To what extent does the inclination angle (°) of a

rolling solid ball (4.400°, 8.800°,13.200°,17.600°,

−1
22.000°) affect its final velocity(𝑚𝑠 ), using an
inclined plane?
Word count: 2997

Introduction
The intriguing concepts of rotating objects and inclined surfaces captured my interest once I
began learning about them in IB Physics. In topic A1, I learned about inclined planes which I
found fascinating, as it provides a visual representation of all forces and energy taking place
on objects, causing me to use this topic for my IA. Another reason I aim to investigate this
relationship is because of their real-world applications, from the movement of vehicles on
inclining streets to the operation of playground slides, and manufacturing roller coasters. I
designed an experiment that investigates the impact of changing the inclination angle by
varying the height of the inclined plane by using scissor lifts on the final velocity of a rolling
solid ball which I measured using a stopwatch. Analysis of the measurements gave a
proportionality between the velocity at the bottom of the ramp and the square root of the sine
of the inclination angle.

Background

Inclination Angle and Conservation of Energy

A rolling ball’s linear and angular velocities increase due to higher gravitational acceleration
(𝑔) as plane inclination increases. As potential energy reduces, its total kinetic energy rises
which contains translational and rotational kinetic energy from linear and rotational motion.
Overall, the system’s mechanical energy remains conserved as one form transfers to
another, following the principle that energy cannot be created nor destroyed.

Rotational Kinetic Energy

Rotational kinetic energy defines the kinetic energy associated with an object’s rotation. Its
formula is listed below:
2
(𝑚𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑎) 𝐼ω (𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦)
(𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦) 𝐾𝑟 = 2
(1)

The formula indicates rotational kinetic energy(J) is directly proportional to the moment of
2 −1
inertia (𝑘𝑔𝑚 ) and angular velocity(𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑠 ) squared. This is crucial for this IA because the
ball will roll down, meaning it will rotate. Therefore, rotational kinetic energy is not 0 and
contributes to the total kinetic energy and the energy conservation formula.

1
 Moment of inertia
Figure 1. Presence of moment of inertia impacting a ball’s rolling motion on inclined planes

Figure 2. Impact of rolling motion of a ball when there is no moment of inertia

2
Moment of inertia is defined as “the sum of the product of the mass of each particle in an
object and the square of its distance from the axis of rotation.” (Gloria Lotha, February 26th,
2024) The diagrams illustrate it resists the change in angular acceleration(α), reducing the
rotational motion of the ball due to lower angular acceleration, changing angular velocity at a
slower rate, meaning linear velocity will also decrease as the moment of inertia increases
because linear and angular velocity are directly proportional due to the 𝑣 = ω𝑟 formula. This
formula calculates the moment of inertia in a solid ball:

2
2𝑚𝑟
𝐼= 5
(2) (testbook, July 31st 2023)

Rolling Motion
Rolling motion is the “combination of translational and rotational motion”(Lumencandela,
n.d.); affected by normal, gravitational forces, and mass distribution. Increasing inclination
angle decreases the normal force. This can be attributed to the formula describing the
normal reaction force.

𝑁 = 𝑚𝑔𝑐𝑜𝑠(θ)

As the angle increases, the cosine of the angle decreases.

Gravitational force is “the force of attraction experienced by two or more objects in contact.”
(GeeksforGeeks, n.d.) The gravitational force causes the ball to roll downward, increasing
the rolling motion, and increasing its final velocity.

3
Mass distribution affects rolling motion. Even mass distribution causes smooth rolling, while
uneven causes deviation from a straight path. Uneven mass distribution could take longer to
perform the experiment, because the ball will keep leaving the ramp midway, preventing
accurate results.

Coefficient of Rolling Friction

Figure 3. Rolling friction impact

The coefficient of rolling friction is defined as “the indication of how great the rolling
resistance is for a given normal force between the wheel and the surface upon which it is
rolling” (tutorialspoint, n.d.). The diagram illustrates rolling has lower surface contact than
sliding friction, meaning rolling frictional force will be a tiny value. This is considered
negligible during the investigation.

