USING A DIGITAL CAMERA TO STUDY MOTION - ANDREW J. MCNEIL AND STEVEN DANIEL
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
McNeil and Daniel Using a digital camera to study motion Using a digital camera to study motion Andrew J. McNeil and Steven Daniel A digital camera is an excellent device for recording a range of motions and interactions of objects – SHM, free-fall, and elastic and inelastic collisions – so they can subsequently be analysed Some of our earliest conscious interactions with the article show selected frames from the video record physical world involve forces on objects, and their taken in lessons, and hence show other features like consequent motion. As children, we soon become lab taps, and what was on display boards at the time. skilled at applying just the right force for just the right The video frames have been augmented in Microsoft duration to produce the desired motion. Galileo’s Word, with the addition of features such as scales study of the motion of balls rolling down slopes was and dimensions. one of the earliest mathematical analyses of terrestrial The work described here was triggered by the motion (Gribbin, 2002: 101). Yet motion remains demise of our department’s last BBC ‘B’ computer, difficult to observe and quantify. Ticker-timers, and also by one of us (AJM) discovering the delights light gates and motion sensors of various types will and power of digital photography. When we found continue to be useful. This article describes how we out how easy it was to analyse the simple harmonic have used a digital camera to record and analyse motion (shm) of a mass oscillating on a spring, we motion in various situations, as part of an A-level went on to look at projectiles and collisions. physics course. The camera used was an Olympus C360Z. This records video in Quicktime format, at 15 frames per second (fps) with a frame size of 320 x Simple harmonic motion (shm) 240 pixels, giving a reasonable degree of resolution, Students are very familiar with everyday examples sufficient to measure the position of a pointer to the of shm, from the simple pendulum to the bungee nearest centimetre. The video can be viewed frame jumper. A computer and rotational position sensor by frame, using Olympus or Apple software. The file can be used to record the motion of a mass oscillating sizes are quite small, being about 0.3 MB for every 1 on a spring. We started by seeing if we could do this second (15 frames) of video. The photographs in this with the digital camera. Figure 1 shows the simple experimental arrange- ment. The camera was placed on a level surface at ABSTRACT the same height as the scale, and about 1 metre away, A digital camera can easily be used to make close enough to measure position to ± 0.5 cm, but not a video record of a range of motions and so close as to introduce serious parallax errors. There interactions of objects – shm, free-fall and was no need to synchronise the camera with the collisions, both elastic and inelastic. The video action. We set the mass oscillating, let it settle for a record allows measurements of displacement few cycles, and then started the camera and recorded and time, and hence calculation of velocities, the motion for a further 2–3 cycles. The time period and practice with the standard formulas for of about 1 second was long enough to resolve one motions and collisions. The camera extends the cycle, frame by frame. The centre of the oscillation range of motions that can be studied, to include was measured, from which the displacement every free-fall with forward motion and collisions between two moving objects. The exercise 1/15th of a second could easily be recorded. An gives students valuable experience in handling improvement on this arrangement would be to have raw data, and brings a concrete experience a scale with a central zero, and to position the resting to a part of physics that is sometimes treated mass with the pointer at zero. theoretically. School Science Review, September 2006, 88(322) 123
Using a digital camera to study motion McNeil and Daniel Figure 1 A frame from the video of an oscillating 600 g mass. The reading of the pointer is 8.5 cm on the scale. We have used these data with students to work Projectiles with the shm equations. Students calculated the time period from the video, and checked it against We then went on to use the camera to record the motion direct measurement with a stopclock. They used of a free-falling projectile. We used the arrangement the relationship between time period and spring shown in Figure 2 to produce a predetermined initial constant, velocity, followed by free-fall under gravity. The ball’s trajectory was very close to the wall, ending m on the side bench. This