Graph of Force on Vane,F(N) against Rate of Delivery of Momentum, ṁuₒ (N)

Force on Vane,F(N)
3

y = 1.425x + 0.0113 y = 1.1449x - 0.0257

2.5 y = 1.6066x + 0.3625 Flat plate
Conical vane
2
Hemispherical vane

1.5 Linear (Flat plate)

Linear (Conical vane )
1 Linear (Hemispherical vane)

0.5
Rate of Delivery
of Momentum, ṁuₒ (N)
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Discussion

Gradient of line graph of Force on Vane against Rate of Delivery of Momentum

Flat plate 1.1449

Conical cup 1.4250
Hemispherical cup 1.6066

Gradient of theoretical/ideal results

Flat plate 1
Conical cup 1.5
Hemispherical cup 2
When the experimental results are compared to the ideal results, deviation is observed. The formula of
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒
× 100% is used to measure the deviation of the results. The percentage error is calculated
𝐼𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒
𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒−𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒
by using the formula × 100%
𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

Type of Vane Percentage Error (%)

Flat Plate 14.49
Conical Cup 5.00
Hemispherical Cup 19.69
The graph above shows the graph of force on vane against rate of delivery of momentum by plotting the
results obtained with the line of best fit. As shown above, the vane subjected to the largest force is the
hemispherical vane, followed by the conical vane and the lowest being the flat plate. When we compare
the gradients of the graphs plotted to the ideal results gradients, we can see that there is an average
percentage error of 13.06%. This means that several errors might have led to the errors in measurement
values.

The errors in values tell us that the experiment can be improved in several ways. First of all, a stopper or
a plate can be added on to the tally to prevent the tally from fluctuating up and down the balance point
to ensure the tally is exactly level before collecting the water amount. Secondly, an automatic timer
should be used with the apparatus instead of a person manually using a stopwatch to ensure no human
error occurs. Moving on, the spring suspending the weight beam should be well maintained to ensure
no permanent stretching occurs by removing it when no experiment is conducted with the apparatus.

The experiment results can also be largely affected by systematic errors. This can be shown by
calculating the error when the error in the jockey weight is 1g.

F x 0.15 = mass jockey x g x y

0.601
F= x 9.81 x y
0.15

F = 39.31y

F x 0.15 = mass jockey x g x y

0.599
F= x 9.81 x y
0.15

F = 39.17y
Therefore, we get that the final equation representing the error is

𝐹 = (39.24 ± 0.07)𝑦

This means that when 1g of error is present in the jockey weight, the force on vane has an error of 0.07y
when compared to the ideal force.

Another form of systematic error that can be found is the distance from the center of the vane to the
pivot level. This can be shown by calculating the error when the error of the distance is 1mm.

F x L = mass jockey x g x y

0.6
F= x 9.81 x y
0.151

F = 38.98y

F x L = mass jockey x g x y

0.6
F= x 9.81 x y
0.149

F = 39.50y

Therefore, we get that the final equation representing the error being

𝐹 = (39.24 ± 0.26)𝑦

This means that when 1mm of error is present in the distance from the center of the vane to the pivot
level, the force on vane has an error of 0.26y when compared to the ideal force.

From the calculations, we can conclude that the force on vane caused by the water jet decreases as the
distance from the center of the vane to pivot increases. It can also be said that the velocity of the fluid
increases as it approaches the center.

When the velocity of the water jet is 10% slower, the force produced on vane will also lower. This is
because the mass flow rate decreases with the decrease of velocity. When the area of the vane is
increased, the force produced on the vane will decrease. Besides that, when different vanes are used,
the force produced on the vane increases when the deflection angle increases.