Final Report - King of the Hill

NG 1 - Key Question

The objective of this project was to utilize our knowledge from physics class to construct the best possible car that would go up the hill by maximizing potential/kinetic energy. We were also trying to accomplish building a car that would go up the hill quickly and smoothly. Overall, our main objective was to win the entire competition with the car.

NG 2 - Investigating

Our plan was altered from our original design, so our entire Car Plan was changed. that happens! We found that making the car out of a single rat trap was the most efficient way to build the best car possible within the $20 budget. In order to construct the vehicle, the base was to be made from the rat trap itself. Then, we place two eye hooks on each side of the rat trap so that there would be spots to attach the axels to the car. Next, we used a power saw to split one wooden dowel in half. These dowels served as the axels, which we slipped into the eye hooks. We also cut the straw into four, 1-inch long pieces and placed them on the outside of the eye hooks right before attaching the wheels. Wooden plaques were then used as said wheels, which were also drilled into used a drill so that each one would fit on the sides of the rat trap. We used tacky glue to secure them into place and then waited for them to dry. Afterwords, we put two rubber bands on each wheel for a total of 8 rubber bands to utilize friction. Lastly, we used a parachute cord and tied it to the spring of the rat trap, which thus served as our winder. A nail was then placed into the back axel to hold the cord in place as we winded up the wheels.

Material	Cost
Rat Trap (x1)	$1.97
Wooden Dowels 28 cm (x10 bag)	$3.00
Rubber bands (assorted bag)	$2.50
Parachute cord (x1)	Free
Nail (x1)	Free
Wooden plaques (x4)	$6.00
Eye hooks 2 in (x4)	$3.99
Straw	Free
TOTAL	$17.46

NG 3 - Analysis

Race 1: The first race we competed in was in the 32 round since we got a bye for the first round. In this round, the opponent's car was kind of weak so we easily crushed their car. It wasn't a surprise since I had seen it in action in the round before, so I knew that our car would be faster than the other one.good

Race 2: This race was more competitive, however the opponent's car had a lighter body than ours, so although we both met at the top of the hill at the same time, our car was able to push their car back down with ease.

Race 3: This race was our last race before getting eliminated. Both cars performed pretty well considering that they had made it far into the competition. I'm biased in thinking that my partner and I got a bad break. In the race, our car and the opponent's car met at the top of the hill at the same time, but his car was heavier than mine, therefore my car slide on top of his. We were still at the same position though, so neither had the advantage of securing the hill. However, it was ruled that his car pushed mine even though we went up at the same time. I thought it was unfair initially, but I guess it didn't really matter since it was a fun competition in the end. My only regret was that my car wasn't heavy enough to push my opponent's car instead of the other way around.

NG 4 - Developing a Model

The entire model of our car is completely different from the original model that I posted in the Justification Statement. The final design was changed so that instead of being dependent on two mouse traps, one giant rat trap would be used. And instead of using wooden sticks as a lever to unwind the back axel, the actual spring itself was used to unwind it. Not only did this save space so that we would meet the 30 cm maximum length, but it also made it more convenient so that during the competition, the only thing we would have to really prepare would have just been the spring. Overall, I think that our new model was sleeker and more durable than our old one. yes

NG 5 - Evidence

To some extent, we were successful. We were successful because we achieved our goal of building a great car using materials under a $20 budget. However, we were unsuccessful because we did not achieve our goal of winning the whole competition. I think that this project did a good job of reminding us about the relationship between friction and kinetic energy, as well as forces in general. It also reminded us about Newton's three laws of motion, especially the 1st and 2nd laws. The concept of inertia and acceleration were keys to being successful in the competition. I think that the winner's car was the evidence that showed this. Patrick's car was a beast because he applied what he remembered about forces and momentum (and weights) into designing a perfect car that balanced all of these ideas. His was heavy enough so that it knocked back lighter cars, but was light enough so that the energy from the spring of the rat trap moved it and accelerated it with ease. If I were to do this again, I would add more weights to my car. I think that this was the biggest obstacle coming in to the Sweet 16 round. Every car was durable enough to show why Newton's Third Law would be why they would destroy anything lighter than their own cars. Equal forces but unequal masses the main thing that I would want to address if we did this again. good job!

Ticker Tapes

NG1: Key Question - what is the relationship between position/time on ramp  and...?