4
 Derivation
Figure 4. Physics terms involved in the derivation

Use the conservation of mechanical energy equation and assume no energy losses.
𝐾𝑖 + 𝑃𝑖 = 𝐾𝑓 + 𝑃𝑓
𝐾𝑖 is the initial kinetic energy, and 𝑃𝑖 is the initial potential energy, 𝐾𝑓 is the final translational
kinetic energy, and 𝑃𝑓 is the final potential energy.
1 2 1 2
0 + 𝑚𝑔ℎ = 2
𝑚𝑣 + 2
𝐼ω + 0
−1
Where v (𝑚𝑠 ) is the linear velocity of the rolling ball. ℎ (𝑚) is the height the ball was
−2
released from. 𝑔 = 9. 81𝑚𝑠 and it is the gravitational acceleration. The diagram illustrates
that 𝐾𝑖 = 0 because the ball is stationary, meaning 𝑣 = 0. 𝑃𝑓 = 0 because the height of the
ball from the floor becomes 0. The rotational kinetic energy formula is applied as the ball is
rotating.
Cut the 𝑚 and substitute equation (2) for 𝐼:
2 2 2
𝑣 1 2𝑟 ω
𝑔ℎ = 2
+2 ( 5
)
2 2 2
𝑣 𝑟ω
𝑔ℎ = 2
+( 5
)
Multiply both sides by 10:
2 2 2
10𝑔ℎ = 5𝑣 + 2𝑟 ω
Write the formula for angular velocity in terms of linear velocity:
𝑣
ω= 𝑟
(3)
−1
ω is the angular velocity (𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑠 ) of the rolling ball, and it measures the rate of total angular
displacement traveled by the ball. r is the ball’s radius(𝑚).
2 2
Substitute equation (3) into ω and cut the 𝑟 :
2 2 𝑣 2
10𝑔ℎ = 5𝑣 + 2𝑟 ( 𝑟 )
2 2
10𝑔ℎ = 5𝑣 + 2𝑣
2
10𝑔ℎ = 7𝑣

5
As shown in the diagram, s(𝑚) is the hypotenuse of the inclined plane. This means
trigonometry can be used to identify the incline plane’s height.
𝑜𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑒
𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) = ℎ𝑦𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑠𝑒
Opposite=ℎ and inclined plane’s hypotenuse=𝑠. Therefore:
ℎ
𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) = 𝑠
Isolate h:
ℎ = 𝑠 · 𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) (4)
Where θ(◦) is the inclination angle of the inclined plane.

Substitute equation (4) for h:

2
10𝑔𝑠 · 𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ)) = 7𝑣
Isolate 𝑣:
10𝑔𝑠·𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ)) 2
7
=𝑣
10𝑔𝑠·𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ))
𝑣= 7
(5)

Hypothesis
Null hypothesis(𝐻0): There is no relationship between the ball’s final velocity and inclination
angle.
Alternative hypothesis(𝐻1): The relationship between the independent and dependent

variables is 𝑣 α 𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ), as it matches with the derivation. This is because of energy

conservation increasing the inclination angle will increase the ball’s potential energy as the
height increases, meaning as the ball is rolling down, by conservation of energy a larger total
kinetic energy is needed to be equal to the higher potential energy, and mass and moment of
inertia are constant, meaning final velocity will increase. Another reason is the gravitational
force has a larger component in the ball’s motion, increasing acceleration, and increasing
10𝑔𝑠
final velocity, as acceleration is the rate of velocity. The predicted gradient is 7
with
2 −2
units 𝑚 𝑠 .

Variables
Table 1. Independent variable
Independent Variable How to change?

Inclination angle Using 3 scissor lifts, the ramp’s height will

be adjusted to vary inclination angle.
Increasing the height by 4.4 after 5 trials will
correspondingly increase the inclination
angle, because this increment allows the
maximum height to be reached by the
scissor lifts, creating a more reliable result.

