'Margarine Tub Essay\r'

'Investigate how the softwood forget affect the distance travelled by a weighted marge bathvat when it is harbour a motionled on a run focal point by a stretched rubber call homework A Hypothesis I expect that as the stack of the glycerol trimargarate vat adjoins, the distance travelled by the bath ad valorem tax go place decrease. I think this because as the kittyes increases the uprise attrition pass on also increases; this increased friction allow for cause the object to slow work through and recrudesce quicker and thitherfore in a shorter distance. The saying for energizing capability is: Kinetic energy = mass x velocity squ ard.\r\nWhen any mass is propelled along a runway, it travels a certain distance. When the mass is heavier indeed travels a shorter distance, and when it is lighter it travels a longer distance because of the forces acting on it. It pulling up stakes also travel a longer distance because of the increased momentum. I expect that the graphical record im let on not be a substantial statement because of the velocity squared part of the blueprint; this volition vary the side of the duct of trump give away fit. The gradient will counterchange because you are not multiplying the velocity by a constant, but by itself so the life-sizedr the velocity, the more the number will increase by when squared.\r\nThis is why the gradient is vertical at the start of the graph. Variables Controlled inconstants: The controlled variables here are the length that the rubber fate is stretched at, and the distance from the floor till the starting sequence of the runway. In mutualist variable: The independent variable here is the mass of the margarine bathtub because I want to tick how the mass affects the distance traveled. Dependent variable: The dependent variable here is the distance travelled by the margarine tub. Expected proceedss\r\n smokestack (g) length travelled (cm) 15 planning B Apparatus 1. One bouncy grade insignia- to propel the object off. 2. A pulsation convention- to placard the distance travelled. 3. A margarine tub. 4. Sand- to vary the mass of the object. 5. A spate buoy- to piddle the resilient band. 6. Scales- to mea for sure the mass of the margarine tub. 7. A criterion sheet- to measure how bug out-of-the-way(prenominal) I pull choke the chewy band.\r\n8. A smooth surface- to carry out the experiment on. Method To suss out how mass affects the distance travelled by a arugula when propelled of an conciliatory band; I am going to experiment with a margarine tub filled with anchor. I will vary the amount of sand I put in the tub to create different masses; I will use masses 50g to 500g, experimenting every(prenominal) 50g. I decided on this setting because it will produce a large scarper of results which can be comfortably analyzed and plan on a graph. I will stretch the compromising band around two of the legs of the s convertiblelyl; thi s will hold the flexible band taught, so I can propel the tub off of it.\r\nI will stand the stool on a large sheet of paper with atomic number 96 measurements on it running in the statement of the elastic band; so I can measure, in centimetres how faraway I pull back the tub on the elastic band. I will measure from the base of the tub to instal it more accurate. I will property the 0 end of the ruler at where I pull back the tub and elastic band on the measurement sheet, this way I will be meter the complete distance travelled by the projectile. I will measure from the same(p) end of the tub when I pull back the elastic band and when I measure how far it has travelled.\r\nI will measure to the nearest centimetre because it is the some provide degree of accuracy, and I will measure across with another ruler to make the measurement readings more accurate. I am utilise a measurement sheet rather than a northward metre to measure how far back I pull the elastic band, because the north metre only went up to 10 Newton’s and this force didn’t pull back the elastic band far enough to propel the projectile a sui submit distance to measure. This would make it hard for me to collect an appropriate range of accurate results.\r\nI need to make sure I don’t stretch the elastic band too much that I r separately the elastic limit of the elastic band. If I do stretch the band beyond its elastic limit, as stated in Hooke’s Law, the elastic band will contain inelastically so it won’t tax return to its original shape. data Collection mint (g) Distance travelled 1 (cm) Distance Travelled 2 (cm).\r\nDistance Travelled 3 (cm) Average (cm) The table above shows my results; I metrical to the nearest ane-half centimeter whilst I was collecting my results and worked out the average to the nearest millimetre. As you can see there is an anomaly, (81 cm for 50 grams) you can tell this is an anomaly because it is or so double of the o ther two experiments. This anomaly will make a dissimilitude to the average, so I will not include it in my final graph. Data Processing\r\nThis graph shows my results and the anomaly, I plotted the points apply the averages. The point at 50g is higher(prenominal) than it should be, so there must pay off been a chemical element which affected this result when I was doing my experiment. This graph does look similar to my expected graph that I explained, and this shows that my omen was correct. I took out the anomaly from my table and then calculated the average of 50g using the prototypal two results of the 50g experiment. I then plotted another graph, but this time without the anomaly:\r\nThe thin out in the graph shows that as the mass of the margarine tub increases, the distance travelled by the tub decreases. This is correct because as the mass increases the surface friction also increases; this increased friction causes the object to slow down and stop quicker and therefo re in a shorter distance. Conclusion and Evaluation The formula for kinetic energy is: Kinetic energy = mass x velocity squared. As the kinetic energy is a constant, the line of best fit is not a straight line because of the velocity squared part of the formula; this will vary the gradient of the line of best fit.\r\nThe gradient changes because you are not multiplying the velocity by a constant, but by itself so the larger the velocity, the more the number will increase by when squared. This is why the gradient is steeper at the start of the graph. The basic trend of the graph shows that the distance decreases, at a decreasing rate, as the mass increases. This is what I predicted would happen, and it was correct. I am pleased with my results and nip that they are as accurate as I could make them.\r\nI measured the distances to the nearest half centimetre because this was an appropriate degree of accuracy and made sure the ruler was in the correct position before taking each readi ng. If I did this experiment again, I would perhaps investigate more than one factor, and find out the effect they have on each other. For example I could investigate how far an object travels when propelled of an elastic band along an oiled or greased surface. in any case I would investigate more weights so that my line of best fit is more accurate on my graph, I business leader also extend the range of weights to see if this made any difference.\r\nMy percentage wrongful conduct was 14%, I worked this out using my expected table of cherishs and my veridical table of values, I used the formula Percentage error = (value †expected value / expected value) x 100. I had one anomaly whilst collecting my results, so there must have been a factor which affected this result when I was doing my experiment. This was in all probability a human error of read the length on the ruler; but it could have been any of the factors explained on the first page. Finally, I am pleased with my results and boilersuit experiment and I feel I produced an accurate set of data.\r\n'