Example Of Report On Experimental Procedure4
A variety of paper aero plane models which are applied to simulate the behaviours of airplanes. From the chopper model paper aero planes to the basic dart, paper aero planes have become increasingly more diverse and complex. There are paper aero planes that are composed of two wings and others that are composed of several wings. The objective of this experiment was to design a gliding paper aero plane by means of using A4 paper in its construction. When the aero planes were propelled, the quantity of time that the aero plane remained aloft and the number of meters that the aero plane traversed were recorded. Subsequent to documenting a few readings of the characteristics of time spent aloft and the number of meters travelled, improvements were made and new aero plane models were applied. The objective was to discover the most aerodynamic model. Six distinct models were applied in this laboratory experiment. The works of Chatterjee (2013), Collins (2013), Johnson (2012), McClamroch (2011), Nakamura (1993), Naik (2010), Oteh (2008), Parker (2003), Senson and Ritter (2011) were accessed in the composition of this assignment.
Results and Analysis5
Discussion of Results 8
The phenomenon of flight has been a component of the natural world. The birds are able to achieve flight not only by conducting a flapping of their wings, but by applying the ability of gliding with their wings extended for significant distances (Chatterjee 2013; Johnson 2012; McClamroch 2011; Naik 2010; Oteh 2008; Parker 2003; Senson & Ritter 2011). Consequently, the aero planes that are man-made depend on these physical tenets in order to overcome the opposing forces of gravity and attain the quality of flight (Collins 2013).
In order for an aero plane to rise into the atmosphere, the must be a force that is created that is in excess of the force of gravity. This force is designated as lift. (Chatterjee 2013; Johnson 2012; McClamroch 2011; Naik 2010; Oteh 2008; Parker 2003; Senson & Ritter 2011).
The variation in pressure of the air that flows is manifested by Bernoulli’s equation. The equation that was formulated by Daniel Bernoulli is demonstrated as:
S x (1/2 ρV2) x CL = the lift coefficient
(Chatterjee 2013; Johnson 2012; McClamroch 2011; Naik 2010; Oteh 2008; Parker 2003; Senson & Ritter 2011).
All of the physical bodies that are propelled though air manifest the quality of experiencing air flow resistance. The resistance that is experienced by the aero planes is defined as drag (Chatterjee 2013; Johnson 2012; McClamroch 2011; Naik 2010; Oteh 2008; Parker 2003; Senson & Ritter 2011).
A x (1/2 ρV2) x CD = the drag coefficient
An aero plane’s weight is a restricting factor in the designing of aircraft components. The weight of an aero plane may be tabulated by applying a paradigm of Newton’s second law of physics. The mathematical formula is represented by the mathematical equation:
This equation considers that weight is expressed by the letter W, mass is expressed by the letter m and the gravitational acceleration provided by the Earth is demonstrated by the letter g (Chatterjee 2013; Johnson 2012; McClamroch 2011; Naik 2010; Oteh 2008; Parker 2003; Senson & Ritter 2011).
Constant = P + (1/2 ρV2)
This equation considers that P represents pressure. The letter ρ represents the density of the sir and V is defined by the speed of the aero plane. The continuity equation is demonstrated as the mathematical equation:
Constant = P x V x A
This equation considers that the letter A represents the cross sectional zone of the airflow, V presents speed and P represents the pressure of the airflow (Chatterjee 2013; Johnson 2012; McClamroch 2011; Naik 2010; Oteh 2008; Parker 2003; Senson & Ritter 2011).
The model planes were made from A4 paper. There were a total of six models that were used. The planes were flown at a forty five degree angle aside, against and into the wind. Seven trials were conducted for each of the six aero plane models. The results of the amount of time that the aero planes spent aloft were documented in minutes and seconds. The characteristics of the aero planes that included length, wing span, and height were documented The distances that the aero planes flew was documented in meters. Tables 1, 2 and 3 demonstrate the characteristics of the aero planes and the qualities of their flight. Friends helped in measuring the distance and the positioning of the planes during the throws. The first and second throws were straight. The third, fourth and fifth throws were at 45°. The sixth and seventh were inside throws that were straight due to the roof limits. The air speeds of the models were assessed.
Results and Analysis
The model aero planes that were demonstrated to be the most efficient flying aero planes were models 1, 5, 6, 2, 3 and model 4. These were the models that exhibited the most effective flight characteristics (Chatterjee 2013; Johnson 2012; McClamroch 2011; Naik 2010; Oteh 2008; Parker 2003; Senson & Ritter 2011). An identical propulsion force was applied to all of the model aero planes. The characteristics of weight, drag and thrust were identical for all of the six aero plane models that were used in the trials.
