IB Physics Verification of g = 9.

81 ms -2 Name: Mehdi

Learning objectives
To gain experience using capstone for data collection
To practice processing data with uncertainties
To practice linearization

Theoretically, objects in free-fall near the earth will accelerate downwards at 9.81 ms . The-2

purpose of this investigation is to see how accurately we can verify this value using the
equipment available in the physics lab.

Background Information & the Aim of the Investigation.

1. a. Define acceleration in free-fall (2)

When an object is accelerating in free fall, it is the state where by which the only force
acting on the object is the force of gravity. In the case of the earth, all free falling objects
undergo constant acceleration of -9.81ms , assuming no air resistance, and that the
-2

surface of the earth is flat. In addition, this statement also assumes that variance in
heights of objects in free fall are negligible, as the gravitational pull of the earth is
proportional to the physical distance of the object.

b. State the aim of this investigation (1)

The aim of this investigation is to see how accurately we can verify the accepted free
all acceleration value through the use of capstone.
Theory.
2. Given Earth’s gravitational field strength is 9.81 Nkg , show why a mass M will
-1

accelerate in freefall at 9.81 ms independent of M. (3)

-2

The figure above shows the net force of a free-falling object, which happens to be its
weight, W=mg. By newton’s second law, force equals mass times acceleration, and so

that is, the acceleration of a free-falling object is exactly g. Experiments going back to
Galileo show us that the indeed, all bodies fall in a vacuum with the same acceleration(the
acceleration due to gravity) irrespective of their density, their mass, their shape, and the
material from which they are made.

Design.
To collect data for this investigation an object will be dropped. The time it takes for this
object to fall various distances will be measured. The acceleration of the object will be
determined from the distance time data.

3. a. When an object is dropped from rest in a gravity field, what is the relationship
between the distance traveled and the time the object has been falling? Write your answer
as an equation (1)

1
𝑠 = 𝑔𝑡 !
2

b. In this investigation we would like distance travelled to be the independent

variable. What variables should be graphed to give a linear graph with distance
traveled as the independent variable? Explain (with math and words). (3)
In our case, we are attempting to experimentally obtain a value of g that is close to the
accepted value of g, the gravitational acceleration an object experiences in free fall. Since we
are dealing with gravitational acceleration, we will obviously use the free fall equation

1
𝑠 = 𝑔𝑡 !
2
To get a linear graph, we will need to graph distance travelled as a function of half the time
elapsed squared. The figure below explains this to a better degree.

c. How will the acceleration of g be found from the graph described

above? Support your answer with an equation. (2)

"
Graphing s as a function of ! 𝑡 ! , the slope of the graph will be equal to the average
experimental value of g. Using error bars, as well as max and min slopes, we can obtain the
uncertainty of our experimental g, and process such information.
Procedure

To collect data for this investigation, an object will be dropped. The time it takes the object
to fall various distances will be measured. The acceleration of the object will be determined
from the distance time data.

4. a. Explain why in the collecting of data, it will be necessary to either let the object
drop for a large distance or measure the time with great precision. (2)

The two scenarios deal with the percent uncertainty of s or t respectively. By letting
an object drop for a long distance we are minimizing the relative scale of either the
reading or random experimental error, allowing our value of g to be of small relative
uncertainty as well.

For time, by making sure that the data points collected for each increment of
distance are of great numerical proximity, this allows for the minimization of random
error. Through this approach, the experiment can achieve the rare scenario where
random error of our data collected is less than the reading error of our equipment.
In theory, this should allow our evaluation to focus more on equipment error rather
than experimental error. In general, however, this would reduce the relative
magnitude of the absolute uncertainty of the experimental value of g.

b. We will be observing an object accelerating in air. This is not free-fall. How

should the experiment be designed to minimize the effects of air resistance? (2)

In order to minimize the effect of free fall, the ratio of mass to surface area of an
object needs to be of high magnitude. If a metal ball and a foam ball of the same surface area
and dimensions, are dropped at the same time in the “real world,” the metal ball will reach
the ground first inevitably (This would not be the case under free fall conditions, as object
mass is entirely independent of its acceleration when it’s being dropped). The ratio of mass to
surface area in the metal ball is greater than in the foam ball, and therefore the ball does not
experience enough drag to cause any deficiencies in our calculations. Thinking about this in a
more equation-based manner the surface area of an object moving in the air is an algebraic
factor of its drag force experienced. Yet, the net force of the falling object would be impacted
by mass. By using a great mass, and keeping the same surface area, the net force of the object
in the perceived free fall will be less impacted by the drag force. Therefore, using an object
of great bass and of low surface area would decrease the impact of drag to the object.
d. Explain how the time will be measured and state its uncertainty. (1)

Time will be measured through the use of a Capstone Free Fall module, which will be
displayed on a connected computer. It will record the time elapsed between the
release of the ball, and it’s contact with the black platform after it hits the sensor
below. The uncertainty, in this experiment, of time, is ±0.01s, as this is a digital tool,
and 0.01s is the unit of measurement. In the processed data section, more information
will be displayed as to how the percent uncertainty was found.

e. Explain how the distance fallen will be found and state its uncertainty. (1)

