Activity Number 1: Newton’s Law of Motion

Leader1: Mhelvin A. De Castro and Group Members: Cyrus

James S. Bajeta, Isabel C. Naadat, Davonn D. Gahisan, Elixir James
R. Rabara

STEM Strand, Department of Education, San Jose del Monte

National High School, City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan3023
1
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. This laboratory report details experiments to determine

theoretical and experimental values of static friction, employing Newton’s
Laws and rigorous calculations. Overcoming challenges in achieving
certain results, the group persevered, ultimately succeeding in applying
physics principles. The focus was on angle changes and static friction,
with relative errors as the primary objective. These tasks demonstrated the
practical application of physics, enhancing problem-solving skills. This
serves as a valuable example for students, illustrating how physics is
relevant in daily life

Introduction
The amount of friction that must be overcome by any parallel force to the
surface while an object is being pulled across a horizontal or inclined surface
relies on the normal force and the coefficient of friction. Different techniques of
expressing normal force might be used depending on the circumstance. The
normal force, for instance, is equal to the weight in the situation where the object
is on a horizontal surface and is equal to the weight times the cosine of the angle
of the inclined surface in the case when the object is on an inclined surface. As
the normal force expression varies, observe how the friction changes. The degree
of friction, in Makkonen's hypothesis, is correlated with the surface energy of the
substance. As a result of the development of new surfaces, friction begins in
nanoscale interactions. The hypothesis clarifies how frictional force and frictional
heating are produced in dry contact.

Page 1 of 8
 The problems in this activity are given to students. In experiment A, students
Solve for the relative error using the experimental and theoretical values of the
applied force or three coefficients of static friction in the given values of 0.5, 0.6,
and 1.0. and for Experiment B, same as in Experiment A, but we have now
angles that we need to have a relative error using the experimental and theoretical
values of the given angles (15°, 30°, 45°). The significance of this exercise
completed by the students will aid them in the future solution of physics-related
problems, particularly in college and in engineering courses. Additionally, it will
enable the kids to develop their ideas and use them in daily life.

The equation that used to solve the problem are:

f = m • g (Friction= Mass x gravity)

│measured value−expected value│

Relative Error = x 100
expected value

f s= m • g (static friction • Mass • gravity)

f a=μ s n (cosθ) + n (sinθ)

Methodology

METHODOLOGY FOR EXPERIMENT A

EXPERIMENTAL
In the experimental methodology, the process begins with the setup of a
simulation application, where the key parameters such as the object's mass, the
applied force, the object's initial position and angle, as well as the coefficients of
static ( μs ) and kinetic ( μk ) friction are all initially set to zero. The experiment
unfolds in two parts. In the first part (1A), a 20 N, the object remains motionless
due to static friction's inhibiting effect on motion. applied, and if the static friction (
μs ) equals or exceeds 20 N. By progressively increasing the applied force to 200 N
we can observe changes. When we applied 400 N, the object successfully overcome
static friction and it begins to move and accelerates. The object's subsequent
behavior upon the release of the force depends on the value of the coefficient
kinetic friction of the ( μk ). In the second part (2A), when the static friction
coefficient ( μs ) is adjusted to 0.5 as compared to 0, indicating no static friction, the
object finds it easier to commence motion, with a lower threshold to overcome
static friction. Nevertheless, the object continues to accelerate due to the applied
force. Just like in the beginning, if you take away the force (reduce it to 0 N), the
object might stop because of the kinetic friction.

Page 2 of 8
THEORETICAL
Theoretical values were determined by employing the formula f a=μ s (m ∙
g). To solve for the first theoretical value, substitute the coefficient of static
friction( μs ) 0.5 and the object's mass(m) 75.0 kg and the gravity(g) 9.8 m/s² then
substitute it to the f a=μ s (m ∙ g). Repeat this process but change the coefficient of
static friction(μs) into 0.6 and 1.0. The theoretical value for the coefficient of static
friction( μs ) 0.5 is 367.5 N, the theoretical value for the coefficient of static friction(
μs ) 0.6 is 441 N and lastly the theoretical value for the coefficient of static friction(
μs ) 1.0 is 735 N. After determining the theoretical values, we can now proceed to
the relative error. The formula that we will use to get the value of relative error is
measured value minus expected value all over expected value times 100. Substitute
the measured value 367N and the expected value 367.5N to the formula then we
will get the relative error 0.14%. To get the relative errors of the remaining values
just repeat the process, substitute then solve. The second and third relative error we
get are both 0%. In conclusion all the relative error values calculated above are zero
percent, it indicates that there is no deviation or error between the experimental and
theoretical values.

