Playing with New Toys! Motion Party!

We had a bit of fun with technical dodads. More specifically, motion detectors. We had to set the up, connected with the laptops, so that we could use logger pro. The detector aspect was a microphone/speaker type thing, which sent out a sound wave. Right after that, it switched modes, now waiting to "hear" the sound wave bounce back at it. Send, receive, send, receive. One big cycle. But when setting the detector up, you had to be careful about where it was set. Because the signal that it sends out, goes in a cone-ish shape. So if there is anything in the cone that the signal hits, other than what you hope to have it hit and bounce back off of, it can mess with your data collection. If your data is incorrect, you were going to have a hard time with the testing of our understanding as to if we could use the system.

The Goal:

We downloaded a document before starting to use the motion detectors, which gave us a few different scenarios. Lines on a graph that using the Logger Pro program and the motion detectors, we had to attempt to recreate. 

Picture here

We, in groups of 3 or 4, spent the better portion of two classes doing things like figuring out where we needed to stand to be at zero on the graph, where to set the sensor so that nothing interfered with its signal, how quickly we needed to move, where we needed to change direction, and what worked best for recreating the graphs assigned. We took notes along side the graph designs, so that we could recreate the graph with Mr. Smail watching. We also needed to figure out a better object for catching the sensor's signal, because the body, in all of it's bumpy, curvy glory, can make some funny looking reflections. So we held a flat piece of foam in front of ourselves as we did our graphs, attempting to hold it as still as we could, so that he would get a "clean" graph.

The Black Box of Sciency Doom!

What is in the black box of science? Tubes? Pipes? A purple gelatin monster? Of course the gelatin monster doesn’t work, but how about two tubes, that have openings at both end? My group and I have watched the tests and we came up with a theory. We built our theory around multiple points.

1) Mr. Smail poured water three different times in two different spots in the box;

2) The first pour came out immediately, and the water loss was minimal, which could be attributed to a slight bit of water getting caught;

3) The second pour didn't come out immediately, like it was caught on something;

4) The third pour, which appeared to be in the same spot as the second, came out, but there was significant water loss;

5) The third pour came out purple.

So my group and I  theorized that there were two spots to pour the water into. The first spot was a generic tube slanted down. Nothing obstructing or changing the water. The second spot was obstructed by some kind of filter. That is why the first pour didn't come out immediately. The filter needed the pressure before water could pass. Caught in the filter was a dye. So when the water was forced through the filter, it got dyed purple. That would also explain the water loss, since once pressure fell below the needed amount, water would stop.