6
Table 2. Dependent variable
Dependent Variable Measurement Method

Final Velocity I will use a formula to find the final velocity

by measuring the hypotenuse of the
inclined plane and the time taken for the
ball to reach the floor from the highest point
in the ramp. A meter stick is used for the
hypotenuse measurement because it
directly measures the hypotenuse with low
uncertainty, saving time and enhancing
precision.

Table 3. Control variables

Control Variable To make it constant Variable Impact:

Length of the ramp Same ramp will be used An increase in the length will
throughout the experiment. increase the distance traveled by
the ball, increasing the time taken,
and decreasing the final velocity.

Ball’s initial velocity The ball will be released from If the initial velocity is positive, it
rest. will increase the final velocity, as
the ball will have a positive initial
kinetic energy, meaning the final
kinetic energy will become the sum
of both initial potential and kinetic
energy rather than only initial
potential energy.

Ball’s starting I will mark a spot on the top of the Varying the ball’s starting position
position ramp using posted notes where I means the ball won’t have a
will always release the ball. constant time to accelerate,
affecting the final velocity.

The ball’s mass Use the same ball throughout the Due to Newton’s 2nd Law of
experiment. Motion (F=ma), increasing the
mass will decrease the
acceleration, decreasing the final
velocity.

The type of ball A solid ball will be used If different balls are used per trial,
used throughout the experiment. then there would be changes in
the moment of inertia and other
ball’s properties. This affects the
ball’s final velocity.

7
 Equipment
Figure 5. Set-up and apparatus

Methodology

Preliminary Experiment
This was conducted to familiarise myself with the experimental setup, procedure and
address its challenges. I noticed that I needed to derive a formula to find the final velocity
using time, as the final velocity will be harder to measure directly. I used a suvat equation to
solve this issue:
𝑡·(𝑣+𝑢)
𝑠= 2
Where v=final velocity, u=initial velocity, t=stopwatch time, and s=inclined plane hypotenuse.
−1
u=0𝑚𝑠 , as the ball starts from rest.
𝑡·(𝑣+0)
𝑠= 2
Isolate 𝑣:
𝑡·(𝑣+0)
𝑠= 2
2𝑠 = 𝑡𝑣
2𝑠
𝑣= 𝑡
(6)

Experiment
1) Use the meter stick to measure the length of the ramp.

8
 2) Place 3 scissor lifts on top of each other, and make the clamps hold the top of the
previous scissor lift and the bottom of the next scissor lift to enhance stability.
3) Use trigonometry to calculate the corresponding height to create that inclination
angle in the inclined plane, use this process:
ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡
𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒) = ℎ𝑦𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑠𝑒
(7)
𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ(ℎ𝑦𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑠𝑒) · 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒) = ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡
4) Adjust the scissor lifts’ height to match the height calculated in step 3.
5) Mark a spot at the top of the ramp using a posted note to have a fixed point of
release of the ball from the ramp.
6) Release the ball at that fixed point.
7) Use the stopwatch to measure the time taken for the ball to touch the ground from
that fixed point.
8) Use equation (6) to calculate the ball’s final velocity.
9) Repeat steps 6,7 and 8 four more times for 5 trials.
10) Change the inclination angle by repeating steps 3 and 4.
11) Repeat steps 9 and 10 for inclination angles incrementing by 4.400°.

Safety Hazards
Table 4. Hazards and Prevention
Hazard Consequence Measure taken to Probability
reduce

Instability of the When measuring Enhance stability by likely

scissor lifts height, scissor lifts attaching 2 clamps
fall due to unstability to a clamp stand for
and cause injuries. 3 scissor lifts.

Handling the ball Ball drops may Handle the ball with likely
cause foot injuries. care and be careful.

Sharp edges Ramp could have Check the ramp for unlikely
sharp vertices, and sharp edges. If any
it could cause a cut are found, smooth
if the person them using
handling it is not sandpaper.
careful.

Musculoskeletal Carrying 3 scissor Lift the apparatus Unlikely

injuries from lifts simultaneously individually to carry
incorrectly lifting is heavy, causing less strain on the
equipment strain on muscles or body.
ligaments.

