Average Range Versus Height

Luka Vonier

Course: PHYS 140

Due Date: 09/11/19
 Abstract
We measured the height we dropped the ball from and it’s resulting range after it hit a
slanted metal plate directly below the dropping point. We sought out to compare our height with
the standard deviations of ranges after we had run 12-18 trails from each specific height. These
standard deviations were also affected by which dropping method we used, and so we measured
standard deviations depending on which method we found to minimize the most error in our
measurements, which was the magnet method. We wanted to find a linear coordination between
height and range and found that range was most linearly expressed as a function of the square root
of height.

Introduction
In this lab, we are measuring how dropping a ball from different heights effect the range that
ball moves in the horizontal direction, as well as the size of the standard deviation of those ranges.
In the first part of the lab, we measured the ranges of dropping the ball by hand from 20 cm above
the table for 18 trails. We then calculated the sum of ranges, and the current average for each drop
number up to 18. In the second part we minimized our errors in calculation by trying two new
methods: holding the ball in place at the measured height with a magnet and holding it in place with
a ruler before removing it and letting it drop that way. For the final part of the lab, we dropped the
ball 12 separate times from 6 different heights: 30 cm, 25 cm, 20 cm, 15 cm, 10 cm, and 5 cm. We
then calculated the average range and standard deviation for each and sought out to find a linear
coordination between the two variables.

Procedure
We wanted to measure and compare the range in the horizontal direction of a metal and the
height the ball was dropped from which was the causation of the horizontal range. We measured
the horizontal factor by placing charcoal paper in the general area we thought the ball would land
and then measuring each one of the black dots that indicated impact back to the dropping point of
the ball. We also measured specific points at which to drop the ball which gave it a vertical
acceleration due to gravity until it also gained horizontal velocity after bouncing off the horizontal
plate below the dropping point. After calculating the average range from each of the various heights
at which we dropped the ball, we calculated standard deviation by subtracting our smallest range
from the largest and dividing that by 2.

Theory
In this lab, we needed to measure our range as a function of the height we dropped the ball
from. We also wanted to find a correlation between height, dropping method, and standard
deviation of the ranges. To calculate this, we first needed to collect data and calculate our standard
deviation for each height we dropped the ball from. We calculated our current average of ranges
from a 20 cm height by

𝑅𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 𝑅𝑠𝑢𝑚 /𝑛

where n is the number of trails we have conducted. We then also calculated the sum of ranges by
using
 𝑛

𝑅𝑠𝑢𝑚 = ∑ 𝑅𝑖
𝑖=1

We calculated standard deviation by using

1
𝜎 = (𝐴 − 𝐵)
2
where A is the largest range for a given height and B is the smallest. To find a theoretical correlation
between range and height, we used the equation

1
∆𝑦 = 𝑣𝑜 𝑡 + 𝑔𝑡 2
2
Since our initial velocity is 0, the equation simplifies to

1
∆𝑦 = 𝑔𝑡 2
2
and since we knew the distance in the y direction for each trail, we can calculate the time as well.
We also can calculate the final velocity the ball has in the y direction before it hits the plate, which
ends up being the initial velocity in the x direction afterwards.
2
𝑣𝑓𝑦 = 𝑣02 + 2𝑔∆𝑦

Since the object only accelerates in the y direction and not the x,

∆𝑥 = 𝑣𝑓𝑦 𝑡
∆𝑥 = √2𝑔∆𝑦 𝑡

Results
We found that once we graphed our data, we found that we weren’t as close to a linear
coordination between height and average range as we were hoping. This is because there isn’t a
linear function between range and height, as shown in the equation above. So, we took the square
of all 6 of our heights, and the results were much more linear than before
 Average Range (y) vs Height Average Range (y) vs square
(x) root of Height (x)
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 2 4 6

Discussion
We found that standard deviation got progressively smaller as the height got smaller, with
the exception of out measurements at 25 cm. This possibly was because we dropped the ball by
hand, whereas the rest of the balls at the other heights were dropped either by ruler or magnet. This
could’ve been a large source of potential error for our lab results, as we didn’t use a consistent
method of dropping for each of the trails at different heights. Another source of error could’ve
been only measuring the ranges up to two decimal places and not doing so with an extremely precise
tool of measurement. Overall, however, we found that the standard deviation and range both
decreased as height decreased.
We found that making range a function of the square root of height made our results much
more linear, and when we calculated the theoretical function of range as a function of height, we
also found that height was expressed with a square root in that equation. This corroborated our
decision to make our second graph with the square roots of all of the various heights we measured
from.