The relationship between the position and time on the ramp is that as time increased, cart's position grew further and further. Thus the movement of the cart can best be described as speeding up as it went traveled down the ramp in every 0.1 second interval. The relationship between velocity and time for the cart rolling down the ramp is that the slope of the velocity increased proportionally over the same time interval.

NG2: Investigate - photo, summary of what you did to get data

                         

The ticker timer was used to gather data for position and time by counting every 4th dot on the tape used. We counted every 4th dot because the timer that we used recorded 40 hertz which means 40 dots per 1 second; which was then 4 hertz  dots per 0.1 second. I used the ticker timer tape to create my velocity vs time graph by cutting them up for every 0.1 seconds that passed and then aligned them together in order to create a linear graph. This linear graph represents the rate of change of the object on every interval of 0.1 seconds, or the velocity of the object in other words.


NG3: Analysis - graph, verbal model, math model (units), describe motion of cart






VM: As the time increases, the position increases (not proportionally)
MM: Position = (33 cm/sec²)x time²
Y-int: 0 sec, it represents initial position

VM: As the time increases, the position  velocity increases proportionally
MM: Vfinal = (66 cm/sec²)x time + 0 cm/sec
Slope: When time increases by 1 second, then the velocity increases by 66 cm/sec called the....?
Y-int: At 0 seconds, it represents initial position

Average velocity: V = ∆x / t
V = 91.2 cm / 1.6 sec = 57 cm/sec


NG4: Models

The two new equations that were developed in this lab are a parabola and a linear line respectively.  those are shapes, not equations.  WHat are the equations that we will now take and use in other situations?>   The position vs. time graph was discovered by rolling the cart down an incline with ticker tape; the velocity vs. time graph was discovered by taking the tape pieces, flipping them on its side to represent cm/sec, and creating a new graph. The area under the velocity graph thus represents the total distance traveled over the time interval

NG5: Explaining

The position vs time graph and the velocity vs time graph did not have the same numbers for the slope, but did for the constants. The constants were both zero to represent that the initial position,  ??however the slopes were different because they represented different things. The slope of the 2nd graph represents the rate of change of what?  But how did we compare across groups??. An error that I experienced in my experiment was that I did not use a more accurate ticker tape timer. Instead of using a 60 hertz timer, I used a 40 hertz one, thus my data was not as accurate as it could have been. Another source of error was deciding where my starting point would be on the tape since the cart did not go smoothly around the first few seconds. Something that I would like to test in regards to acceleration would be to test the cart going uphill instead of downhill. It would be interesting to see what the position vs time graph and velocity graph would look like when the acceleration vectors of the motion map are in the other direction. good idea

Car Plan and Justification

Material List

• CDs (x4) - Staples/at home
• Wooden block (x1) - Home Depot
• Wooden sticks (x2) - Home Depot
• Mouse/Rat traps (x2) - Home Depot
• Super and/or Hot glue
• String
• Rubber bands

Drawings

Justification Statement

The car that we designed will be propelled using two rat traps and have CDs as wheels. We decided to use rat traps because of the design of the rat traps themselves. The force from the snapping of the traps, we will, shall be enough to get the car over the hill and onto the other side. The CDs will be used as wheels because of their thinness, which will slide with little air resistance, its little inertia rotation. 

Forces: The forces that will act upon our car include the force of gravity, the normal force at an angle (since the initial position is on an angled wooden platform), the force of friction, and the applied force from the rat traps. The force of gravity and the normal force will be the same, but the friction force will be larger than the applied force since the car will not be moving at a constant speed.

Motion: The change in the velocity of the car will occur at the initial starting point. It will begin with a velocity of zero, and then will start to speed up due to the force of the rat traps. Thus, the velocity of the car will be speeding up in a positive direction until it is no longer in motion after going up the platform

Mass/Weight: Mass and weight affects the performance of the car due to impulse and change in momentum. If the car is really heavy, then the change in velocity will decrease. Likewise, if our car is very light, then the change in velocity will increase. We need to be careful when planning how much our car will weigh.

Newton's Laws: During this competition, Newton's 1st Law applies since the car will always remain at rest until it is provoked by the force of the rat traps. And on the other spectrum, it will always remain in motion until another force stops it. Newton's 3rd Law also applies if the two cars collide, for example. The forces exerted by the two will be the same no matter the mass or weight or change in velocity, which is the 3rd Law.

Momentum/Impulses: At the top of the hill, the two cars will most likely hit each other. But more specifically, the forces exerted by the two objects will be the same according to Newton's Third Law. Their impulse will also be the same since the time and the force shall be identical. However, the change in velocity will vary according to the mass of both cars. Whichever car is heavier will sustain more damage to the opposing car.

Energy: From what I've researched, I know that kinetic energy is the energy of motion. For the sake of this competition, I believe that kinetic energy (and velocity) will affect the distance required for the car to stop. 

Marshmallow Lab

NG1 Key

Q1: How does the height of the shooter affect the distance traveled by the marshmallow?
IV: Height of the shooter
DV: Distance the marshmallow travels (inches)
CV: the marshmallow and the shooting device and the force of the blow

Q2: How does the shooting device's texture affect the distance traveled by the marshmallow?
IV: Different paper used to shoot the marshmallow
DV: Distance the marshmallow travels (inches)
CV: Marshmallow,  force of the blow, and height

Q3: How does the strength of the blow affect the distance traveled by the marshmallow?
IV: How hard the marshmallow is blown into by the shooter
DV: Distance the marshmallow travels (inches)
CV: The shooting device, the marshmallow, the height
all good

NG2 Investigate

Procedure:

1. First we decided to conduct three different tests for the variable of height. We achieved this by shooting the marshmallow in a straight direction from standing on the ground, then standing on a chair, and finally on an elevated table. We also kept the marshmallow, the tube, and the force of blow constant. We then recorded the data what data?  what exactly did you measure? with various meter sticks

         The data we recorded was how far the marshmallow traveled in inches with different independent variables affecting it.

1. We then repeated a similar experiment but instead of height, we tested how far the marshmallow went when shot from a tube made from different material. We used three different tubes made from a folder binder, binder paper, and wax paper while also keeping constant the marshmallow, the height, and the force of blow. We then recorded the data with meter sticks again.
2. Lastly, we shot the marshmallow by blowing with different forces from the tube. The tube, the height, and the marshmallow were kept constant this time. Using meter sticks once more, we measured how far the marshmallow went when the tube was blown softly, medium, and hard.

NG3 Data

Experiment 1

Independent Variable (Height)	Dependent Variable Result (Inches)
Ground	191 In
Chair	206 In
Table	242 In

VM: As the height from which the marshmallow was shot increases, the distance it travels also increases

Experiment 2

Independent Variable (Paper Material)	Dependent Variable Result (Inches)
Folder Paper	195 In
Binder Paper	142 In
Wax paper	104 In

VM: When the material of the paper of each tube is thicker, the marshmallow travels further.

Experiment 3

Independent Variable (Force of Blow)	Dependent Variable Result (Inches)
Soft	96 In
Medium	168 In
Hard	314 In

VM: As the force of the blow increases, the distance traveled by the marshmallow also increase

NG4 Model

The equation p = mv is the equation from momentum. This means that Momentum = Mass x Velocity. We learned that momentum can be defined as a "mass in motion". The velocity of that mass affects the quality of its motion. The equation FT = mΔV is the equation for impulse. This means that Force x Time = Mass x Change in Velocity. We learned that impulse in physics is the change in momentum. We observed the relationship between momentum and impulse in our lab experiment. For example, other experiments conducted by our peers chose to make the length of the tube the independent variable. This affected the time it took for that the force of air to reach  acted on the marshmallow, thus changing the momentum of the marshmallow, or its impulse. Our group only conducted one experiment that tested impulse, which was experiment 3. Overall, when time and mass were held constant in our experiments, then force and velocity thus increased proportionally.

We observed similar data from other groups' experiments. The data in almost all of our experiments showed that the momentum affected the time it took for the marshmallow to reach the ground. no it doesn't  - only the height affects the time to hit the ground.  Whether the independent variable was height or force of blow, it was not surprising to observe that further the marshmallow was from the ground, the more longer it stayed in the air because more time was needed for gravity to pull it back down.
 hmmm..  I am not convinced you know well how this equation works... some stuff is there but I would like to see a clearer explanation of how the force affects velocity (thus affecting distance), same for time in the tube (although that explanation wasn't so bad).  And how does the equation tell you the velocity the mallow leaves the tube with, and then how does the height allow it to go further....
I now have better understanding of the equation for impulse FT = mΔV. In one of our experiments, we held the force and the mass of the marshmallow constant. We then made the time our independent variable by increasing the height from which the shooter blown. The higher the platform, the more time the marshmallow stayed in the air. As the time increased for the marshmallow to stay in the air, the velocity also increased in turn. Another example that we did not do in our experiment was to keep force and time constant. Therefore if we increased the mass of the marshmallow, its velocity would then increase as well.

