# PHYS164 CCC Behaviour of Free-falling Object using Pendulum Lab report

Anonymous

### Question Description

Hi, I have collected the data and I need a lab report. in the attachment below, the data collection, a pdf of the experiment and example of the lap report.

### Unformatted Attachment Preview

Professor: Physics September 10, 2018 Experiment # 1 Measurement My Partners: Thomas Objective: The main objective of this lab is to study the behavior of free-falling object using pendulum. Procedure: The procedure used for this activity can be found on pp. 1-10 of the Physic 163 Fall September 2018 Lab Manual. Data: To check the correctness of distance measuring instrument, table 1 constructed below. Results showed that measured distance of 80 ± 0.5 cm is consistent with expected distance. After that some different heights of pendulum were considered which are shown in table 2. Their respective uncertainties were also determined. Reported average height is 3.6 ± 0.2. After that, time taken by pendulum for 10 oscillations was measured experimentally as shown in table 3. For its verification 10 seconds were timed and their uncertainty was found to check correctness of time measuring device. Then diagonal length of table was measured which acted as support for pendulum. Table 1: Distance between 10 cm mark and 90 cm mark of a meter stick 1 (0 aligned with 10) Distance (cm) 80.0 2 (12 aligned with 10) 80.0 3 (20 aligned with 10) 80.0 Average Accidental Uncertainty 80.0 0.05 Trial No.     Reading Deviation uncertainty 0.5 from average 0 0.5 0 0.5 0 0.5 Table 2: Height of computer mouse Trial No. 1 Height (cm) 3.4 2 3.5 3 3.8 Average 3.6 Accidental Uncertainty 0.2 Reported Height (cm) 3.6      Reading uncertainty 0.1 Deviation from average 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 Table 3: Time for 10 oscillations of torsion pendulum Trial No. 1 Time (s) 12.41 2 12.53 3 12.56 4 12.50 Average Accidental Uncertainty 12.50 0.8 Reported Time (s) 12.50    Reading uncertainty 0.08 Deviation from average 0.446 Ten second measurements 10.38 0.08 0.814 9.94 0.08 0.464 10.22   0.08 0.004 9.72  0.09 0.08 Table 4: Diagonal length of lab table x1 Length (cm) 100.0 x2 100.0 x3 93.50 Total Length (cm) 293.5     Reading uncertainty 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 Measurement Uncertainty: Distance measuring instrument has uncertainty of 0.5cm as found in table 1. After that, this instrument was used for measuring average distance at which pendulum will be suspended. Uncertainty in this average distance is 0.5cm. In next step, time taken by 10 oscillations of pendulum was found. Its average uncertainty was 0.09sec which represents the average deviation from mean value of time for 10 oscillations. Analysis of Data: Average is found such that e.g. for 80.0cm and the reported uncertainty is 0 which is uncertainty of Distance Results: Results D (cm) D 80.0 0  Is the reported distance consistent with the expected distance? Expected value Percentage difference 80.0 0.0000 Yes Conclusion & Discussion: In this experiment first of all average height and its uncertainty was found between 10cm and 90cm mark on meter stick was found to check correctness of length measuring instrument. Reported value is the same as expected value. Then different heights of pendulum were found to obtain average distance at which pendulum will be suspended above ground which is 3.6 ± 0.2. Time for 10 oscillations of pendulum was repeatedly measured. About As an educational psychologist, I teach students with different academic abilities. I have learned to listen carefully and am well versed with subject areas such as cognitive behavior analysis, ethics, communication skills and counseling psychology Scanned with CamScanner Scanned with CamScanner Scanned with CamScanner Scanned with CamScanner Scanned with CamScanner Scanned with CamScanner Scanned with CamScanner PHYS 164 LAB #24 Interference of Light Waves Instrumental uncertainty 0.2 cm dX = dD = DATA & ANALYSIS Source Wavelength ltrue = 546.1 nm Part I. DIFFRACTION GRATING GRATING 1 100 l i nes/ mm ORDER m 1 2 3 GRATING 2 300 l i nes/ mm ORDER m 1 2 3 GRATING 3 600 l i nes/ mm ORDER m 1 2 3 N= d = 1/N = D= XL (cm) 2.5 5 7.6 1000 1.00E-03 44.4 XR (cm) 3.0 5.7 7.9 lines/cm cm cm Xavg (cm) 2.8 5.4 7.8 Grating constant Screen distance ± tan q (cm) 0.2 0.06 0.2 0.12 0.2 0.17 N= d = 1/N = D= XL (cm) 4.7 9.3 14.4 3000 lines/cm cm 3.333E-04 cm 26.3 XR Xavg (cm) (cm) 4.5 4.6 8.7 9.0 12.3 13.4 Grating constant Screen distance ± tan q (cm) 0.2 0.17 0.2 0.34 0.2 0.51 N= d = 1/N = D= XL (cm) 3.9 8.3 13.3 6000 lines/cm cm 1.667E-04 cm 9.8 XR Xavg (cm) (cm) 3.7 3.8 9.4 8.9 14.2 13.8 Grating constant Screen distance ± tan q (cm) 0.2 0.39 0.2 0.90 0.2 1.40 ± 0.00 0.01 0.01 ± 0.01 0.01 0.01 ± 0.02 0.03 0.03 q (rad) 0.06 0.12 0.17 q (rad) 0.17 0.33 0.47 q (rad) 0.37 0.73 0.95 6. Compare appearance of mercury spectrum w/ monochromatic source (use 600 lines/mm grating) Color diffracted most? Orange Color diffracted least? Part II. THIN-FILM INTERFERENCE 8. Make a sketch on a sheet of paper of the fringes 9. Describe effect on fringes by depressing one edge 10. Measure fringes over cm  sin q ± 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.12 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.01  sin q ± 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.17 0.32 0.45 0.01 0.01 0.01  sin q ± 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.36 0.67 0.81 0.02 0.01 0.01 Purple lexp (nm) 618.2 598.2 573.2 ± (nm) 47.6 24.7 16.9 % Diff lexp (nm) 574.3 539.6 502.9 ± (nm) 26.3 12.6 7.5 % Diff lexp (nm) 602.5 558.5 452.4 ± (nm) 32.9 10.1 3.8 % Diff 13.2 9.5 5.0 5.2 1.2 7.9 10.3 2.3 17.2 Agree w/ Uncert ? No No No 570.6 573.5 556.3 Agree w/ Uncert ? No Yes No 548.0 552.2 510.4 Agree w/ Uncert ? No No No 569.6 548.4 448.6 ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

dynamic_tutor
School: Duke University

Hi dude,I am sending you the draft version of your Lab report.In order to add the reference, I need the title and the authors of the Lab Manual used for this experiment.Also, in the excel file there in no results relating the third part of the experiment, Thin-Film Interference. Do you have any notes from the class?I have not included the experimental procedure into the Lab report as it had not been included in the example you had sent me.I am waiting for your valuable comments :)

Professor:
Student:
Physics

September 21, 2019

Experiment # 24
Interference of Light Waves

Contents
Objective ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
Theory ........................................................................................................................................................... 1
Apparatus and Procedure .............................................................................................................................. 1
Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 1
Measurement Uncertainty ..............................................................................................................................

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
The tutor managed to follow the requirements for my assignment and helped me understand the concepts on it.

Anonymous
The tutor was knowledgeable, will be using the service again.

Anonymous
Awesome quality of the tutor. They were helpful and accommodating given my needs.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors