How Height Affects Time Taken for A Falling Object to Reach Ground Level Essay Example for Free

How Height Affects quantify Taken for A Falling Object to Reach purpose Level EssayIntroduction In this investigation, how spinning top go step to the foreing affect the epoch taken for a steel thump bearing to reach the ground get out be investigated.It is was Isaac Newton that first observe solemness and wrote laws defining it. His Second Law of Motion states that the impressionant Force on an object (F) is commensurate to the Mass of the body (m) times its acceleration (a), or .The weight (W) of a body is the force of gravity acting on it, which gives it acceleration (g) if it is falling freely close to the earths surface. If the body was to have a nates (m) Newtons 2nd Law of Motion could calculate its weight. Given that and Newtons Law becomes .In April of 2003, in a order similar to that, which will be conducted in this investigation, the acceleration of gravity was concluded to be 9.81.Using the association mentioned above, several equation of motion ha ve been created. One particularly relevant to this investigation is .In this equation S = Distance in meters (In this case height)u = Initial velocity in *t = Time Taken in secondsa = Acceleration in *** As the ball begins its fall from rest, its initial velocity, u, will be 0** As the ball is falling under acceleration due(p) to gravity, = 9.81Plan In this investigation, since the means to calculate air resistance and friction ar unavailable, they will be ignored. Acceleration due to gravity and the method by which the investigation will be carried out are controlled variables. The height from which the ball is dropped is the independent variable, i.e. the variable that is changed and the dependent variable is the time taken for the ball to reach the ground.It is predicted that as the height from which the ball is dropped decreases, the time taken for the ball to reach the ground will also decrease. An actual fix up of predicted values can be predicted from the earlier mention E quations of Motion.This trace of the equation can be cogitate to the clean- byplay chart equation , (the gradient) and . When the ball is dropped from 0.00m, it takes 0.00seconds to reach the ground as this will mean that the graph will pass through the origin so .Alternatively .Using the above equations, the expected results for the investigation areHeight H, (m)Time t, (secs)Time square up t2, (secs2)1.00.4520.2040.90.4280.1830.80.4040.1630.70.3780.1430.60.3500.1230.50.3190.1020.40.2880.0820.30.2470.0610.20.2020.0410.10.1430.0200.00.0000.000This is what the expected graph of Height vs. time should look bidHeight (m)Time (secs)The following page shows what the expected graph for Height vs. time2 should look like. It is a straight line passing through the origin, thus proving the prediction .The expected gradient, m, should be equal to 1/2 g, or, 4.905ms-2. It is actually 4.926ms-2, which is only 0.021 ms-2 out or 0.428%. This is probably due to the rounding of decimal places when drawing the graph and human error in plotting the points (i.e. not exactly accurate to 3 decimal places.)Apparatus plotSafety As there is a very minimal risk in this investigation, no guard measures need to be taken.It is planned to drop the ball from a height of 1m and decrease in intervals of 0.1m. At each height 5 readings will be recorded and then the mean result will be calculated. This makes the results more unquestionable (and better for use in calculation like working out g or the mass of the steel ball.)The Results will be recorded in a evade like thisHeight (cm)Time taken for ball to reach ground (seconds) fee-tail ResultMean Result21st2nd3rd4th5th10090807060504030201000It is hoped that a graph of height vs. the mean results squared will be produced similar to that on page 4. In the graph, it is hoped to prove that the time-taken-for-a-ball2 to fall is today proportional to the height it is dropped from, i.e. .Obtaining EvidenceHeight (cm)Time taken for ball to reach ground (seconds)Mean ResultMean Result21st2nd3rd4th5th1000.4560.4540.4580.4540.4540.4550.207900.4320.4310.4310.4320.4320.4320.186800.4060.4070.4060.4070.4060.4060.165700.3800.3820.3820.3830.3810.3820.146600.3530.3540.3540.3540.3540.3540.125500.3230.3230.3220.3220.3220.3220.104400.2890.2880.2930.2890.2870.2890.084300.2520.2510.2510.2500.2510.2510.063200.2080.2070.2060.2060.2060.2070.043100.1500.1500.1500.1500.1510.1500.023000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.000Graphs In the following pages, the results recorded in the above table will be shown in the form of line graphs. This will make it easier to invest a trend in the results. It is also an appropriate method of recording the information and is useful for fast reference also if the time for the ball to fall is desired from a height other than the ones stipulate in the table, the value can be obtained from the graph.Conclusion The general trends from the graphs show, as predicted when the height from which the ball was dropped decreased, the time taken for the ball to reach the ground also decreased.In the graph of Height vs. Time2,, it is shown that Height is directly proportional to Time2. The reason for this is derived from one of the Equations of Motion , from this equation below, it was shown that .The final line of the above equation can be related to the straight-line graph equation . , (the gradient) and . C can be ignored as the line in the graph passes the y-axis at the orgin.Fundamentally .H = S = The height in meters from which the ball was dropped.= The time in seconds that the ball took to land.a = g = The acceleration due to the gravitational pull of the earth.Note The calculate that affected the acceleration was g, (which, on earth, is ) is the mass of the planet, for Earth this is constant.The results of the investigation are consistent with the prediction. The relationship of was turn out in the similarity of the graphs on page 4 8, they had almost the exact same gradient, only 0.072 ms-2 in difference (or 1.462%) it was also very similar to the mathematical prediction of the gradient (1/2g) again only 0.051 ms-2 out.military rating In this investigation, all results are held to be very reliable. When the data was being collected, sophisticated technology was utilize which measured time accurately and reliably to the nearest thousandth of a second. all told recorded results were in very close proximity of each other, so that 0.006seconds was the maximum difference observed.There were no anomalies observed. All points on the graph on page 8 are not only close to the line of best fit, they are actually on it.The results in this investigation are believed to be very reliable as a result no changes need to be made to the procedure.