NG5 Evidence

During our experiment, we committed some small errors. First, we had three shooting tubes but with different measurements for their radius. This affected how much air escaped from the tube when blowing the marshmallow, which thus affected how large or small the velocity truly was. yep  Another error that we had in our experiment was that we didn't really know how to keep the force of the blow constant. There was no way to accurately measure how hard to blow, so we tried our best to estimate how hard or soft to blow in experiments 1 and 2. Lastly, we made a mistake by forgetting to roll the marshmallow in flour before shooting it. Over time, the marshmallow became sticker since we kept picking it up and shooting it. The stickier it became, the harder it took to smoothly get the marshmallow out. The flour could have prevented this stickiness, which presented some additional difficulty when shooting the marshmallow out of the tube. We could have improved this experiment by a performing different tests with different independent variables. A good experiment that my peers tested was how the length of the tube affected the distance traveled by the marshmallow. This would have been better to perform that our experiment 2 because this one affected the impulse. We also could have improved this test by repeating each experiment to confirm our results. yes.  good work!

Forces practice

Friday Practice - BFPM

Friction Lab

Partners: Christina and Gavriella
Group 3

Objective Statement:
Our objective was to figure out the which factors affect the force of friction on a two sided block. One side of the block had felt on it while the other side had vinyl on it.

Our Plan:
Our plan was to record the force of friction of the block by adding five different weights to the block in order to control the force of gravity. yes but we were really testing how hard the surfaces press together 

Prediction:
The side of the block with vinyl on it would experience a higher force of friction. what about the Fn?

Apparatus:

• Logger pro
• Weights
• Two-sided block with felt and vinyl

Procedure:

1. First we will set the Force Sensor on Logger Pro to be 10 N
2. We will lay the Force Sensor horizontally on the table and “zero” Logger Pro
3. Then we will connect the block to the Force Sensor and begin collecting data
4. As we collect data, we will hit collect on Logger Pro and drag our object at a constant velocity. why was constant velocity important?
5. We will add to the weight of the object each time to collect 5 data points.
6. We will change the Normal Force by changing the mass of the object we are using each time.

Data Collection:units!

Data Analysis:

VM: As the FN increased in Newtons, the force of friction also increased proportionally.

MM: FF = (0.229 N/N) FN - 0.1907 N

Slope: For every 1 N added, the Force of Friction increased by 0.299 N

Y-int: When the FN is 0 N, the Force of Friction is -0.1907 N

VM: As the FN increased in Newtons, the force of friction also increased proportionally.

MM: FF = (1.0591 N/N) FN - 0.3152 N

Slope: For every 1 N added, the Force of Friction increased by 1.0591 N

Y-int: When the FN is 0 N, the Force of Friction is -0.3152 N

Conclusion: 

In this lab, we were trying to find out the difference between the force of friction between the vinyl side and the felt side of a block in order to show their contrasting forces. To find this out, we tested both sides using a force sensor and adding different amounts of weight each time. Then we would pull the block by the force sensor so that we could measure and record the force of friction each time we tested it. The independent variable in this lab was the normal force (in Newtons). The dependent variable was the force of friction also measured in Newtons.

After doing this lab, we discovered that the slopes from our equations are the coefficients of friction. These tell you about the type of surface the object is on. We also found out from this lab that velocity and surface area do not affect the force of friction. Everyone's graph looked identical to ours: the slope of the felt side was significantly smaller than the slops of the vinyl side. The only differences were the y-intercepts and the number of the slope. Other graphs had different slopes because those other groups might have committed data error such as moving too fast or too slow. The equation for the calculation of the force of friction was Ff = μ Fn(N/N). This lab turned out exactly as we predicted: the vinyl side exhibited a larger force of friction.  I feel like you didn;t talk about how the surfaces pressing harder together affects the Ff.....  

Two people wearing identical shoes can have different forces of friction depending on the surface they are on. For example, a person with the same pair of shoes standing on ice will have a less force of friction, whereas the shoes of a person standing on a mountain side will exhibit a greater force of friction. Likewise, two people wearing different types of shoes will have have the same force of friction if they are on a frictionless surfaces. The coefficients of friction determine how much force of friction an object will feel. The force of gravity and the normal force does not affect this on the other hand. Yes, the normal force DOES affect the Ff,...  when the surfaces press together harder, there is more force of friction.  

