Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
=
sin
x
F F = cos
y
F F =
$able 1
1easurements of $hree Force 0onfiguration
F1 F2 F3
1agnitude 7g'8 94 194 1:!
irection 7degrees8 14 1!4 252
. diagram of the system 'as then dra'n and used to graphically add forces F
1
and F
2
to determine the
resultant force 7see attached8& $he resultant force 'as also calculated analytically and both results 'ere
recorded and compared to the force F
#
( the equilibriant:
$able 2
0omparison of 1agnitudes and irections of ;esultant
<raphical .nalytical F3 7Equilbriant8
1agnitude 7g'8 1:!&4 1:!&# 1:!
irection 7degrees8 =2&4 =1&= 252
Percent discrepancy bet'een both methods and the actual equilibriant 7 F
#
8 'as calculated and
recorded:
$able #
iscrepancy >et'een 0alculated ;esultants and Experimental Equilibriant
<raphical .nalytical
1agnitude discrepancy 7percent8 !&25 !&15
irection discrepancy 7percent8 !&51 !&2?
Part >:
.fter recording the measurements of the three force configuration( the force table 'as reset and four
ne' forces 'ere added to the table such that the ne' system 'as also in equilibrium& $he magnitude
7in gram 'eights( g
'
8 and direction 7in degrees8 of the four forces 'as then recorded:
$able ?
1easurements of Four Force 0onfiguration
F1 F2 F3 F4
1agnitude 7g'8 94 1:4 1!! 1:4
irection 7degrees8 2! =# 1:5 29!
. diagram of the system 'as then dra'n to graphically find the resultant of all four forces 7see
attached8&
Finally( the components of each force 'as added together to find the component of the resultant and
'as recorded along 'ith the propagation errors of the addition:
$able 4
0omponents of Four Forces and ;esultant
Fx1 7g'8 9!&4 Fx1 7g'8 !&592
Fx2 7g'8 2#&= Fx2 7g'8 4&!9
Fx3 7g'8 +:5&1 Fx3 7g'8 !&922
Fx4 7g'8 ! Fx4 7g'8 4&12
(Fx4) 7g'8 +1&=! @Fx4| 7g'8 11&5
Fy1 7g'8 24&9 Fy1 7g'8 1&=4
Fy2 7g'8 1:#&4 Fy2 7g'8 !&52#
Fy3 7g'8 +29&5 Fy3 7g'8 2&42
Fy4 7g'8 +1:4 Fy4 7g'8 !
(Fy4) 7g'8 +#&?! @Fy4| 7g'8 ?&::
$herefore the components of the resultant are:
F
x
= +1&=! A 11&5 g
'
F
y
B +#&?! A ?&:: g
'
Conclusions
<raphical measurements and analytical calculations yielded results 'hich 'ere %ery close to the
experimental %alues& *t 'as not surprising that analytical calculations 'ere closer than graphical
measurements& *t is li)ely that the limited accuracy of graphical measurement along 'ith slight
imperfections in the force table 7such as being slightly unle%el( or pulleys anchored at slight angles8 can
account for discrepancies& $he propagated error of the components of the resultant force in part >
became surprisingly large( but the margin of error still allo'ed for the theoretical %alue of !&