reduced parallax errors in T= 2≠ = 2π (1) k measuring positions, and also ensured that students were kept well out of the way. Demonstrations using where T is the time period (s), m is the oscillating mass faster and/or heavier projectiles and longer ranges (kg), and k is the spring constant (N m–1), to check would need an appropriate risk assessment. The ball the value of k agreed with the manufacturer’s data. was held in contact with the ramp, and then released, The maximum velocity, vmax (m s–1), at the centre of to minimise the chance of sliding as it rolled down the oscillation can be measured and checked against the ramp. the value calculated, using the formula, The video record can be used to plot the ball’s vmax = 2πfA (2) motion on the scale, using blobs of sticky tack. Students can see the vertical component of motion where f is the frequency (Hz), calculated as f = 1/T, increase, while the horizontal component stays and A is the amplitude (m). constant. The ball hit the bench between frames 7 and The expression for the displacement, x/m, of the 8, making the time of flight very close to 0.50 s. oscillating mass at any time t/s, We can use the kinematics equation, x = A cos(2πft) (3) s = ut + 12 gt 2 (4) often gives students difficulties. Points can be on the vertical component of motion, where s is the selected from the video record to check the calculated displacement (m), u is the initial vertical velocity (m displacements, both negative and positive. We have s–1) – equal to zero in this case – and t is the time of found calculations to agree with measurements from flight (s) under gravitational acceleration, g (taken the video record to within about 10 per cent. as 9.8 m s–2). This tells us that the ball has fallen Students enjoy getting involved in reading the through a vertical height of 1.2 m, in very good video record, and checking the formulas – which agreement with the scale on the wall. many feel initially are highly abstract – against a The ball travelled close to 55 cm horizontally very tangible physical experience. during its free fall, so the velocity formula, vh = s/t (5) gives the horizontal velocity, vh, as 1.1 m s–1. 124 School Science Review, September 2006, 88(322)
McNeil and Daniel Using a digital camera to study motion Figure 2 A small steel ball is rolled down the ramp R, placed on top of the wall cupboard. The blurred object at position ‘0’ is the ball leaving the end of the ramp with a horizontal velocity. The ball’s subsequent free-fall to the bench is shown by the black circles, some of which are marked with their frame numbers. Axes have been added to the digital video frame. The camera was positioned about 2 m away, level with the centre of the scale on the wall. There is some parallax error at the top and bottom of the scale. How does this compare with the velocity of the where I (kg m2) is the moment of inertia, and ω ball when rolled down the ramp on to a horizontal (rad s–1) is the angular velocity. Since the moment bench? The video record, shown in Figure 3, gives of inertia of a solid sphere is 0.4mr2 (Nelkon and the horizontal velocity, vh, as about 1.2 m s–1, in good Parker, 1995: 120; Tipler and Mosca, 2004), and agreement with the motion under free fall. ω = vh/r, expression (7) helpfully becomes: Does this velocity tally with the measured height Ek(r) = 0.2mvh2 (8) of the ramp? The first step is to use the simple (GCSE) relationship between initial potential and Expression (6) now becomes (Nelkon and Parker, final kinetic energy of the ball (where the mass of 1995: 120): the ball is m kg): mgh = 0.5mvh2 + 0.2mvh2 (9) mgh = 2 mvh 1 2 (6) The ball’s rotational kinetic energy Ek(r) is nearly The ramp’s measured height of 0.11 m should give equal to half of its linear kinetic energy. Taking the ball a horizontal velocity of about 1.5 m s–1. This height h = 0.11 m gives a predicted value of velocity clearly exceeds the measured velocity, so where has vh of 1.2 m s–1, close to the two measured values. some of the potential energy gone? You can use the disparity to help students see that the rolling ball has both linear and rotational Collisions kinetic energy. The rotational kinetic energy Ek(r) is We finally turned to studying momentum changes in given by collisions. Here we found the camera brought a real Ek(r) = 0.5Iω2 (7) bonus. In the past we have taught momentum using Figure 3 The same ball is rolled down the same ramp on to the horizontal bench. In 8 video frames (8/15ths of a second) the ball rolls about 62 cm, from 3 cm to 65 cm on the scale behind. School Science Review, September 2006, 88(322) 125
