Theory:
I think this will happen because if an object has a larger surface area it will have more weight, this creates more drag or air resistance and create a turning force for it to move through the air. I do know though that objects that have a larger surface area will create more air resistance or drag, than a smaller falling object and this increased air resistance might slow my helicopter down.
Method:
- Create your helicopter to your desired specifications, remembering to fold on the dotted lines, and cut on the solid lines shown in the diagram
- Settle on an ideal weight by attaching paper clips to the base of the helicopter
- Find a suitable position 4m above the ground with the minimal amount of draft
- With a partner drop the helicopter three times for each surface area. Once this is done take an average of the three.
- Do the above for 5 different surface areas, three more times remembering to take an average.
- To keep the weight equal throughout, with the pieces that have been cut off, you should attach them to the base with paper clips.
My table of results:
Analysis
The pattern shown in the graph is that as the surface area of the helicopter decreased so did the time taken for the helicopter to reach the ground the graph has a smooth curve and seems to fit a pattern, apart from one point, which seems to be an anomaly at 3.51s. It seems to far out, and if this point was at maybe 2.85s then it would fit with the smooth curve, and not seem as disjointed.
My prediction for this experiment was totally wrong. I predicted that as the surface area decreased the time taken would increase.
I think my prediction was wrong because objects with a larger surface area cause more drag, and this drag slows an object down when it is falling. So objects that have a small surface area will create less drag or air resistance when they are falling, so they fall faster.
Evaluation:
Accuracy:
In the experiment I believe my results were fairly accurate, but there were some areas where I could have improved. When I was dropping the helicopter it was very hard to make sure it fell exactly 4m every time because we carried out the experiment on a flight of stairs. Timing inaccuracies also were a problem because they put our averages out. They usually happened when my partner wouldn’t be totally sure when to begin the timing when the helicopter was released, also the human reaction times would have made our recordings inacurate by 0.1 to 0.3 seconds, which could be vital to the accuracy. To make sure the times that we plotted on our graphs were as accurate as possible we took in account the human error, and we took an average of the three results of each surface area. We checked the weight carefully and made sure all the pieces we cut off were added to the bottom with a paper clips
Improvements:
If I was to carry out the investigation again, I would choose an area with a flat floor so the hinderance with steps altering the target height wouldn’t happen again. With the timing I would agree with my partner a certain time to begin recording data and so confusion wouldn’t occur. If I could have any extra equipment I would require a more precise and accurate stopwatch, which would help our results.
Reliability:
My results were fairly accurate, but when you look at the varying result for the three recordings for each surface area at times they are very contrasting. I think the cause of this was when you released the helicopters, some of them flapped down, and didn’t begin rotating properly, and at times my partner recorded one ore two of these results. Also the step issue caused difficulties because some went down way beyond the 4m mark and others fell short. If I could make the results more reliable I would be more selective with my results, only choose the ones that fell exactly on the 4m mark and only record good falls.
Anomalous results:
Because my results weren’t totally accurate I did experience anomalous results. The result 4.82s was an anomaly because it’s almost double the lowest reading of 2.68s. This caused the average to be 3.51, while an average of 2.90 would look more reasonable.
Conclusion:
I think that my investigation went well and that for a further I would like to look at a different variable like weight perhaps. If I could improve my experiment I would use more accurate equipment and do more readings if possible. I would choose an area that was flat so I wouldn’t have any difficulties and problems with steps, that would improve the accuracy of the results. I would also construct more than one helicopter, but they would all have the same weight. I would make more than one because when the helicopter was falling it became damaged, and this would affect the results. The conclusion I have deduced is: as surface area decreases as does the time taken for a paper helicopter to fall 4m.
