration. This original pulley
machine consisted of one wheel supporting a string with weights
tied on either end and four other wheels that supported the first
one. The purpose of the experiment performed is to study an
Atwood’s machine and verify the acceleration due to gravity with
and without accounting for friction using Newton’s second law
which states: At any given time, the net force on a body is equal
to the body’s acceleration times its mass. By using tension as the
force and gravity as acceleration of one weight, the acceleration
of the other weight when released on the Atwood’s machine can
be estimated. The theoretical value calculated for acceleration
without friction is 0.853 m/s2 and the theoretical value calculated
for acceleration with friction is 0.794 m/s2. The experimental
value obtained for acceleration is 0.730 m/s2. Without accounting
for friction, the percentage error between the theoretical value
and the experimental value is 14.4%. Accounting for friction, the
percentage error between the theoretical value and the
experimental value is 8.06%.
Quintanilla 1
Introduction
This lab’s purpose is to verify an object’s acceleration when
released using an Atwood’s machine.
This experiment presents the opportunity to get familiarized
with an Atwood’s machine.
Equipment and Images
- Photogate
- Pulley
- Mounting Rod
- Table Clamp
- Multi-Clamp
- 90 cm Rod
- Braided String
- Mass and Hanger Set
- No-Bounce Pad
Theory
Table 1: Symbols and Variables
Symbol Variable Definition
FNet 1 Net Force 1 Total forces acting on Mass 1
FNet 2 Net Force 2 Total forces acting on Mass 2
m1 Mass 1 125 grams – the heavier mass
(descending)
m2 Mass 2 105 grams – the lighter weight
(ascending)
a Acceleration The change in velocity over time
g Gravity The acceleration of an object due to
gravity
T Tension The pulling force acting on the string
Quintanilla 1
Equation 1: FNet 1 = m1a, FNet 2 = m2a
Equation 2: FNet 1 = m1g – T, FNet 2 = m2g – T
Equation 3: T = m1g – m1a, T = m2g – m2(–a)
Equation 4: m1g – m1a = m2g – m2(–a)
Equation 5: a = (m1 - m2) (g) / (m1 + m2)
Acceleration can be calculated by rearranging the equation listed
above. To do this we must assume that the downward direction is
positive. The total forces acting on an object are equivalent to the
sum of the mass of the object multiplied by its acceleration and
any other additional or opposing forces. This equation can be
applied to the descending mass (m1). Acceleration can be
replaced with acceleration due to gravity (g) and Tension must be
subtracted from the product of mass and gravity to give the net
force. It can also be assumed that this is equal to mass times
acceleration. By doing this, we get equation 2: F Net 1 = m1g – T =
m1a. The same process can be applied to the net force of the
ascending mass; FNet 2 = m2g – T = m2(-a). Tension can be solved
for. This gives equation 3: T = m1g – m1a and T = m2g – m2(–a).
Tension is equivalent and thus these equations can be set equal,
resulting in equation 4: m1g – m1a = m2g – m2(–a). Acceleration
can now be solved for by simplifying, giving equation 5: a = (m 1 -
m2) (g) / (m1 + m2).
The percent error equation used is: % error = (measured –
accepted) / accepted X 100%.
Free Body Diagram:
Quintanilla 1
Procedure
1. To start, the Atwood’s machine was assembled by clamping
the 90 cm rod into place, attaching the photogate and pulley
to the mounting rod which was clamped to the 90 cm rod
and then plugging in the photogate to the computer. A string
was pulled through the pulley and masses on hangers were
tied to each end of the string so that a mass hung on either
side of the pulley. A foam pad was placed below the pulley to
avoid recording a bounce when the masses hit the table.
2. Once assembled, the ascending mass (m2) was pulled to its
lowest point. Then recording began and m 2 was released.
Recording was stopped just before the descending mass (m 1)
hit the no-bounce pad. This took several tries as the masses
would swing and hit each other when released.
3. Once a smooth trial was recorded, acceleration was
calculated using the PASCO computer program. The slope of
the graph created by the photogate recording represented
the calculated acceleration.
4. To account for friction, m2 was given an additional 20-gram
chip so that it was equal to m1.
Quintanilla 1
5. m1 was moved to its highest position and recording began.
As soon as recording began, m1 was gently pushed
downward. Once the masses stopped moving, recording
ended.
6. Step 5 was repeated with an additional 1-gram chip and ½-
gram chip added to m1 until the speed of m1 became
constant. The mass added to attain constant speed was then
recorded as frictional mass and subtracted from the original
mass of m1.
Analysis
The theoretical value calculated for acceleration without friction
was 0.853 m/s2 using equation 5. The same equation was used to
calculate the theoretical value for acceleration with friction but
with 1.5 grams subtracted from m1 which gives 123.5 grams and
0.794 m/s2. The experimental value obtained for acceleration was
0.730.
Calculations
Slope = 0.730 = a
a = (125 - 105) (9.81) / (125 + 105) = 0.853 m/s2
a (with friction) = (123.5 - 105) (9.81) / (123.5 + 105) = 0.794
m/s2
Percent Error: | (0.730 - 0.853) / 0.853 | x 100% = 14.4% without
friction
Percent Error: | (0.730 - 0.794) / 0.794 | x 100% = 8.06% with
friction
Quintanilla 1
Conclusion
The purpose of this experiment was met. Although a higher
percent error than I would have liked was calculated, some of that
can be attributed to student-error. From the experiment we were
able to verify that when accounting for friction, the acceleration of
an object falling can be calculated using Newton’s second law and
Quintanilla 1
applying the Tension as a force and acceleration due to gravity.
Without accounting for friction, a very rough estimate of the
acceleration of a falling object on a pulley system can be
calculated. The experimental value for acceleration obtained was
0.730 m/s2 and the theoretical value for acceleration without
friction is 0.853 m/s2 and with friction is 0.794 m/s2. This gave
percent error values of 14.4% without friction and 8.06% with
friction.
Some Sources of error include:
Inaccurate and/or imprecise recording of the start and end of
each trial run. This could be considered both user and
technological errors. The issue with this is that the change in
time used to calculate acceleration would not be entirely
correct.
Imprecise recording of frictional mass. It was difficult to find
the precise amount of mass needed to generate constant
speed after a gentle push. The constant speed signifies no
change in acceleration and then can be used to find the
exact mass that equates to the force of friction.
The masses knocking into things or swinging during the
trials. When the masses knock into each other or sway, it
affects the recording device and could interfere with the
data being recorded into a graph.
Appendix
1. How did the correction for friction affect your final results?
a. The correction for friction decreased the theoretical
value of acceleration and decreased the percent error
calculated. This means that the calculated acceleration
with friction more accurately represents the
experimental value of acceleration of the mass on the
Atwood’s machine.
Quintanilla 1
2. Show that equation 5 reduces to the expected result in the
following limiting cases. Explain. (a) Case 1: m 1=m2 (b) Case
2: m1=0
a. a = (m – m) (g) / (2m) = 0(g)/2m = 0
b. A = (0 – m2) (g) / (0 + m2) = –m2g / m2 = –g