Environmental Concerns
Posted note wastage, since posted notes are made of paper, meaning they need forest
materials to produce, and too much of this causes deforestation. To fix this, use only 1

9
posted note and place it on top of the ramp, rather than changing it every time the inclination
angle increases. Using wood as the ramp, wood cutting causes increased global warming
effects, bad for the environment. To fix this, I used 1 ramp throughout the experiment to
minimise the effects of this issue.
Ethical Concerns
There are no ethical concerns because no organisms were used, and humans weren’t used
for data collection.

Raw Data

Table 5. Preliminary measurements

Hypotenuse Height uncertainty

1. 512 ± 0. 050𝑚 ± 0. 005𝑚

Height Example Calculation

All examples θ = 4. 400 will be used.
Using equation (7) to identify the inclined plane’s height:
ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡
𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) = ℎ𝑦𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑠𝑒
1. 512 · 𝑠𝑖𝑛(4. 400) = 0. 116𝑚
Table 6. Raw dataset
Time taken for the ball to roll down the ramp in seconds(s) ∆𝑡 =± 0. 100𝑠

Height (h) in meters (m)

Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5

0.116 2.061 1.970 1.980 2.017 2.009

0.234 1.429 1.477 1.461 1.384 1.443

0.354 1.166 1.205 1.179 1.141 1.223

0.479 1.052 0.983 1.021 1.080 1.003

0.610 1.011 0.912 0.942 0.977 0.934

Mean Time Example Calculation

𝑡1+𝑡2+𝑡3+𝑡4+𝑡5
𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 5
Where 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑔 is the mean time and 𝑡1 is the first trial’s time.

10
 2.061+1.970+1.980+2.017+2.009
𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 5
= 2. 007𝑠

Final Velocity Example Calculation

Use equation (6) and substitute values for s and 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑔:
2(1.512)
𝑣= 2.007
−1
𝑣 = 1. 505𝑚𝑠

Inclination Angle Uncertainty Example Calculation

Add the height and hypotenuse percentage uncertainties:
0.005 0.05
%∆𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) = 0.116 · 100 + 1.512
· 100
%∆𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) = 4. 310% + 3. 311%
%∆𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) = 8%
However, as inclination angle changes, height also changes, causing fluctuations in this
percentage uncertainty.
Velocity Uncertainty Example Calculation
Add the percentage uncertainties of 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑔 and hypotenuse from equation (6):
0.1
%∆𝑡 = 2.007
· 100
%∆𝑡 = 4. 983%
0.05
%∆𝑠 = 1.512
· 100
%∆𝑠 = 3. 311%
%∆𝑣 = 4. 983 + 3. 311
%∆𝑣 = 8%
This uncertainty varies as the inclination angle changes.

11
 Processed Data

Table 8. Processed dataset

Percentage Uncertainties
sqrt(sin(Inclination
angle)) (°)
Mean time Mean final Inclination angle Velocity
taken for ball velocity at the
to reach the bottom of the
bottom of the ramp(𝑚𝑠 )
−1

ramp
(𝑠)

0.277 2.007 1.505 ± 8. 000% ± 8. 000%

0.391 1.439 2.099 ± 5. 000% ± 10. 000%

0.477 1.183 2.553 ± 5. 000% ± 12. 000%

0.550 1.028 2.938 ± 4. 000% ± 13. 000%

0.612 0.955 3.162 ± 4. 000% ± 14. 000%

Figure 6. Linearised graph

The Pearson correlation coefficient value is 0.9987, suggesting a positive linear correlation.
The RMSE stands for Root Mean Square Error and identifies the mean difference between
experimental and theoretical values. An RMSE of 0.03988 is low and the lower the RMSE
value the higher the prediction model’s ability to predict the outcome.

12
 Gradient Uncertainty
To calculate the gradient’s uncertainty, the difference between the maximum(red line) and
minimum gradient (blue line) must be identified and halved:
𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡−𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡
∆𝑚 = 2
6.606−4.452
∆𝑚 = 2
2 −2
∆𝑚 =1. 656𝑚 𝑠
Therefore:
𝑚 ± ∆𝑚
2 −2
5. 034 ± 1. 656𝑚 𝑠
Percentage uncertainty conversion:
1.656
5.034
· 100 = 33%
2 −2
5. 034𝑚 𝑠 ± 33%
This is a significant percentage uncertainty, indicating the imprecision of the results, as both
minimum and maximum gradients generated are distinct from the actual gradient of the
graph in the experiment.

