Justin Yim

Mr. Mills
SPH4US-02
October 12 2022
Terminal Velocity Lab

Results:
Qualitative Observations:
- The coffee filter got crumpled during the earlier stages of testing, which affected the
surface area of the filter
- The coffee filter did not travel in a straight line during the earlier stages of testing, which
affected the measurement of velocity
- The coffee filter travelled in a straight line as more filters were stacked, which allowed a
more accurate measurement
Measured Values:

Number of Filters Mass (kg) △t avg. (s)

Stacked

1 0.00088 + 0.00001 0.80 + 0.20

2 0.00176 + 0.00001 0.48 + 0.20

3 0.00264 + 0.00001 0.38 + 0.20

4 0.00352 + 0.00001 0.33 + 0.20

5 0.00440 + 0.00001 0.31 + 0.20

Trial Number One Filter (s) Two Filters Three Filters Four Filters Five Filters
(s) (s) (s) (s)

1 0.82 + 0.20 0.5 + 0.20 0.38 + 0.20 0.30 + 0.20 0.32 + 0.20

2 0.79 + 0.20 0.43 + 0.20 0.40 + 0.20 0.37 + 0.20 0.28 + 0.20

3 0.78 + 0.20 0.49 + 0.20 0.37 + 0.20 0.30 + 0.20 0.30 + 0.20

4 0.80 + 0.20 0.51 + 0.20 0.39 + 0.20 0.35 + 0.20 0.32 + 0.20

5 0.81 + 0.20 0.47 + 0.20 0.36 + 0.20 0.33 + 0.20 0.33 + 0.20
Mass was measured by a digital device, therefore uncertainty was obtained by taking the smallest
division
△t was measured using a stopwatch, therefore uncertainty was obtained by using the margin of
human error

Analysis:
Sample Calculation:
Calculate Velocity:
∆𝐷
𝑉1 = ∆𝑇
1𝑚±0%
𝑉1 = 0.80𝑠±25%
𝑉1 = 1. 25𝑠 ± 25%
Calculate Error:
0.20𝑠
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 0.80𝑠
× 100%
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 25%
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = (0. 25)(1. 25𝑚/𝑠)
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 0. 31𝑚/𝑠
Therefore, 𝑉1 = 1. 25𝑚/𝑠 ± 0. 31𝑚/𝑠
Calculated Values:

Number of Filters 𝑚 ( 𝑘𝑔 ) 𝑉𝑡 ( m/s)

1 0.03 1.25 + 0.31

2 0.04 2.08 + 0.87

3 0.05 2.63 + 1.39

4 0.06 3.03 + 1.84

5 0.07 3.23 + 2.10

*Error of mass is very small, therefore it was ignored*

Graph:
Calculating Slope:
3.23𝑚/𝑠−1.25𝑚/𝑠
𝑀=
0.07 𝑘𝑔−0.03 𝑘𝑔
𝑚/𝑠
𝑀 = 49. 50
𝑘𝑔
Finding Slope Error:
Calculating Maximum Slope:
(3.23+2.10 𝑚/𝑠)−(1.25−0.31 𝑚/𝑠)
𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 =
(0.07 𝑘𝑔))−(0.03 𝑘𝑔))
𝑚/𝑠
𝑀𝑀𝑎𝑥 = 109. 75
𝑘𝑔
Calculating Minimum Slope:
(3.23−2.10 𝑚/𝑠)−(1.25+0.31 𝑚/𝑠)
𝑀𝑀𝑖𝑛 =
(0.07 𝑘𝑔))−(0.03 𝑘𝑔))
𝑚/𝑠
𝑀𝑀𝑖𝑛 =− 10. 75
𝑘𝑔
Finding Slope Uncertainty:
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥−𝑀𝑚𝑖𝑛
∆𝑀 = 2
𝑚/𝑠 𝑚/𝑠
(109.75 )−(−10.75 )
𝑘𝑔 𝑘𝑔
∆𝑀 = 2
𝑚/𝑠
∆𝑀 = 59. 88
𝑘𝑔
𝑚/𝑠
Therefore, the slope must be 49. 50 ± 59. 88
𝑘𝑔
Find Surface Area of Coffee Filter:
𝑅𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑢𝑠 = 0. 045𝑚 ± 0. 011%
2
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = π𝑟
2
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = π(0. 045𝑚 ± 0. 011%)
2
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 0. 006𝑚 ± 0. 022%
−2 −5 2
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 0. 6 × 10 ± 1. 3 × 10 𝑚
−2 −5 2
Therefore, the surface area of the coffee filter is equal to 0. 6 × 10 ± 1. 3 × 10 𝑚

