KOH Final Lab Report

Key Question:
Our key question was not so much a question, but an objective. We had to create a car that was self-propelled and that could run over another oncoming car. This objective gave us many questions such as how weight, material, length, etc... might effect how the car performed.

Investigation:
We searched on the internet and decided it would be best if we create a rat trap car. It seemed like simplest and effective route to go and it worked out well. We used the rat trap as our base for the car and hot glued everything else around it. We glued zip ties to the bottom of our rat trap to hold the axels, which were straws. We also used CDs as our wheels and put rubber bands to give them more friction to go faster. We also used a metal string that we attached to our rear wheel, which would be the self-propelling aspect of the vehicle.

Materials List:
Rat trap- 2.50
CDs- 1.00
Rubber bands- 2.00
Straws- 2.00
Hot glue- 4.00
Metal string- 3.00
nice pics!

Analysis:

In the first round we got a bye because our car was so exceptional.

In the second round our opponent had taken someone else's car and therefore he was disqualified well that was lucky!

In the third round, we faced a very worthy opponent. His car was very well constructed and was a top contender. When we let our cars loose, my opponents car won and my car was forced to retire. Our car was on the lighter side and its overall speed was on the slower side. For these reasons the other car trampled my car.

I believe our car was a success and it is amazing that we even made it to the third round. I am just happy that we created a car that made it up the hill and that we made an original car. 

If i were to create another car like this in the future, i would definitely try to build a heavier car. This one was much too light for the competition and a heavy car would have a lot of success because it could trample other cars.

Developing a Model:

When we planned this, we were just aiming to make a car that could go up the hill and survive the initial test, and in that we succeeded. We used a rat trap because the force of the rat trap would be a good source for a self-propelling car. We super glued the zip ties and left them a little loose so the straw axels could spin. good idea We also used rubber bands on our wheels because when we used just CDs the wheels would just spin because they had no friction, but when we added the rubber bands, it traveled a fair distance. Our Metal wire also was a big part of our car as well. The metal string was strong and never came undone.

Evidence:

I believe our car was an overall success. We got it to go up the hill and we even made it to the third round. I was really happy when the car first  began to move and go up the hill. I believe we had a lot of success because the rat trap car was the simplest, yet effective. Most cars at the competition were rat trap cars and they were all pretty solid. Ours didn't look the strongest or fastest but at least it worked and it made it farther tan a lot of other cars did in the competition. I believe we had a lot of success because of our zip tie method. we used zip ties to hold the axels and it proved to be a good strategy. we left the zip ties a little loose so the axels would have less friction so they could spin faster. this method worked very well and we were the only group to actually do that. 

If i were to do this lab again i would create a heavy car that would trample other cars and make a better base to the vehicle, because mass is very important in this self-propelling car lab.

Ticker Tape Lab

Key Questions: What is the relationship between position and time for a cart rolling down a hill?
What is the relationship between velocity and time for a cart rolling down a hill?

We used a 60 hertz ticker and attached a long strand of paper to a cart. We then turned on the ticker and then let the car go down the ramp. The ticker made dots on the line and basically created a motion map on the piece of paper. Since the ticker tape was 60 hertz, the ratio was 6 dots to .1 seconds. We then marked every 6th dot on the thin piece of paper and measured the tape. We then created the position time graph.

Position Time graph:

Time(sec)	Position(cm)
0.1	1.2
0.2	3.2
0.3	5.9
0.4	6.3
0.5	10.4
0.6	15.2
0.7	20.7
0.8	26.9
0.9	33.8
1	40.2
1.1	48.2
1.2	56.7
1.3	65.7
1.4	75.7
1.5	86.1
1.6	97.4
1.7	108.9

VM: When the time increases, the position increases increasingly
MM: X=(34.639cm/s^2) t^2

Velocity Graph:

VM: As time increases, velocity increases proportionally
MM:
y=mx+b
Vf=at+Vi
a=(cm/s)/s this is the slope
We created our velocity graph by cutting our paper every 6 dots, which is also equivalent to .1 seconds. we then lined up each strand next to each other to see the constant acceleration and how the slope being constant showed constant acceleration.