One source of error that we had was when we measured the force of friction of the vinyl side of the block. When we were calculating our data, the block was kept riling up. This drastically affected how the block was pulled along. Another error we had was when we pulled the block. Sometimes we pulled it too fast or too slow, which messed up how we calculated the mean of the data. In the future, I am interested in finding out how tension affects the force of friction.

I feel like I am getting better at writing lab reports because they are a lot more thorough and informative. I think I can improve my writing of these reports by being more accurate.

Gravity Lab

Partners: Gavrielle and Christina

Group 3 

Objective Statement:

Our objective was to figure out the force of gravity measured in newtons when different masses measured in kilograms are added to a force sensor.

Our plan:

Our plan was to measure the force of gravity by adding five different weights to a mass hanger in order to calculate the forces in newtons.

Data Analysis:

1. In order to measure the force of gravity, we used the Dual Range Force Censor program via Logger Pro

2. We then added a metal mass hanger to the force sensor, which weighted 50 grams and used the "zero" option to reccaliberate the scale of the sensor.

3. Next we added different weights to the mass hanger and collected the data of the newtons produced. We repeated this step the following masses: 10 g, 20 g, 30 g, 40 g, and 50 g

4. We then converted each weight from grams to kilograms

5. The equation of the data points was Force = (9.1 N/kg)mass + 0.017 N, where 9.1 N/Kg = the gravitational field strength of the Earth and 0.017 N = when the mass is 0 kg

very nice

Data Table:

VM: As the mass increased in kg, the force of gravity in Newtons also increased proportionally

MM: Force = (9.1 N/Kg)Mass + 0.017 N

Slope: For every 1 Kg added, the force of gravity increased by 9.1 N

Y-intercept: When the mass is 0 kg, the force of gravity is 0.017 N. However, the force of gravity should by 0 N but the scale of our data points is close enough already.good

Conclusion/Claims and Evidence:

Weight, or the force of gravity, can be determined by multiplying the given mass of an object by 9.8 N/kg. The difference between mass and weight is that mass is defined as how much stuff is in something, whereas weight is defined as the force of gravity.excellent In this lab, we observed that the almost every other group had similar slopes to ours, which was 9.1 N/Kg. After finding out the average of each slope, we discovered that the earth's gravitational field strength is 9.8 N per every 1 Kg. So no matter where on the earth's surface, the gravitational strength always yields 9.8 N/Kg. So the new equation is Force = (9.8 N/Kg)Mass + 0 N. The y-intercept can be anything close to zero newtons. Light and heavy objects hit the ground at the same time because objects with different masses fall at the same acceleration rate of 9.8 m/s/s. Under the rule of free fall motion, all objects will fall at the same rate of acceleration regardless of their mass. This is because since all objects are within the Earth's gravitational field, they all experience the same amount of force. no not same force that would mean everything weighs the same...  the reason they all fall at same rate, a more massive object has more force on it, which is the same as a less massive object with less force on it...  the more massive object is harder move so it requires more force to move it. 

otherwise, great job!  neat and thorough!  :)

Dueling Buggies Lab (10/8/14)

Partner: Charles Lau
Group 1

Objective Statement:
Our objective was to figure out find out a model which demonstrated at which point two buggy vehicles moving from different directions will meet at. Both buggies moved at different speeds; one moved at a fast constant velocity while the other moved at a slower constant velocity.

Our plan:
1. In order to create the model for our lab, we needed to find the point-intercept equation y=mx+b
2. Our first step was calculating the speeds of both the red buggy - the faster one, and the blue buggy - the slower one
3. We measured out 100 cm on a table and then decided to calculate how long it would take for each each buggy to get across the table from 0 cm to 100 cm.

Data Analysis:
1. We recorded the data of the slow car first. The blue buggy traveled 100 cm in 2.49 seconds
2. Next we recorded the data of the fast car. The red buggy traveled 100 cm in 14.90 seconds.
3. We then calculated the speed of each buggy using the formula speed = distance/time to configure the constant velocities of each car. The blue buggy's slope was 14.90 cm/sec and the red buggy's slope was 40.16 cm/sec  
4. After finding out the slopes of both cars, we proceeded to use our model by setting the red buggy at 0 cm and the blue buggy at 150 cm, which was the given data
5. The equation for the fast red buggy was x = (40.16 cm/sec)t + 0, where t = time and 0 cm = the starting position.excellent!
6. The equation for the slow blue buggy was x = (-14.90 cm/sec)t + 150, where t = time and 150 cm = the starting position. The slope of this equation was negative because the buggy was moving in a negative direction at a slow constant speed.
7. After graphing both equations on a graphing calculator, we discovered that the two buggies intersected at 2.72 seconds when they both reached 109 cm from their opposite starting positions.

