How Accurate is the 1/2gt² Formula for Calculating Drop Height?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the accuracy of the formula 1/2gt² for calculating the height of a drop, specifically using a football as the dropped object. The calculation yielded a height of approximately 2.83 meters based on a drop time of 0.76 seconds, which raises concerns about the accuracy of the time measurement. Participants noted that for a height of around 5 meters, the drop time should be closer to one second, indicating potential miscalculation or measurement error. The importance of considering human error and the method of dropping the object was also highlighted. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for precise measurements and understanding of the formula's application.
Greiver
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
This is one of the questions on my college intro. to physics course lab.

use the shortest time(or shortest average time) to calculate the height of the drop point from the ground, Explain the choice of time to calculate the height of the drop

*object dropped was a football.

1/2gt^2




1/2 (9.8m/s^2)(0.76s)^2
=2.83024m


I don't know if I am headed in the right direction with this problem any input would be appreciated, although I have to point out that logically the height is approximately 5 or so meters could this be a miscalculation ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's the correct formula for an object dropped from rest with no air resistance. You probably didn't measure the time correctly...If the height was 5 meters, the time would have to be at least about a second.
 
PhanthomJay said:
That's the correct formula for an object dropped from rest with no air resistance. You probably didn't measure the time correctly...If the height was 5 meters, the time would have to be at least about a second.

looking at the average time for three trials with a football, although in doing the experiment i don't recall taking note of how it was dropped and the possibility for human error in this experiment. Thanks for the reply though it is very much appreciated.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top