METHODOLOGY FOR EXPERIMENT B

EXPERIMENTAL
In this computer simulation experiment, we didn't need any physical
equipment to accomplish our main goal, which was to investigate how changing the
ramp angle of an inclined plane affects the force needed to get an object moving.
We also aimed to see how close our measurements matched to what we expected.
To determine the experimental values, we start by setting up the simulation with all
the parameters at their designated values these includes object's mass(m) 75.0 kg,
gravity (g) 9.8m/s², static friction ( μs ) 0.5, object position 5 m and the angles which
are 15°,30° and 45° After arranging the designated values needed, we tried to get
the object moving on the slope at different angles (15°, 30°, and 45°) using the
computer simulation. After many trials, we've finally found the experimental values
or the maximum applied force needed before the object move. In the first angle
(15°) the experimental value is 545 N, In the next angle (30°) the experimental
value is 685 N and lastly in angle (45°) the experimental value is 779 N.

THEORETICAL
To solve for the theoretical values, the formula we use is f a=μ s n (cosθ) + n
(sinθ). To solve for the first theoretical value, we acquire all the needed values
which are the static friction( μs ) 0.5, object's mass(m) 75.0 kg, gravity(g) 9.8 m/s²
and the angle (15°) Then we substitute it to the f a=μ s n (cosθ) + n(sinθ). We repeat
this process but change the angles into 30° and 45°. Eventually we get the accurate
theoretical value needed. The theoretical value we obtained for the experimental
applied force 545 N is 545.2097393N, we just took the 2 decimal digits and

Page 3 of 8
 rounded them off so the equivalent is 545.21 N. The theoretical value we obtained
for the experimental applied force 685 N is 685.7643359N which is also equivalent
to 685.76 N. Lastly the theoretical value we obtained for the experimental applied
force 779 N is 779.5852263N, we just took the 2 decimal digits and rounded them
off so the result is 779.59 N. After determining the theoretical values, we can now
proceed to the relative error. The formula that we will use to get the value of
relative error is measured value minus expected value all over expected value times
100. Substitute the measured value 545N and the expected value 545.21N to the
formula then we will get the relative error 0.04%. To get the relative errors of the
two remaining values which are the 685N and 685.76N and 779N and 779.59N just
repeat the process, substitute those then solve. The second relative error we got is
0.11% while the last relative error is 0.08. Hence, all the relative error values
calculated above are zero percent, it indicates that there is no error between the
experimental and theoretical values.

Results and Discussions

Creating the necessary data for the activity posed a challenge for the team. The
process was informed by their theoretical decisions and its practical applicability.
Obtaining crucial data and validating their solutions were pivotal aspects of this
endeavor. When they conducted experiments, initial communication hurdles arose due to
the limitations of text-based interaction. Recognizing this, they opted for a Google Meet,
facilitating open discussion and collaborative problem-solving. This collective effort was
instrumental in identifying Newton's involvement in the experiments.

Page 4 of 8
 A similar approach was taken in Experiment B, resulting in its successful
execution. The activity's design, particularly the capability to manipulate objects based on
neutron input, proved effective. However, this functionality required a computer, as it
wasn't feasible on mobile devices. Additionally, the experimentalists encountered a
challenge in Experiment B as they were unsure of the required formula. They sought
assistance from another group, demonstrating effective teamwork and knowledge
sharing.

When addressing relative errors, they adhered to the formula:

│measured value−expected value│

x 100, ensuring accurate assessments of their
expected value
results.

This part of the Lab Report presents and discusses the results of the experiment of
the simulation of the forces and motion. In the activity sheet, it provides the procedure on
how to do the experiment, first is that it needs to set all the values to the initial
parameters. Then, set the applied force to 20 N and start the motion.Next is to repeat the
procedure by setting the applied force to 200 N. Then lastly, repeat for the 400 N. The
object moves using the given values of the applied force(N).

Furthermore, as the group moves forward to the experiment, there are adjustments
that need to be done on the static friction. To get the value of the theoretical we used the
formula for the applied force and the value of the experiment is based on the maximum
value that we get on the simulation before the box moves. The adjustments on the
parameters gives us different results for the given static friction values. For us to get the
relative error, we used the gathered data.

Table 1: Experiment A

Coefficient of Applied Force (N) Relative

Static error
Experimental Theoretical
Friction, μs

0.5 367 N 367.5 0.14%

N

0.6 441 N 441N 0.00%

Page 5 of 8
 1.0 735 N 735N 0.00%

Table 1: Results from the gathered data on experiment A

The Table 1 shows the value of the applied force that is needed for the object to
move that has a static friction. On the first row, we have a static friction of 0.5, with an
experimental value of 367N, theoretical value of 367.5N, and a 0.14% value for the
relative error. Next is the static friction of 0.6, with an experimental and theoretical value
of 441N, and a 0.00% value of relative error. Lastly, we have the value of static friction
which is 1.0, with an experimental and theoretical value of 735N, and a 0.00% value of
relative error.