Proportionality Constant Example Calculation

Proportionality expression is:
𝑣 α 𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ)
Therefore, there must be some constant that makes this relationship true. Substitute
𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) = 0. 277 and the corresponding velocity:
1. 505 = 𝑘 · 0. 277
1.147
𝑘= 0.277
≈ 5. 433
Table 9. Proportionality constant for all θ

𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ) Proportionality constant(k)

0.277 5.433

0.391 5.368

0.477 5.352

0.550 5.342

0.612 5.167

Changes in the constant prove how errors harm the results’ reliability.

13
 Theoretical Gradient

Substitute all values received during the experiment in the predicted gradient formula, the
theoretical gradient will be:
10·9.81·1.512 2 −2
7
≈ 4. 603𝑚 𝑠
This gradient is only applicable when θ = 4. 400, the hypotenuse of the inclined plane
changes with θ.

Percentage Difference Between Theoretical and Actual Gradient

Next, calculate percentage difference between the experimental and theoretical gradient for
each gradient value, as it varies with the inclination angle.

5.034−4.603
4.603
· 100 ≈ 9. 363%

Conclusion
The graph shows that as the square root of the sine of the inclination angle increases, the
final velocity at the bottom of the ramp increases linearly, meaning the results support my
alternative hypothesis to some extent, while not supporting the null hypothesis. During the
alternative hypothesis, I correctly described the relationship 𝑣 α 𝑠𝑖𝑛(θ), and this fits with the
graph because when I plotted the final velocity with the 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒), it showed a
correlation coefficient of 0.9987, proving a very strong positive correlation, and almost
completely linear. However, my percentage uncertainties for the inclination angle and final
velocity were relatively high, indicating a large range of potential values, reducing precision,
as high variability gets introduced into the results. I am confident with my results. There are
fluctuations in the proportionality constant that I calculated, meaning the relationship
between the independent and dependent variables isn’t strictly linear and the final velocity
relationship may not be consistent across every angle. This could be due to friction which
was considered negligible. A high percentage difference between the theoretical and
experimental gradient reduces the accuracy and precision of the results. I am still confident
despite the significant gradient uncertainty, further reducing precision, due to the high
variability. the RMSE is 0.03988 which is low, indicating high accuracy and reliability. This
relationship is scientifically correct because; as the inclination angle increases, potential
energy increases because of increased height when the ball is stationary. As the ball rolls
down the ramp, the ball has more time to accelerate, increasing final velocity. Additionally,
the slope becomes steeper, increasing acceleration and final velocity.

Evaluation

Percentage Difference Between Experimental and Theoretical Velocities

When θ = 4. 400, the theoretical value is found by substituting all measurements into
equation (5):
10(9.807)(1.512)·𝑠𝑖𝑛(4.400)) −1
𝑣𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 = 7
= 1. 037𝑚𝑠

14
 𝑣𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙−𝑣𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙
𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 𝑣𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙
· 100
1.505−1.037
𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 1.037
· 100 ≈ 45. 000%

Inclination Angle Percentage difference(%)

4.400 45.000

8.800 43.000

13.200 43.000

17.600 43.000

22.000 38.000
All of these percentages are significant, indicating a large distinction between theoretical and
experimental values. The possible reasons for this discrepancy are shown below.

Strengths
1) Using trigonometry for some measurements, as trigonometry gives results without
uncertainties, improves the results’ reliability. Trigonometry improves relationship
precision because formulas can be derived to identify the relationship between the
independent and dependent variables.
2) Methodology’s simplicity, saves time and resources, meaning non-specialist
equipment is generally needed, making it cost-effective.

