Flywheel Lab (MECH1070)

Group Report – Group 8

Group Members:
Owen Mansfield – 001037006
Zain Humayoun – 001031353
Aaron Hoang – 001044279
Robert Koroma – 000932696
Andrei Jagotincev – 001017782
6.1) Apparatus Set-Up

Figure 1 - Photograph of Flywheel Used

Figure 4 - Photograph of Apparatus Used

for Experiment

Figure 2 - Photograph of Timer Used

Figure 3 - Photograph of
Masses Used

6.2) Experimental Results & Processed Data

Table 1 - Table of Collected Results for Anti-Clockwise Motion

Mass (kg) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

1st Test 12.85 9.13 7.47 6.53 5.86 5.42

4 Revs 2nd Test 12.56 9.37 7.39 6.44 5.97 5.31
3rd Test 12.97 9.10 7.47 6.46 5.79 5.29
1st Test 19.26 13.42 10.90 9.47 8.49 7.81
8 Revs 2nd Test 18.95 13.67 10.82 9.38 8.61 7.70
3rd Test 19.39 13.40 10.90 9.41 8.42 7.69
Table 2 - Table of Collected Results for Clockwise Motion

Mass (kg) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

4 Revs ∞ 9.55 7.64 6.56 5.81 5.32

8 Revs ∞ 13.91 11.12 9.55 8.46 7.73

Table 3 - Processed Results for 8 Revolution Results

Mass 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

(kg)

t2 Anti- 1st Test 370.9 180.1 118.8 89.7 72.1 61.0

Clockwise 2nd Test 359.1 186.9 117.1 88.0 74.1 59.3
3rd Test 376.0 179.6 118.8 88.5 70.9 59.1
Clockwise - 193.5 123.7 91.2 71.6 59.8
1/t2 Anti- 1st Test 0.00270 0.00555 0.00842 0.01115 0.01387 0.01639
Clockwise 2nd Test 0.00278 0.00535 0.00854 0.01137 0.01349 0.01687
3rd Test 0.00266 0.00557 0.00842 0.01129 0.01411 0.01691
Clockwise - 0.00517 0.00809 0.01096 0.01397 0.01674

6.3) Graph of Results & Calculations

0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
1/(t^2)

0.01
y = 0.00559185x - 0.00003922
0.008 Clockwise

0.006 Anti-Clockwise

0.004
y = 0.00580392x - 0.00062233
0.002
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Added Mass (kg)

Figure 1 - Graph Showing Relationship Between Mass and Inverse of Time Squared

1 𝑔𝑅2 𝐹𝐵 ∗ 𝑅
2
= 𝑚−
𝑡 2ℎ𝐼 2ℎ𝐼
𝑔𝑅2
𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 =
2ℎ𝐼
𝐹𝐵 ∗ 𝑅
𝑌 − 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 = −
2ℎ𝐼
ℎ = 2𝜋𝑅𝑁
 𝑔𝑅
𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡(𝐴𝑛𝑡𝑖 − 𝐶𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑘𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒 ) =
4𝜋𝑁𝐼𝐴
𝑔𝑅
𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡(𝐶𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑘𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒 ) =
4𝜋𝑁𝐼𝐶
𝑅 = 0.018𝑚
𝑁=8
𝑔 = 9.81
𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡(𝐴) = 0.00559185

∴ 𝐼𝐴 = 0.314 𝑘𝑔𝑚 2
𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡(𝐶 ) = 0.00580392

∴ 𝐼𝐶 = 0.303 𝑘𝑔𝑚 2
𝐹𝐴
𝑌 − 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 (𝐴) = −
4𝜋𝑁𝐼𝐴
𝐹𝐶
𝑌 − 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 (𝐶 ) = −
4𝜋𝑁𝐼𝐶
𝑌 − 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 (𝐴) = −0.00003922

∴ 𝐹𝐴 = 0.00124𝑁
𝑌 − 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 (𝐶 ) = −0.00062233
∴ 𝐹𝐶 = 0.01893𝑁

6.4) Discussion
The results show that the moment of inertia is approximately the same regardless of the direction of
the flywheel, as the values for the clockwise and anti-clockwise are quite similar. There is a slight
difference but this could be explained by errors. However, there is a larger difference in the values
for the friction values for the two different directions. The value for the clockwise direction was 10
times as large as the anti-clockwise direction. One reason for this difference could be wear on the
bearings that support the flywheel. If the flywheel is consistently used in a single direction, then that
direction of motion would involve more wear, which would lead to a lower frictional resistance to
the motion of the flywheel. This difference could be reduced by replacing the bearings on which the
flywheel rotates, so that there would be no wear on the apparatus.

The experiment was repeated 3 times for each number of revolutions when testing in the
anticlockwise direction. All 3 sets of results for each number of revolutions were relatively similar,
proving that this set of results would be quite repeatable. For the processed results, the tests which
used 8 revolutions were preferred, as the initial few revolutions would involve an increasing angular
velocity, and therefore a higher number of revolutions would be better, to provide a better idea of
the time taken for a single revolution.

There were some flaws with the experimental procedure. Firstly, the point of release was not the
same every time, which means that the flywheel had differing amounts of rotation to accelerate
through before the timer was started, which would affect the time taken to complete the set
number of revolutions. A change of temperature could lead to variation in results, which would
cause an error. This is because, in hotter conditions, the frictional resistant to motion is less, which
means the time taken would be less. However, the change in temperature in the laboratory
environment would be minimal leading to near to no effect on the results. The error in this
experiment could be reduced by having a set point from which the flywheel should be reduced. This
would then make the experimental procedure less variable.

6.5) Conclusion
Flywheels are mechanical devices that rotate to store kinetic energy. The greater the moment of
inertia of a flywheel, the greater the kinetic energy. The moment of inertia is greater when the mass
of the flywheel is more distributed towards the outside of the flywheel. This is done using a light
inner part to the flywheel, with the majority of the mass being located around the outer rim of the
flywheel. The moment of inertia is a constant, and is not affected by the direction of rotation, which
was proven by this experiment.

The aim of the experiment was to determine the moment of inertia of a flywheel by using a falling
weight and to estimate the friction in the bearings. This was achieved by this experiment,
demonstrated by the values calculated for moment inertia and the frictional resistance. The errors in
the experiment were acceptable, as they didn’t have much of an effect on the results.