Henry@Khant Thu Hein Block F (Grade 10)

 
FREE FALL INVESTIGATION 
 
Hypothesis:​ If an object is released from a height near the earth’s 
surface, then the object will fall to the ground with constant acceleration. 
 
Results Table: 
 
  Time (seconds)   
Height(m)  Trial 1  Trial 2  Trial 3  Average  t^2(s^2) 
Time 
1   0.45  0.44  0.47  0.45  0.2025 
1.2  0.49  0.48  0.47  0.48  0.2304 
1.4  0.53  0.51  0.51  0.52  0.2669 
1.6  0.57  0.60  0.59  0.59  0.3441 
1.8  0.61  0.57  0.62  0.60  0.3600 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Henry@Khant Thu Hein Block F (Grade 10)

 
Height times Average time Graph: 

Average time vs Height Graph: 

 
 
 Henry@Khant Thu Hein Block F (Grade 10)

Time^2 vs Height graph: 

 
Explanation of Graphs: 
 
The first graph is Height vs Average time. As you can see from the graph, it 
is a curve. The reason why we cannot use the first graph and the second 
graph because of many factors. First, it is not linear, it also places average 
time in the x-axis and height in the y-axis. This graph is not convenient for 
our calculation as it is stated that height is an independent variable instead 
of a dependent variable. The second graph is Average Time vs Height graph. 
The slope was created using the data implemented from the experiment. As 
it is not linear, a slope cannot be determined. The information from the 
graph cannot be used to reach conclusions. The first graph and the second 
graph are exactly the same graph, but with the opposite axes. 
 
 Henry@Khant Thu Hein Block F (Grade 10)

The third graph is a Time​^2​ vs Height graph. The trendline is linear. The 
reason this graph was implemented is due to the equation of motion. The 
equation “h=ut+1/2gt^2” cannot be applied to the first and second graphs. 
Which is why the third graph’s sole purpose is for the equation of motion. In 
normal graphs, time is always an independent variable. However, in this 
situation, time is a dependent variable. This means that the slope will not 
represent the free-fall acceleration. To get the acceleration, you must 
inverse the slope and times it by two.  
 
Equation of the Graph:  
h=0.214t-0.0193 (Equation from the third graph) 
The process to get acceleration: 
0.214 (slope of the third graph) 
0.215^-1=4.67 
Then, 
4.67x2=9.35m/s^2 
Note: The reason why the resultant acceleration is not 9.8m/s^2 is due to 
errors that could have occurred during this process.  
 
 
 
Calcuting the chances of error: 
(9.8-9.35)/9.8=0.045 
0.045x100=4.5%  
About 4.5% error rate for calculating acceleration due to free fall. 
 Henry@Khant Thu Hein Block F (Grade 10)

Conclusion: 
The aim of the experiment, when the elevation of an object is increased, 
then the time is taken to hit the surface also increases is proven. As my 
hypothesis states: “If an object released from a height near the earth’s 
surface, then the object will fall to the ground with constant acceleration” 
this was proven as well. To give evidence, the third graph proved both the 
aim and the hypothesis. The third graph is linear. This means that the 
constant acceleration of free fall can be estimated from the graph. This also 
means that since it is linear, the height and time taken are directly 
proportional. All in all, proving my hypothesis was a success. 
 
Evaluation: 
This experiment was complicated. Mainly because due to the height being 
too short. The time taken for the object to reach the ground is less than 1 
second. To account reaction time into this, this is almost the same as 
clicking start and stop simultaneously. So, results may vary depending on 
the reaction time. The procedure also states to conduct the trial 3 times. In 
my opinion, each trail should be conducted more than 3 times. The reason 
is, this can reduce human error or random errors. In order to reduce to get 
very precise data, sensors would further improve the accuracy. Since 
machines do not have human reaction time, it can achieve better results 
than humans can. Also, I personally think that a partner should be there to 
assist you. Since dropping the ball and clicking start at the same time can 
also make an error in the data. Multitasking while conducting the 
 Henry@Khant Thu Hein Block F (Grade 10)

experiment in my opinion is not recommended. With a partner, you can 

focus solely on dropping or recording the time taken while your partner 
does the other task. A strength of this experiment would be that by using 
the method given to calculate the acceleration of free fall, we can calculate 
this anywhere. Another strength would be that it does not use up a lot of 
money just to conduct the experiment. In fact, you can conduct the 
experiment with household items. The reason why the error rate is 
extremely high is due to not having the proper equipment and not having 
machine-like reaction times. Factors that do not go into this experiment 
would be air resistance. Since I chose a golf ball, air resistance won’t affect 
significantly due to the object’s mass.