Gena Horyn Block III Physics SL 14 October 11

Lab #2: Air Resistance

Research The goal of this experiment is to determine via a controlled setup the influence of air resistance and the extent thereof on downward acceleration. The procedure will involve gauging the distance and velocity of a fallen object and ascertaining trends as well as deviations from such. A Vernier motion detector will be set approximately 93 centimetres above a tabletop and a number of coffee filters, from five to one (the number being the independent variable in this experiment), will be released from a starting position directly under the detector, free to fall. The instrument will collect the velocities and positions at increments of .05 s and output them into a table. I predict the acceleration will decrease somewhat with time due to air resistance. Additionally, I predict subtraction of coffee filters will result in a longer time of fall and thus, presumably, greater air resistance forces.

Variables The independent variable is the number of coffee filters used in each trial, varying from one to five. The dependent variable is the deviation from freefall acceleration in the velocity regression. The controlled variables include the calibration of the instruments and the types of the coffee filters.

Materials Motion detector Stand for motion detector; ruler Computer and logging software Coffee filters, five

Procedure Set up motion detector on stand above table surface Connect motion detector to computer, initiate logger Drop coffee filter from height of detector Record position and velocity data Repeat using varying numbers of coffee filters

Data Note well that trial 1 corresponds to 5 filters, trial 2 corresponds to 4, etc. Also note that the uncertainty in the data is negligible for distance and velocity and very close to negligible for the time (i.e. at the very least, there is no accuracy standard given by the instruments; the two-decimal figure may well be merely a convention, given that the other data are given to six decimal places). Due to space constraints, note : All times are in seconds (s) All distances are in metres (m) All velocities are in metres per second (ms-1)

Velocity / ms-1

Time 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45 1.5 1.55

Trial 1: 5 filters Distance Velocity 0.178703 0.450854 0.212832 0.977169 0.279202 1.444221 0.375928 1.585327 0.439212 1.673649 0.52822 1.987018 0.646041 2.137652 0.754257 2.002072 0.859387 1.545501 0.928844 0.729447

Time 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

Trial 2: 4 filters Distance Velocity 0.178189 0.199035 0.182991 0.626261 0.237013 1.120562 0.308872 1.372286 0.381588 1.475567 0.451217 1.63954 0.542455 1.852676 0.641582 1.964628 0.742252 1.93976 0.848411 1.610957 0.928158 0.828821

Trial 4: 2 filters Time Distance Velocity 0.6 0.211631 0.730304 0.65 0.26068 0.935342 0.7 0.310244 1.030906 0.75 0.363923 1.095313 0.8 0.419832 1.143238 0.85 0.4802 1.168487 0.9 0.538339 1.179158 0.95 0.587731 1.363711 1 0.675539 1.526159 1.05 0.751513 1.472899 1.1 0.825773 1.30502 1.15 0.890943 0.93982 1.2 0.927815 0.439326

Trial 1 Velocity
Velocity / ms-1

3 2 1 0 1
Time / s

1.5

Trial 2 Velocity
4 2 0 0.5 0.7
Time / s

0.9

Time 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.35 1.4 1.45

Trial 3: 3 filters Distance Velocity 0.178532 0.326708 0.202027 0.754981 0.254163 1.180873 0.333568 1.354564 0.393593 1.427261 0.475398 1.500244 0.541769 1.598666 0.631806 1.755779 0.726303 1.719573 0.805364 1.586566 0.903291 1.092455 0.924042 0.435229

Trial 5: 1 filter Time Distance Velocity 0.55 0.196368 0.356053 0.6 0.221235 0.419413 0.65 0.241472 0.428369 0.7 0.259137 0.504591 0.75 0.289492 0.616447 0.8 0.330481 0.580051 0.85 0.344715 0.594914 0.9 0.379015 0.783469 0.95 0.428922 0.876937 1 0.474884 0.832442 1.05 0.508669 0.826249 1.1 0.554288 0.860644 1.15 0.599564 0.832633 1.2 0.639695 0.778991 1.25 0.665592 0.923909 1.3 0.734192 1.048913 1.35 0.776895 1.048723 1.4 0.834862 1.067778 1.45 0.900375 0.768225 1.5 0.917011 0.371107 1.55 0.927815 0.137009

