Our lab results on all three data table experiments had a percent error less than 5 percent. When examining these results I can be almost certain it was not systematic error due to the fact that a major percent error was not detected on every trial that was run in each of the three tables. With there being some percent error there is the possibility for random error which are from unknown factors, which could come from impact of outside forces like the air track interfering with the acceleration of the cart. Beings that this was the first lab for my lab partners and I were working there was room for slight personal errors with our use of the computer program as well as the lab equipment. How does the acceleration in Data Table 2 compare with that of Data Table 1? Why do we observe this difference? In data table 1 the rate of a_calculated was 2.829 m/s2 and table 2 was 4.77m/s2. The acceleration in the first table would be less than table two due to the fact that less mass is added to the hanger. This in turn does not add a greater gravitational pull downward due to the greater level of mass. Which means that the string has added tension, which pulls the cart faster in table number 2. How does the acceleration in Data Table 3 compare with that of Data Table 1? Why do we observe this difference? In data table 3 the rate of …show more content…
This was then tested against adding more weight in the second table, which increased the acceleration due to gravity, which made the second table faster than the third. While the third table went the slowest, because of the added weight on the cart which pulls back against the weight end more than tables on and two. This whole process in finding a_calculated would be the same as finding F=ma. Which makes this lab fully about testing Newton’s 2nd law and then checking out findings with percent