Chinweike osubor

lab Report –Help Sheet

Hypothesis:

Apparatus:
Pump
Tape measurer
Bottle rocket
Stand
Measuring` cylinder ‘300ml’

Method:
I could make this a fair test by firstly using the same type of water,
secondly the same type of rocket and thirdly by pointing the rocket
to the same direction for every trial.
We could also make this a fair test by making the same person
pump for every trial.

Steps:
the first step to this experiment is to out the tape on the floor and
elongate it so that it lays horizontally on the floor
Step two is to target the stand so that the direction stays the same
for all trials, make sure it’s tight, so it doesn’t shake
Step three is to measure the amount of water first starting with
100ml and pour into bottle.
The fourth step is to cock on the bottle to the stand so water
doesn’t go out.
The last step is to keep pumping till pressure builds up and the
rocket pops. repeat last two steps but keep increasing water by
100ml.
• An outline how you plan to process your data
Amount of Distance traveled by bottle rocket(m)
water(ml)
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Average
0 1.5 6.2 1.4 3.0
100 7.7 9.4 7.6 8.2
200 28.2 11.6 20.3 20.0
300 28.3 26.2 23.9 26.1
400 19.7 25.2 24.4 23.1
500 15.8 19 16.4 17.0
600 13.3 10.2 11.6 11.7
700 3.8 7.0 9.9 6.9
800 3.3 4.1 4.9 4.1
900 1.1 1.3 6.4 2.9
1000 1.5 0.4 3.3 1.7

Data Collection:
The table above shows the raw and processed data of this
experiment

Data Presentation:
Graph showing relation between amount of water an distance covered
by rocket.

conclution
The graph that I did demonstrates that as we increased the amount
of water the distance the bottle travels will decrease, which is my
hypothesis; this was clearly shown through last 7 dots where the
amount of water and the average distance was 23 meters for
400ML, 17 meters for the 500 ML, 11.7 meters for 600ML,7 meters
for the 700ML, 4 meters for the 800ML,then decreased to 3 meters
for the 900ML, and finally over-decreased to reach 1.7 meters for
the 1000ML ;in that case my hypothesis was proven to be correct.
But in the first 3 results my hypothesis was proven to be wrong
when the data was increasing as the amount of water added
increase, for example in the rocket without water we got a distance
of 3 meters, in the second one (100ML) we got a distance of 8
meters, and in the final one which is 300ML we got a distance of 20
meters. This indicates 7/10(70%) of my dots prove my hypothesis
to be correct while only 3/10(30%) of my dotes proves it to be
wrong. In conclusion by looking at the graph; most of my results do
fit in my hypothesis because the con-cave was upgoint in 7 of them;
I believe that happened because as the mass increases the
gravitational force increases, for example if we had a bottle full of
water and we pump it the gravitational force acting against it will be
stronger than the gravitational force acting against a bottle without
water. As I said 70% of the data is reliable as the distance kept
decreasing, this is explained by con-cave down shown in the middle-
end of my graph.

Evaluation:

My conclusion shows that the method I used was reliable. I say this
because 70% of my data prove my hypothesis while only 30% does
not, if the method I used was not reliable I would not get that
amount of correct results. If I was asked to redo the experiment I
would get more group members, use more accurate measuring
beakers, put a red tape at the starting point in order not to exceed
it, ask all the groups to have the same angle of the stand, try
another type of liquid, and make my experiment of a sandy surface
in order to see exactly were the rocket landed using the rocket
stamps. I think that adding weighs (metals but same kind) in
different weights inside the bottle would give me good results that
would prove my hypothesis, but unfortunately this experiment also
suffers from limitations, firstly adding or removing metals is hard,
secondly pumping huge amount of metals is hard; thirdly the bottle
may break or be damaged.