15
 Weaknesses
Table 11. Experiment issues
Weakness Error type Significance (1-5) Suggested improvement
(1=negligible, 5=significant)

Using trigonometry in Random (3) Trigonometric calculations rely on Repeating the measurements 5 times and
calculations. accurate measurements, as they are calculating the mean, excluding anomalies.
sensitive to measurement variations, Use laser distance meters rather than meter
meaning slight variations can sticks for ramp measurements.
significantly deviate the results.

External vibrations when Random (2) External vibrations slightly Do the experiment in a stable and quiet
measuring. change the ball’s direction and location, away from vibration sources like
speed, changing its final velocity. footsteps, which reduces the external
vibrations amount, improving accuracy.

Reaction time when using Random (2) but it depends on the size of the Use a photogate, as it automatically
stopwatch reaction time, if large then it would measures the time, eliminating the
increase the total time, causing a inaccuracies caused by reaction time.
lower final velocity.

Air resistance’s impact on Systematic (4) Despite being controlled, it can Do the experiment in a vacuum chamber, as
the ball significantly affect the results. Air there are no air particles in a vacuum,
resistance creates a drag force that meaning the effects of air resistance will be
opposes the ball’s motion, reducing completely removed, improving the
its acceleration and final velocity. accuracy of the results to the theoretical
values.

Rolling resistance of the Systematic (4) Rolling resistance is deformation Use low-friction materials for the ball,
ball on the inclined plane. and energy loss at the contact point minimising energy loss to the surroundings.
between the ball and the surface. Ball bearings can also be used, reducing
This generates a resistive force rolling resistance.
called rolling resistance, opposing
the ball’s motion, decreasing the final
velocity.

Frictional forces acting on Systematic (1) because it only leads to slight Use low-friction/smooth materials for the
the ball underestimations. Frictional force ball and the ramp that provides the surface
opposes the ball’s motion, reducing for the inclined plane, as this reduces
final velocity, however, due to contact between the ball and the ramp,
reduced surface contact, the minimising frictional forces, and increasing
coefficient of rolling friction is the results’ accuracy.
diminutive, leading to small frictional
forces, causing slight changes.

● If I were to do this investigation again, I would use specialised apparatus like laser
distance meters instead of meter sticks for length measurement, and use photogates
rather than stopwatches to eliminate the errors caused by reaction time, all reducing
the uncertainty of their respective measurements.
● Cooperate with specialists to receive diverse perspectives and innovative procedures
to decrease uncertainties.
● Use computational simulations to replicate changes in final velocity with changing
inclination angles. Factors that affect the accuracy, precision, or reliability of the
results can be more easily controlled.

16
 Extension
Other variables should be explored that affect the relationship between inclination angle and
final velocity.
1) Changing ball mass while controlling other factors, revealing the relationship between
mass and final velocity on inclined plane.
2) Using inclined planes of different surfaces and friction coefficients would provide
insights into how surface properties alter frictional forces and rolling motion.
3) Allowing spin or an initial velocity, rather than starting from rest, would show how
initial conditions affect final velocity.

Bibliography
1) Lumencandela. (n.d.). University Physics Volume 1. 11.1 Rolling Motion. Retrieved
January 21, 2024, from
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-osuniversityphysics/chapter/11-1-rolling-moti
on/
2) GeeksforGeeks. (n.d.). Gravitational Force. www.geeksforgeeks.org. Retrieved
January 21, 2024, from https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/gravitational-force/
3) Lotha, G. (2024, February 26). inertia (Britannica, Ed.). britannica.com.
Retrieved March 2, 2024, from https://www.britannica.com/science/inertia
4) testbook. (2023, July 31). Understanding Moment of Inertia of Solid Sphere.
testbook.com. Retrieved January 16, 2024, from
https://testbook.com/physics/moment-of-inertia-of-solid-sphere#:~:text=thin%20solid
%20cylinders.-,The%20moment%20of%20inertia%20of%20a%20solid%20cylinder%
20is%20given,%2F5)MR%5E2.
5) tutorialspoint. (n.d.). Rolling friction. tutorialspoint.com. Retrieved March
11, 2024, from https://www.tutorialspoint.com/rolling-friction

17