Calculate Coefficient of Drag:

2𝑚𝑔
𝑉= 𝑝𝐴𝐶𝑑
2 2𝑔
𝑆𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 = 𝑝𝐴𝐶𝑑

𝑚/𝑠 2 2(9.8000 𝑁/𝑘𝑔)

49. 50 ± 121% = 3 −2 2
𝑘𝑔 (1.225 𝑘𝑔/𝑚 )(0.600×10 𝑚 ±0.022%)𝐶𝑑

𝑚/𝑠 19.6𝑁/𝑘𝑔
2450. 25 ± 242% = −3 5
𝑘𝑔 (7.350×10 𝑘𝑔/𝑚 ±0.022%)𝐶𝑑

𝑚/𝑠 19.6𝑁/𝑘𝑔
𝐶𝑑2450. 25 ± 242% = −3 5
𝑘𝑔 (7.350×10 𝑘𝑔/𝑚 ±0.022%)
𝐶𝑑 = 1. 088 ± 242. 022%
𝐶𝑑 = 1. 088 ± 2. 633
Therefore, the coefficient of drag is equal to 1.088±2.633

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the value that we found for the coefficient of drag is equal to 1.088±2.633. The
accuracy of this value is relatively high, as the accepted value of 1 is in this range. However, the
precision of this value is very low, as the error percentage is far greater than 10%.
|𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠.−𝑎𝑐𝑐.|
%𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓 = 𝑎𝑐𝑐.
× 100%
|1.088−1.000|
%𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓 = 1.000
× 100%
%𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓 = 8. 8%
By comparing the measured value and the accepted value, the percent difference found is equal
to 8.8%. Comparing the percent difference (8.8%) to the percent error (242.022%), the percent
error is 30 times greater than the percent difference. However, most of the errors that occur are
systematic. This is because of the way that we obtained the velocity. Since human error is
around 0.2 seconds and the change in time is relatively small, a big amount of error was
obtained. The range of variables is not enough due to the fact that the cubic root function does
not appear on the graph. Instead, the graph looks linear, which means that the data collected is
not enough to show the proper function.

Evaluation:
Error #1: The way that ∆𝑡 was measured
This error was a random error. This is because of the way we used to calculate the ∆𝑡. Since we
were reliant on human error to find the amount, that left us with an error of ± 0. 2𝑠, which is due
to reaction time. This is quite a large error margin comparing it to a value of 0.31s. If this error
did not occur, it would allow the measured value to be more precise, rather than have a huge
error margin. A realistic way to reduce the error would be to measure using a bigger drop height.
Therefore, more time would pass, making the error seem more insignificant compared to smaller
values.

Error #2: Measurement of the radius

This error was a random error. Due to the fact that a meter stick was used to measure the radius,
the measurement was not as precise. This affected our measured value by making them smaller
or bigger. However, since this value was relatively small, it did not affect calculations by a lot. A
realistic way to fix this error would be to use a more precise measurement tool, preferably
something that has millimeter measurement available.

Error #3: The assumption that the coffee filter reached terminal velocity
This error was a systematic error. Since we assumed that the coffee filter reached terminal
velocity, the measurements would’ve changed if it wasn’t actually at terminal velocity. This
affected the measured value because if it did not reach terminal velocity, the ∆𝑡 would’ve been
greater, which affects the velocity by making it smaller. A realistic way to reduce this error
would be to increase the drop height. This would ensure that the coffee filter reached terminal
velocity b

Works Cited:
“Makana Johnson's research into the effect of mass on terminal velocity.” TuHS Physics,

http://tuhsphysics.ttsd.k12.or.us/Research/IB18/MJohnson/index.htm

Musa Baci

William Conlon

Sunny Liu