View Single Post
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-08-2012, 15:43
JamesCH95's Avatar
JamesCH95 JamesCH95 is online now
Hardcore Dork
AKA: JCH
FRC #0095 (The Grasshoppers)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Enfield, NH
Posts: 1,849
JamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond reputeJamesCH95 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coefficient of Friction Testing

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ether View Post
I don't see the point you are trying to make, in the context in which you originally posted.

You'd have to do that anyway, if you were measuring the angle between the ramp and the floor.


In my original post my point is that unless you measure actual rise (movement parallel to the force of gravity) and actual run (movement perpendicular to the force of gravity) the angle you calculate will be inaccurate by however off the reference surface is.

Furthermore, one has to measure either the angle of the reference surface (the surface that the carpenter's square is placed on) and then measure rise/run, or just measure the slope directly. The former contains three sources of error, the latter has only one source of error. I would prefer to measure just one thing, the angle of inclination, instead of the angle of a reference surface and two distances.

Determining if these errors are significant is the responsibility of the experimenter.
__________________
Theory is a nice place, I'd like to go there one day, I hear everything works there.

Maturity is knowing you were an idiot, common sense is trying to not be an idiot, wisdom is knowing that you will still be an idiot.