Using a digital camera to study motion McNeil and Daniel Figure 4 Two gliders are pushed to approach each other on the air track. Each carries a short vertical pencil stuck on with sticky tack, to record its position. Just behind the air track is a horizontal scale, with 5 cm markings, enabling positions to be read to the nearest cm. light gates or motion sensors, using the standard data from the video frame by frame, and recording gliders on an air track. The limitations on equipment their calculations on the board, checking each others’ available to us meant that we could measure the working as they go. Students appreciate seeing a velocity of only one glider, restricting us to inelastic macroscopic version of an intermolecular collision collisions with one glider initially at rest. With that can be related to the kinetic theory of ideal the camera we could record elastic and inelastic gases. They also see the need for a sign convention, collisions between two moving gliders. for the pattern to emerge. We were able to study elastic collisions, where Table 1 gives a typical set of results for an elastic the mutual repulsion of the magnets prevented the collision on a carefully levelled track. They show gliders making contact, and also wholly inelastic the conservation of momentum and kinetic energy collisions, where the gliders were locked together to within about 10 per cent. We offer only one set of by the magnets’ attraction. Glider velocities were results, to illustrate the typical values and precision calculated simply by measuring their displacement that can be achieved. in a known time, usually a few video frames. It was Inelastic collisions, as shown in Figure 6, can found to be important to measure velocities close to be treated the same way. Handling the gliders, and the moment of impact, to get accurate results. We seeing the magnets attracting and colliding helps found that with 5 cm divisions we could reasonably students to appreciate the transfer of kinetic energy estimate positions to the nearest centimetre. Figure 4 to internal energy. shows the experimental arrangement. It is quite straightforward to simulate explosions, Figure 5 shows the aftermath of an elastic collis- by tying two repelling gliders together with thread, ion. Measuring velocities of both gliders before and burning through the thread, and recording the after this type of collision – four values – shows that gliders’ motions. You can start with the tied gliders the system of gliders suffers no loss of momentum or at rest, simulating firing a gun, or in motion, perhaps kinetic energy. It is important to use small approach simulating the separation of a satellite and its booster velocities, to ensure the magnets do not make rocket. contact. As before, the students enjoy reading the Figure 5 After an elastic collision, the two gliders move apart. The velocity of each can be measured against the scale behind. 126 School Science Review, September 2006, 88(322)
McNeil and Daniel Using a digital camera to study motion Table 1 Glider A mass = 0.39 kg. Glider B mass = 0.57 kg Totals Before collision Before collision moved from 39 to 48 cm in 5 moved from 115 to 109 cm in 7 frames. Velocity = 0.27 m s–1. frames. Velocity = – 0.13 m s–1. Momentum Momentum Total momentum = mv = +0.11 kg m s–1 = mv = – 0.074 kg m s–1 = + 0.036 kg m s–1 Kinetic energy Kinetic energy Total Ek = + 0.014 J = + 0.005 J = + 0.019 J After collision After collision moved from 73 to 63 cm in 7 moved from 110 to 117 cm in 5 frames. Velocity = – 0.21 m s–1. frames. Velocity = 0.21 m s–1. Momentum Momentum Total momentum = mv = – 0.082 kg m s–1 = mv = +0.12 kg m s–1 = + 0.038 kg m s–1 Kinetic energy Kinetic energy Total Ek = + 0.009 J = + 0.013 J = + 0.022 J Figure 6 After an inelastic collision, the two gliders move as one object, held together by the magnets. Conclusion Many modern digital cameras can record in video situations. They get ‘hands on’ experience of making mode. This allows physics students to record measurements, and seeing the patterns emerge. This and analyse the motion of objects in a variety of simple video recording can greatly help students’ understanding of the physics of forces and motion. References Gribbin, J. (2002) Science: a history, 1534–2001. London: Tipler, P. A. and Mosca, G. (2004) Physics for scientists and BCA (Penguin). engineers. 5th edn. New York: W. H. Freeman. Nelkon, M. and Parker, P. (1995) Advanced level physics. 7th edn. London: Heinemann. Andrew James McNeil is now retired from teaching, but still very interested in science teaching, and thinking and learning skills in all aspects of education. He last taught at Wilsthorpe Business and Enterprise College, Long Eaton, Nottingham where co-author Steven Daniel currently teaches. Email: mcneilaandh@hotmail.com School Science Review, September 2006, 88(322) 127
You can also read