The distance travelled by the metal sphere will be identified using a ruler. A
measurement from the absolute tip of the sphere till the platform of the sensor
(when it’s fully contracted, i.e. touching the sensor below) describes the distance
travelled by the metal sphere. The uncertainty for distance is ±0.0005m.
8. a. Graph the results of the investigation. Choose a scale which allows error bars to
indicate the uncertainty of the measurements.
b. Draw best fit and max and min slope lines to represent the data.
c. Find the slope and intercept of the fit lines (with units) (10)

9. Analyze the investigation results. Use both equations and words and refer to the
graph. This should include and explain:
• The best fit line slope with uncertainty
• The best fit line y intercept with uncertainty
• The equation of the best fit line with uncertainty
• An analysis of the y intercept checking for systematic errors
• A final equation for the experimental relationship between distance fallen
and time (with uncertainty) (5)
The best fit line of our processed experimental data retained a slope of 9.8. In more
theoretical terms, given the way we graphed our independent and dependent variables, our
slope is essentially the value of g we could obtain from the data collected. It follows that:

𝑦 = 9.8𝑥 + 0.01

Where y has units of m and x has units of s2.

Taking a closer look at the free fall equation

1
𝑠 = 𝑔𝑡 !
2

The equation has a y intercept of zero, as the object being dropped does always starts at a
displacement of zero. In our equation, we have a y intercept of 0.01. In general cases, a
unnecessary y intercept may be an indication of influential systematic error. However, since
the y intercept is incredibly close to zero, the deduction that equipment/systematic error had
very little effect on the data is appropriate. Plus, since the min and max slopes lines overlap
with the origin, we can claim that there is no significant error in this. In addition, this makes
sense considering the fact we adhered to the statement in 4a, where relative random errors
were minimized through experimental procedures (better precision, long distances). This
allows us experimental conductors for the reflection of the experiment procedure/method
rather than the equipment (see more in conclusion).
 The uncertainty of our mean slope, was calculated using the min and max slope
formula, as shown below

Essentially, the slope we obtained experimentally from our method is our experimental value
of g. Thus, our slope value may be between 10.37 and 9.29 inclusively. Now ultimately, the
slope is our experimental value of g, since we graphed s in terms of tˆ2/2, according to the
free fall equation. This translates to the fact that our experimental value of g may be as low as
9.29ms-2, or as high as 10.37ms-2.

A final equation that summarizes our data found would be

s = 9.8 t2 + 0.01

10. Analyze the precision of the investigation (2)

The precision of our experimental value of g is 5.5%. This was obtained by finding the
percent ratio of the uncertainty of g to g itself. This is an indication that our data points
deviated by a relative scale of 5.5 %, and the uncertainty gets greater in absolute terms as you
move up the data points. Another way to look at the precision of our data and investigation is
by finding the standard deviation of each set of times elapsed respective to their distance
covered. We can produce the following table:

Average time / ± 0.01s Standard deviation

0.38 0.004
0.45 0
0.24 0.008
0.51 0.004
0.59 0.005
 0.22 0

The standard deviation within the average values of the collected raw data is incredibly close
to 0, in addition to the percent uncertainty of our slope, it is appropriate to deduct that our
experiment data is precise to a great degree, and that both our method and equipment have
been successfully manipulated to produce minimal uncertainty.
11. Analyze the accuracy of the investigation (2)

The percent accuracy of our experimental g value, is 99.9%. This is a rare and incredible
percent accuracy, indicating that our experimental value of g was off the real value by only
0.1%.

12. Write a conclusion for the investigation. It should include the equation (with
uncertainty) for the relationship between distance fallen and time, the experimental value
for g and the accuracy of the results (4)

To conclude this investigation, our derived experimental value of g is 9.80 ± 0.54 ms-2.
Through the linearization of the free fall equation

1
𝑠 = 𝑔𝑡 !
2

we were able to obtain such a value through the measurement of two variables. We obtained
a very rare 99.9% accuracy in our experimental g, which signifies that our method and
equipment have been successful in measuring both distance and time to a great degree
correctly. There are very little improvements to the experiment in terms of improving the
experimental accuracy, as that last 0.1% may have been due simply by the number of
significant digits in our variables. Using more calibrated rulers and time sensors can be an
influential decision to breaking the 100% mark. In addition, given the precision of our data,
which was 5.5%, it may be worth it to conduct more experimental trials in order to reduce the
percent experimental error in our data. However, the most influential aspect of this 0.1%
inaccuracy would be the fact that we are not actually in free fall when we drop the metal ball
to the ground, since the ball is still travelling through a medium of air, and thus, we could
possibly never reach the value of 9.81 without great coincidence or other external factors,
more complicated to the course. Nonetheless, however, it’s very rare to obtain such amazing
results. Given our 2-day period to conduct such trials, the meticulous procedures of the
experimental conductors can and very well may be a determining factor in the very accurate
and precise results. Other further investigations to conduct may include:

- Using equipment with greater significant digits, and of a higher grade

- Finding g through projectile motion experiment using a computer motion
tracker such as Capstone
- Investigating the impacts of drag on g at terminal velocity
- Modelling projectiles of objects and the influence of drag on their hang time.