Physics term 1 internal assessment

An investigation on the effect of height of

release on the range

Submission by:
Cheshta Chhabra
DP 1
Abstract:
In the investigation, the exploration of the effect of the height from which the object
is released on the range that the object is traveled will be investigated. In order to do
the same, the utilization of a derived formula (R2 =4Hh) will be done.

Research question/ Aim:

To investigate what is the effect of the height of the release of an object on the range
(horizonal distance) travelled by the object?

Background information:
Projectile motion is a form of motion in which an object is thrown near the earth’s
surface, and it follows a curved path due to gravity (9.8 m/s). the object experiences
acceleration due to free fall vertically downward. Ignoring the uncontrollable factors,
two motions will be present, horizontal and vertical, both of which act independently.
The horizontal component has a constant velocity, whilst the vertical component has
variation in its velocity due to gravity.

Hypothesis:
My prediction for the experiment is that the more the height of release, the further
the marble will travel hence, a higher range. Relating to the relationship depicted in
the derived formula, R=4Hh.

Variables Description Method of

Independent variable
(h)
Dependent variable
(𝐑𝟐 )
Controlled variables
measurement
The independent variable A ruler (50 cm long) was
is the height from which utilized to measure the
the marble is being heights and make the
dropped. Changing this markings on the ramp.
variable will increment
or reduce the range that
the marble will travel.
The range. It will vary The marble left an imprint
depending on the value on the spot that it had
of the independent dropped on. The distance
variable. from the end of the ramp
to this imprint had been
measured with the ruler.
The surface of the ramp The surface was wooden.
– same friction.
The marble. (material Glass marble.
and radius) – same effect
of mass and same
friction.
The position of the ramp The position of the ramp
(H) and its distance from the
ground was not varied
 Angle of launch The same ramp was
utilized for each reading

Apparatus/materials:
- Ramp
- Ruler: 50 cm long (uncertainty: ± 0.1)
- Marble
- A4 size sheets
- Blue carbon paper
- Marker
- Table

Derivation of formula:

Mgh=1/2mv^2
V^2 √2gh
V=d/t
√2gh=R
2h=r^2/2H

S=ut+1/2at^2
H=1/2gt^2
√(2H/a)

R^2=4Hh

Method:
1. The apparatus was setup. Setup: the ramp with markings of the variable was
placed on a table and its position was fixed. On the floor, paper layered under
carbon paper was stuck.
2. The heights (h) taken for the independent variable were measured and
marked on the ramp using a bold marker.
3. The ball was positioned at the mark and released, making sure that no extra
force was applied to the marble. This was repeated 5 times for every height (7
heights with uniform difference)
4. The marble left an imprint on the spot that it landed on. The distance from the
end of the ramp to this imprint was measured as the range (R).
Raw data:

Height/h (in Horizontal distance travelled by the marble/ range (cm)

cm) (± 0.1)
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5

45 90.6 90.4 90.2 87.5 91.7

40 83.7 87.6 86.0 83.2 87.5
35 80.0 76.0 78.0 81.0 78.8
30 73.2 66.5 61.0 56.7 75.0
35 65.2 65.2 62.2 59.2 65.3
25 61.7 59.3 58.0 58.7 59.4
20 51.0 45.5 49.7 50.4 48.6
15 90.6 90.4 90.2 87.5 91.7
 Calculations to process data:

1. Calculating the average (R)

Calculating the mean value
Example: reading for 45 cm

90.6 + 90.4 + 90.2 + 87.5 + 91.7

5
= 90.1

2. Squaring the average (R2 )

90.12
= 8441.4

3. Uncertainty in R
(Maximum values from the trials – minimum values from the trials)/2

91.7 − 87.5
2
= 2.1

4. Calculating fractional uncertainty of R2

Dividing uncertainty in R by actual value of R, and then multiplying it by 2 since R
has to be squared

2.1
∗2
90.1
= 0.047

5. Final uncertainty
Multiplying the fractional uncertainty with the value of R2

= 0.047*8441.4

Drop
Height horizontal distance travelled by
(cm) the ball
Fractional Final
(± 0.1 average Uncertainty uncertainty uncertainty
cm) t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 (cm) R2 in R (+/-) in R2 (+/-)

45 90.6 90.4 90.2 87.5 91.7 90.1 8114.4 2.1 0.047 378.33
40 83.7 87.6 86.0 83.2 87.5 85.6 7327.4 2.2 0.051 376.64
35 80.0 76.0 78.0 81.0 78.8 78.8 6203.1 2.5 0.063 393.80
30 73.2 66.5 61.0 56.7 75.0 66.5 4419.6 9.2 0.275 1216.58
25 65.2 65.2 62.2 59.2 65.3 63.4 4022.1 3.1 0.096 386.86
20 61.7 59.3 58.0 58.7 59.4 59.4 3530.7 1.9 0.062 219.85
15 51.0 45.5 49.7 50.4 48.6 49.0 2404.9 2.8 0.112 269.72
Processed data:

Graph:
Range travelled by the marble y = 192.16x - 618.84
9000.0
Horizontal distance travelled by Ball

8000.0
7000.0
6000.0
5000.0
(R^2) in cm

4000.0
3000.0
2000.0
1000.0
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Height (h) in cm (± 0.1)

the graph represents the relationship between the height of release and the distance
travelled by the ball (range). The error bars which vary in length make it evident that
there was involvement of human error in the investigation.

Results:
The graph showed progression. Which means that as the drop height/the release
height is increased, the value of the range increases. The presence of errors is the
cause of all the points not being lined up with the best fit line. The correlation
between the x-axis and the y-axis confirms my hypothesis. According to my derived
formula, R2 =4Hh and putting it into the form of y=mx+c, the equation of the graph
should be:
Y=(4*78.5)x
= 314x
But according to the equation of my best fit line:
y = 192.16x - 618.84
my results are very far off the figure which implies that they may not be accurate. My
results also suggest that the equation could be R2 =2.5Hh instead.

Evaluation:
overall, the experiment was successful to a very limited extent. The cause might be
the human/random errors that were made in the investigation. The following table
depicts the errors that might’ve possibly occurred, how they occurred, and how they
can be prevented/improved.

Error Improvement
The measurement of the The ruler that was utilized was wooden.
length/different heights of the ramp. Using a plastic transparent ruler
would’ve allowed the measurement to
be more accurate.
The measurement of the range. The Since for every reading the ruler was
placement of the ruler while measuring being lifted and placed again, the angle
of the ruler or its positioning might’ve
 the distance might not have been
constant.
Variability in readings.
When rolling off the ramp, the ball
could’ve possibly hit the edges of the
ramp, impacting the readings.
effected the reading, so a fixed scale
should be put/made on the ground.
More number of trials would’ve allowed
the reliability to increase and the error
bars to shorten.
Recording the trials and taking into
consideration the readings in which the
marble didn’t hit the walls of the ramp.

Extension:
As an extension to the experiment, the independent variable that was tested could be
varied and the effect of different variables could be tested and compared. The effect
of different values of H can be tested, or different types of surfaces of ramps or the
angle of the ramp could be varied.