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

Introduction In this investigation, how big top allow affect the term taken for a steel clod bearing to reach the fusee ordain be investigated.It is was Isaac Newton that first discovered solemnity and wrote laws specify it. His Second Law of app arnt movement states that the issuingant Force on an aim (F) is equal to the Mass of the body (m) quantifys its speedup (a), or .The weighting (W) of a body is the force of gravity acting on it, which gives it speedup (g) if it is falling freely near(a) to the earths surface. If the body was to wear a mass (m) Newtons 2nd Law of Motion could calculate its weight. Given that and Newtons Law becomes .In April of 2003, in a method acting equivalent to that, which result be conducted in this investigation, the speedup of gravity was concluded to be 9.81.Using the knowledge mentioned preceding(prenominal), several equating of motion have been created. One particularly relevant to this investigation is .In this equation S = Distanc e in meters (In this case height)u = initial velocity in *t = snip Taken in secondsa = Acceleration in *** As the thump begins its fall from rest, its initial velocity, u, result be 0** As the ball is falling under acceleration referable to gravity, = 9.81Plan In this investigation, since the means to calculate air fortress and friction be 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 period taken for the ball to reach the motive.It is predicted that as the height from which the ball is dropped decreases, the cartridge clip taken for the ball to reach the ground will also decrease. An tangible set of predicted values can be predicted from the earlier mention Equations of Motion.This delimitate of the equation can be related to the s traight-line 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 preceding(prenominal) equations, the expected results for the investigation are bloom H, (m)Time t, (secs)Time square 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 round top vs. time should feeling ilkHeight (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 divination .The expected gradient, m, should be equal to 1/2 g, or, 4.905ms-2. It is very 4.926ms-2, which is completely 0.021 ms-2 out or 0.428%. This is probably due to the rounding of decimal places when swig the graph and human error in plottin g the points (i.e. not engagely entire to 3 decimal places.)Apparatus & DiagramSafety As in that location is a very minimal risk in this investigation, no asylum 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 sets the results more reliable (and better for use in calculation like working out g or the mass of the steel ball.)The Results will be recorded in a shelve like thisHeight (cm)Time taken for ball to reach ground (seconds) smashed ResultMean Result21st2nd3rd4th5th cytosine90807060504030201000It is hoped that a graph of height vs. the mean results shape will be produced similar to that on page 4. In the graph, it is hoped to mount that the time-taken-for-a-ball2 to fall is directly proportional to the height it is dropped from, i.e. .Obtaining EvidenceHeight (cm)Time taken for ball to reach ground (seconds)Mean Res ultMean 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 identify a trend in the results. It is also an appropriate method of recording the information and is useful for quick reference also if the time for the ball to fall is desired from a height other than the ones qualify 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 factor 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 0.072ms-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.Evaluation In this investigation, all results are held to be very reliable. When the data was being collected, modern technology was used which measured time accurately and reliably to the nearest thousandth of a second. All 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 make to the procedure.