nal velocity “v” (of the centre of mass) in terms of “x” and “t” for the object to roll a distance 1m along the plank in average time t for each side of the plank (experimental velocity).
The disk exhibits both rotational motion and transitional motion as it rolls down the plank. Since it rolls without slipping, its bottom is momentarily at rest and the distance, velocity, and acceleration of the centre of mass is directly related to the angle of rotation, angular velocity, and angular acceleration of the centre of mass. The total mechanical energy of the disk is the sum of its kinetic energy of its centre of mass, rotational energy about its centre of mass and gravitational potential energy of its centre of mass.
The total time for the sides are different, time for when the plank is warped concave up is longer than when the concave is warped down since the disk faces higher friction when the concave is warped up hence taking more time and energy in overcoming friction to reach the end
Predicted velocity is lower on both cases as evidenced by the data i.e. predicted velocity is 0.7672m/s while velocity in the first and second case are 0.7968m/s and 0.813m/s respectively. This is so because predicted velocity does not take care of friction effects and errors in performing the