Using our Model/Designing a Solution:
With our model, we predicted that the two buggies would meet somewhere between the interval [105 cm, 110 cm] really early into the lab. The fast red buggy's slope was far steeper than the slope of the blue buggy, therefore it would cover more centimeters per second. We also predicted that two buggies would meet somewhere closer to the starting position of the red car rather than near the starting position of the blue one. Our method pretty much synchronized with the data produced, thus we do not believe that it was wrong.  looks great!

Buggy Lab (8/28/14)

Partner: Charles Lau
Group 1

Pre-lab observations:

• Constant speed 
• Positive and negative movement (position)
• Placement on the number line - single point
• Turned around
• Lights up
• Red
• Black wheels
• Flower pattern
• Noise
• Antenna
• Batteries
• Distance

Objective: We are trying to figure out the different positions of the buggy after moving in both a positive and a negative direction. as compared to the time...state both variables

Our plan: Our plan is to measure out six end points with a length of 12 inches each for a total of 72 inches. After that, we will turn on the buggy and place it at the starting position 12 inches away from the first end point. Then we will record the time it takes to get to that end point and then do the same for the other 5 end points.

Trial 1 Data:
units for position ?
      Time (sec)  |    Position

We moved the buggy in a positive direction and recorded data from 0 inches to 72 inches

VM: As the time the buggy traveled increased in seconds, the position of the buggy measured in inches also increased proportionally
MM: Position = (18 in/sec)time - 1 in
Slope: For every one second of time it passes, the buggy's position increases by 18 inches
Y-intercept: When the time is zero seconds, the starting position of the buggy is -1 inch.

Trial 2 Data:
units for position?
     Time (sec)   |    Position

We tested the same experiment, but this time we moved the buggy in a negative direction from the ending point at 72 inches.

VM: As the time the buggy traveled increased in seconds, the position measured in inches decreased proportionately

MM: Position = (-18 inches/sec)time + 87 inches

Slope: For every one second of time that passes, the position of the buggy decreases by 18 inches.

Y-Intercept: When the time is zero seconds, the starting /////position of the buggy is at 87 inches

Conclusion: In the lab, there were many claims and evidence to back our observations. First we observed that the buggy went at roughly the same speed as the buggies from other lab experiments. The reason for this is because almost all the other lab reports showed large slopes, which defined the speed and how fast the buggies went. We also observed that all of the buggies had different starting positions. Most of the buggies from the trials had different y-intercepts, some were positive while others were negative. Finally, we saw that many groups placed their buggies in both positive and negative directions. We observed this because the graphs increased or decreased depending on the data. However, we experienced a number of errors during this trial. The most common error was reaction time when we recorded the data of the buggy's position through the timer of our phones. We cannot say that we precisely recorded the data. can you improve that?  how?  or not?  If I were to improve this lab, I would have changed more than just the change of positive/negative direction of the buggy. For example, I would have added weights and inclined slopes in order to produce even more intriguing yet different trial datas. 

Journal Statement: Overall, this lab was a nice experiment to kick off the new year of Physics. It was easy and straight to the point, although as a class we struggled to stay on task and complete it faster. However, jumping into the topic of constant velocity without going over the basic lab procedures made things tough and a little frustrating at first. I do hope in the future that we can work on more labs as fun as this one was.good!!!

Earth-Moon Lab (8/27/2014)

First, we figured out the length of the diameter through the web, which was exactly 7,918 units!. To make scaling easier, we rounded this number to 8,000. We also found out that to get to the moon from the Earth's position, it would take 238,900 total miles to reach it. To make things easier once again, we rounded the number to 240,000 miles. We discovered that if we lined up 30 planet Earths side by side, their total diameter would add up to the total estimated amount it takes to reach the moon. The figure above shows a scaled down version of what the Earth's distance is in relation to the moon.

Excellent!  Good idea to use the earth as the measuring device!