Hang something from a spring balance and you can measure the downward pull from the Earth. The pull is called the gravitational force. No one knows what causes this but several things are known about it:* All masses attract each other.* The greater the masses, the stronger the pull.* The closer the masses, the stronger the pull.On Earth, the acceleration of free fall is 10m/sOn Earth, there is a gravitational force of 10 Newtons on every kilogram.
These two facts are connected.You can use the Formula F=m x a to work out the acceleration of an object.1kg a=f/m a=f/m10N =10/1 =500/50=10m/s (g) =10m/s (g)In each case, the acceleration is the same; g.So you can think of g:- as an acceleration of 10m/s- as a gravitational field strength of 10N/kgTerminal Speed as a skydiver falls, the air resistance increases as their speed rises. Eventually, air resistance is enough to balance their weight. If they weigh 500 Newtons, then the air resistance rises to 500 Newtons.
She stops accelerating and falls with a maximum speed called their Terminal Speed.Potential EnergyPotential Energy = mghWhere m=massg=gravitational field strengthh=height above groundor Potential Energy = weight x height above ground.Kinetic EnergyKinetic Energy = 1/2mvAimIn this experiment, I will be testing whether the mass of an object will differ the time in which it takes to reach the ground.PredictionI predict that it will differ the time which it takes to hit the ground. The more cup cake holders there are the more mass it will be and thus will fall quicker. According to the theory of potential energy, mgh, the more mass there is the more energy an object will have and thus will be able to move more quickly towards the ground.
Theoretically, then, the results should be inversely proportional with time and the weight, with time decreasing as weight is increased.Fair TestingTo ensure that this test goes well we have to take into consideration all the variables. The height which the cupcake holders fall at is a variable. This should remain constant as the height which the cupcake holder fall at means that it will gain more energy (mgh).
The variable of the number is what we are testing so this will be changed accordingly.Number and RangeThe number of tests we will be doing is 10 as we have enough time to do this and the results will show a broader pattern. We will repeat each of the tests as well 3 times. This will range from 1 to 10 cupcakes. The range is wide spread enough to see any patterns or trends.
AccuracyThe accuracy of the test is ensured using the meter ruler which is fixed in order to ensure the height isn’t changed. Also the use of a stopwatch will make sure that the timing of the fall will be accurate.We will repeat the test several times in order to make sure we have satisfactory results.SafetyTo ensure safety we must make sure that the area of the testing is clear. Also we must make sure to take care when we are standing on a stool in order to drop the cupcake holders at the desired height.EquipmentCupcake Holder: x10StopwatchTwo meter rulersMethodDiagram of set up:First we fix the two-meter rulers to the wall to ensure that the measure of the height is constant. We place the cupcake holder(s) at the height of 2 meters using the ruler. We then drop the cupcake holder and get someone to start the stopwatch and stop when it reaches the ground.
This was redone according to the range and accuracy requirements.ResultsNo of Cupcake HoldersTime taken to fall from 2m high (sec)Average11.832.292.
710.840.75Analysis of ResultsThe results show that there is a trend that goes downwards on the graph.This shows that there is an inverse proportionality. The results areJustifying my PredictionMy prediction was right and the graph matches the fact that there is an inverse proportionality between the amount of cupcakes (or weight) and the time it take to fall.ConclusionThe amount of cupcakes had increased the weight of the object falling.
This meant that the air resistance had to increase to balance this as it has more energy when falling. Thus it takes quicker for it to fall to the ground.EvaluationI felt the test did not go as well as we had planned. The reliability of the test became less and less as the test drew on. Towards the end, there came a point where the obtaining results became harder as the speed which it fell increased and it became harder for us to time the time it took to fall using just the resources we had. The accuracy of the test was good as when comparing with other groups who have done this test, it was found that they also shared similar results with us.
The results which were taken in this test are very accurate. The three results which have been carried out are close together and close to the average, showing that this test has accurate results.The graph came out pretty well and overall the test was efficiently carried out.