Two New Equations:
Vf=at+Vi
This equation comes from the equation of y=mx+b in the velocity graph

displacement= 1/2(at)^2
We saw this equation from looking at the slopes and areas of the velocity graph and position graph. ??  I am not sure you know what this means...

The area under the line in the velocity graph is the total displacement of the item. we figured this out because we actually cut out the displacement of our car and pasted it and it created that line.

Did each have the same number for the constants and slopes?
No the slopes were different for each graph because everyone tested the cart at a different angle of the ramp which would change the amount of acceleration the cart would experience. The tickers were also different, which may have also changed results for each group. would different tickers matter?  why?

There may have also been human errors like pushing the cart or not starting the ticker at the right time, which may have produced tainted results.

A good way to change the experiment would maybe be to have everyone test the same ramp so the results would be the same. Or you could add weight to the cart and see how that affects the acceleration. good idea1

I overall liked the lab because we got to see acceleration in a good way and it was easy to understand. it was also fun to the use the tickers and use the carts.

Marshmallow Shooter Lab

Key Question 1:
How will the length of the tube affect the distance the marshmallow goes?

Materials:

why is your data table up here before you defined variables and stated your procedure?  Doesn;t make sense in the flow of the report...

Long (46.5cm)	Medium (34.2cm)	Short (22.5cm)
7m	6.21m	3.9m
8.45m	7.6m	4.1m
9.26m	8m	3.7m
Avg: 8.24m	Avg: 7.27m	Avg: 3.9m

IV: The length of the tube

DV: The distance marshmallow travels

CV: How hard we blow and the height we blow at.

Procedure:

For this experiment we will test if the length of the tube will affect the distance the marshmallow travels. We will keep the height of the tube, 160cm, and how hard the blow is the same. We will then shoot the marshmallow three times at each tube length: 46.5cm, 34.2cm, 22.5cm. we will measure the distance the marshmallow traveled each time and average them to get sufficient data. good

Conclusion: 
     We concluded that the distance the marshmallow traveled increased when we increased the tube length. The marshmallow would travel a farther distance because the marshmallow would experience the force of the blow longer in a longer tube and experience the force of the blow less in a smaller tube. show how this is based on the equation. ... how does a longer time make more distance?

Key Question 2:

How will changing the amount of blow affect the distance the marshmallow travel?

Soft	Medium	Hardest
3m	4.3m	6.2m
2.65m	4.3m	7m
3.55m	4m	7.1m
Avg: 3.1m	Avg: 4.2m	Avg: 6.77m

IV: How hard we blow

DV: The distance the marshmallow travels

CV: The height of the tube and the tube length.

Procedure:

For this experiment we will test if how hard we blow will affect the distance the marshmallow will travel. We will keep the tube length and height of the tube the same, we will use the 22.5cm tube and blow at 160cm??  did you mean height?. We will then blow soft, medium, then hardest, three times each and measure how far the marshmallow traveled each time and then average the data.

Conclusion:
        We concluded that the harder you blow, the farther the marshmallow will travel. The marshmallow would travel farther when we blew at a harder force and it makes sense because when you increase the force, the distance increases as well. Ft = M(delta)V really the velocity increases...then say how that increases the distance...

Key Question 3:

How will changing the height the marshmallow is shot at affect the distance traveled by the marshmallow?

.5m(height)	1m(height)	1.5m(height)
2.6m	3.5m	5.8m
2.5m	3.6m	5.7m
2.7m	3.65m	5.95m
Avg: 2.6m	Avg: 3.58m	Avg:5.82m

IV: The height the marshmallow is shot at

DV: The distance the marshmallow travels

CV: How hard the blow is and the length of the tube

Procedure:

In this experiment we will test if blowing the marshmallow at different heights will affect the distance the marshmallow travels. We will keep the tube length, 22.5cm, and how hard we blow the same. We will then test each height three times at .5m, 1m, and 1.5m. we will measure the distance traveled by the marshmallow each time and average the data at the end. good

Conclusion:
        We concluded that when you increase the height the marshmallow was shot at, the distance traveled by the marshmallow increases as well. This happened because the marshmallow had more time to fall because it was at a higher height and had more time to travel farther. but show using equation what the velocity was when it left the tube...