Slope Measurement Lab Report

538 Words3 Pages
In this lab I concluded that the mass (kg) was the independent and the weight (N) was the dependent, because when you read the spring scale it depended on the amount of mass that was hanging from the spring scale.

When I made my graph the slope relation was the amount of mass compared to the amount of weight. The more mass we put on the more it weighed. If we use the equation to find slope (Y2-Y1)/ (X2-X1), using my first point on scale 1(2, 0.2), and my last point of scale 1 (0.16, 0.02). I get 0.2- 2= -1.8 divide by 0.02- 0.16= -0.14 and get a slope of 12.8. This means that the slope is going to be an upward positive slope. Since Fg=m*g, and acceleration due to gravity (g) (9.8m/s^2), the more mass there is the more weight there will
…show more content…
The problems we found during the lab were that the spring scales were not calibrated or they were broken. We also had some bad data on the second scale (.06, 1) it was a lot of weight compared to the mass, and you can see on the graph that it is in a weird place and not near the line of best fit. Non of those errors messed up the lab too much.

Since Fg=m*g, an acceleration due to gravity (g) on earth is always 9.8m/s^2. Theory says that the more mass the more weigh. In our group our data was pretty good we had two mess ups on scale 2 (.06kg, 1N) and (.14kg, 2N). These points were a lot bigger then the points with scale 1 and scale 3, and when I made the graph those two points were farther away and more of set of the line of best fit. Also on scale 2 and 1 I had the same weight for 2 different masses I had 2N for both .14kg and .16kg this also happened on scale 1 and 3 on trail 6 and 5 on scale 1 I had (.14kg, 1.8N) and on scale 3 I had (.16kg, 1.8N). I think these mistakes happened because I read the scale wrong. Besides for that our data provides evidence that the more mass, the more

More about Slope Measurement Lab Report

Open Document