Trial 3 Velocity
Velocity / ms-1

2 1 0 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5

Time / s

Trial 4 Velocity
Velocity / ms-1

2 1 0 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Time / s

Trial 5 Velocity
Velocity / ms-1

2 1 0 0.5 1
Time / s

1.5

Note well that the following velocity graphs discard some of the data points previously mentioned, especially the peaks, which represent merely the strong deceleration as the filter approaches the table and do not convey any meaningful information regarding the acceleration. Therefore, only the initial few points will be used to adulterate the results to the smallest extent possible.

Trial 1 Velocity
2
Velocity / ms-1

Trial 2 Velocity
2
Velocity / ms-1

1.5 1 0.5 0 1 1.1 1.2

Time / s

1.5 1 0.5 0

1.3

1.4

0.45

0.55
Time / s

0.65

0.75

y = 6.1075x - 6.1028

y = 6.5982x - 3.0002

Trial 3 Velocity
2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.8 1
Time / s

Trial 4 Velocity
1.4 1.2
Velocity / ms-1

Velocity / ms-1

1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0

1.2 y = 3.9663x - 3.0013

0.5

0.7
Time / s

0.9 y = 1.3751x + 0.009

Trial 5 Velocity
1
Velocity / ms-1

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.5 0.7 0.9

Time / s

1.1

y = 0.9192x - 0.1266

This table compares the number of filters used in each respective trial with the average of the gradient of the linear regression of the segment of the graph most resembling the expected trend.

Filters 1 2 3 4 5

Filters vs. Air Resistance Trial Acceleration Deviation from g 5 6.1075 3.6925 4 6.5982 3.2118 3 3.9663 5.8437 2 1.3751 8.4349 1 0.9192 8.8908

Number of filters v. deviation from g

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 Filters (#) y = 1.562x + 1.3288 4 5 6 Deviation from g (ms-2)

Conclusions Several general trends may be seen in evaluating these data. Firstly, as the velocity graphs show, the acceleration does show a trend of leveling off, seemingly to terminal velocity; this trend is a result of a force of drag that is increasing directly with the square of the velocity and opposing the force of gravity. Secondly, the hypothesis was correct and the greatest air resistance was seen in Trial 5 with one filter. This may be attributed, at least in part, to structural features; i.e. the non-rigidity of a single coffee filter makes it somewhat more aerodynamic than a greater number of filters. Thirdly, as the number of filters increases, so does the absolute value of the deviation from the accepted value of g (in this specific case, 9.81 ms-2) and thus the opposing force due to drag. Viz., if the filters were in true free fall, the graph of their velocity would be a straight line with g as the gradient. Fourthly, all of the trials show a velocity spike immediately after the sound portion of the trial. This may be a result of the proximity to the surface, air currents, and non-vertical movement of the coffee filters; however, there seems to be no conclusive answer as to its cause. Fifthly, in all of the cases the uncertainties are, for all intents and purposes, negligible, as the final results use only rather general trends and regressions, reducing propagation of error. Sixthly, according to the Number of filters v. deviation from g graph, adding a single coffee filter decreases the acceleration of the net force working on the objects in falling by approximately 1.6 ms-2.

Evaluation Although these trends are reasonable and present in all of the trials, the specific instances vary somewhat. Much of the data was inapplicable due to great variations in acceleration and inapplicability to actual freefall. The data collection occurred with high precision; however, certain errors, such as random nonvertical movement may have occurred and hampered the process. Otherwise, all of the conclusions are consistent.

Improvements The experiment would be improved by a normalization of data via repeated testing. Also, some method of restricting non-vertical movement might be devised to most accurately gauge the position and velocity.