In Experiment B, significant alterations in parameters were observed, particularly

involving an inclined plane with a specified angle of inclination. This mirrored the
approach taken in Experiment A, where theoretical values were determined using the
appropriate formula for calculating the necessary applied force on an inclined plane.
Experimental values, on the other hand, were derived from data collected just prior to the
object's onset of motion in the simulation. It's worth noting that the static friction value
remained constant at 0.5, while the angle of inclination was subject to variation. This
adjustment added an extra layer of complexity to the experiment, necessitating a
meticulous examination of how applied force, angle of inclination, and static friction
interact. The team's precision in parameter manipulation underscores the thoroughness of
the experimental design and highlights the importance of understanding how these
variables influence object motion on inclined planes.

Table 1: Experiment B
Applied Force (N) Relative error
Angle
Experimental Theoretical

15° 545 N 545.21 N 0.04%

30° 685 N 685.76 N 0.11%

45° 779 N 779.59 N 0.08%

Table 2: Results from the gathered data on experiment B

The table above shows applied force requirements for initiating and sustaining
motion on an inclined plane with different angles, maintaining a static friction coefficient

Page 6 of 8
of 0.5. At 15°, the experimental force closely matches the theoretical value with a mere
0.04% relative error. Meanwhile, at 30°, a slightly lower experimental force is observed,
resulting in a relative error of 0.11%. At 45°, the experimental force is again in close
proximity to the theoretical value, yielding a relative error of 0.08%. These findings
demonstrate the nuanced relationship between angle of inclination, static friction, and
applied force, affirming the precision of the experimental design.

Based on our careful observation, we discerned several critical insights. Firstly,

when an external force is applied to an object, its motion is contingent on its mass - a
fundamental principle that underlines Newton's Laws. Moreover, as the static friction
between the object and its surface intensifies, a greater force is requisite to overcome this
resistance and set the object in motion. This illustrates the intricate relationship between
static friction and applied force. Additionally, as the incline angle of the plane widens,
the necessary force for motion escalates. This observation underscores the impact of the
incline's steepness on the force required to overcome gravitational resistance. In
summary, our findings affirm a direct proportionality between applied force, angle of
inclination, and static friction, shedding light on the nuanced dynamics of object motion
on inclined surfaces.

Summary and Conclusion

The activity aims to grasp Newton's Law of Motion through simulation,
quantifying the force required to initiate an object's motion. It enhances students'
comprehension of the intricate connection between forces and motion.
Demonstrating that an object at rest remains so until acted upon by force, it
emphasizes the influence of friction on applied force. This establishes a direct
proportionality between applied force and static friction. Moreover, objects facing
resistance demand increased force for displacement. Particularly, inclined planes
necessitate significantly higher applied forces for movement. This exercise
provides invaluable insight into the fundamental principles governing motion and
forces.

Acknowledgement
I want to take a moment to express my deepest gratitude to the exceptional
individuals whose unwavering dedication and outstanding contributions have been
the cornerstone of the successful completion of this report:

- Cyrus James S. Bajeta

- Isabel C. Naadat
- Mhelvin A. De Castro
- Davonn D. Gahisan
- Elixir James D. Rabara
- John Michael S. Jordan (from the other group)
- Alexandre Kim T. Argao (from the other group)

Page 7 of 8
 - Tiffany Lorraine R. Cortel (from the other group)
- Sir Joseph Bernard C. Dalusong (Teacher)
- PhET Interactive Simulation

Each of you has showcased not only exceptional expertise but also an
admirable level of commitment throughout this endeavor. Your insightful
perspectives, tireless efforts, and meticulous attention to detail have been
invaluable in achieving the objectives of this activity.

Furthermore, I would like to extend my gratitude to all those who provided

significant input and support during the formal report writing process. Your
collective efforts have significantly enhanced the quality and depth of this
document.

I also wish to acknowledge the supportive role played by John Michael

Jordan, Alexandre Kim Argao, and Tiffany Cortel, whose guidance were
indispensable in shaping the outcome not only of this report, but also on the
experiment. Moreover, I would also like to extend my gratitude to Sir Joseph
Dalusong who explain the experiment and the lab report to us.

Once again, thank you all for your extraordinary contributions and
unwavering support. This report stands as a testament to our collective effort,
dedication, and the collaborative spirit that has made it all possible.

Page 8 of 8