A potential source of error could be the lack of measurement of the propulsion force that was applied in each of the trials. Another source of uncertainty could be the intensity of the wind. These are considerations that could have cause uncertainty in the results of the experiment. It would be recommended to gauge the wind direction and propulsion force in future experiments.
A variety of aero plane shapes were applied in this assignment. The characteristics of weight, drag and thrust were considered to be equivalent in all of the trials of the model aero planes. The aero plane forms that were most effective in flight were the airplane forms that demonstrated the greatest capacity of lift. The capacity of lift could be assessed by the density of the air that passed over and under the air foils. A variety of wing configurations were applied. The most effective wind form was assessed to be model 1. Model 5, 6 and 3 were effective at providing the characteristic of lift. However, the form that was applied for model 1 seemed to have the highest lift coefficient.
Chatterjee, B 2013, Diverse Topics in Science and Technology. Bloomington, IN: Author House.
Collins, J 2013, The New World Champion Paper Airplane Book. New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group.
Johnson, ES 2012, Fluid Mechanics and the Theory of Flight. R. S. Johnson and Ventus Publishing ApS.
McClamroch, NH 2011, Steady Aircraft Flight and Performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Naik, PV 2010, Principles of Physics, Fourth Edition. New Delhi, India: PHI Learning Private Limited.
Nakamura, E 1993, Quick and Easy Flying Origami. USA: Japan Publications.
NCES 2015, “Create a Graph.” NCES.
Oteh, U 2008, Mechanics of Fluids. Bloomington, IN: Author House.
Parker, D 2003, Fields, Flows and Waves: An Introduction to Continuum Models. London, UK: Springer- Verlag.
Senson B and Ritter J 2011, Aerospace Engineering: From the Ground Up. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning.
USW Logo, http://www.ican.edu.my/imgs/footer/footer-logo-06.gif[17 January 2015].
The materials applied in the paper airplane experiment were: protractor, ruler, measuring tape and A4 paper.
Model aeroplane 1 was a traditional paper airplane. The length of the plane was 0.22m. The width of the wing was 0.065 m. The height of the wing was 0.166 m. The wing angle was 47°. The side wing has a width of 0.015 m. the side wing has a height of 0.086 m. The total plane width is 0.186m. The angle of the side wing was 90°. Model 1 achieved the best flight qualities due to the wing area. The wing area contributed to increased lift. The average air speed for model 1 was assessed at 3.41 m/s (Collins 2013).
Model aeroplane 2 was a Javelin paper airplane. The length of the aeroplane was 0.221 m. The width of the wing was 0.06 m. The height of the wing was 0.145 m. The wing angle was set at 45°. There were no side wings on this model. The total plane width was 0.153 m. Model 2 did not have the same efficiency as model one due to its decreased wing area. The decreased wing area caused the amount of lift to decrease. The average air speed for model 2 was assessed at 4.10 m/s (Collins 2013).
Model aeroplane 3 was a Nakamura Lock Paper Airplane. The length was 0.221 m. The height of the wing was 0.08 m. The wing was 0.24.1 m tall. The wing angle was 25°. The side wing had a width of 0.04 m and a height of 0.045 m. The total plane width was 0.181 m. Model 3 flew effectively, however its flight speed was second only to model 2. The average air speed for model 3 was assessed at 3.89 m/s (Collins 2013; Nakamura 1993).
Model 4 was a sleek traditional aeroplane. The length was 0.207 m. The wing width was 0.042 m. The height of the wing was 0.215 m. The wing angle was established at 12°. The width of the side wing was 0.04 m. The height of the side wing was 0.244 m. The total plane width was 0.172 m. The side wing angle was assessed at 14.2°. The flight characteristics of model 4 were less than the others due to the decreased wing area. The decreased wing area decreased the amount of lift. The average air speed for model 4 was assessed at 1.56 m/s (Collins 2013).
Model aeroplane 5 was an American Vortex. The length of the aeroplane was 0.194 m. The wing width was measured at 0.057 m. The wings were 0.193 m tall. The wing angle for model 5 was 27°. The total plane width was 0.15 m. Model 5 flew well due to its increased wing area. The only model which flew more effectively than model 5 was model 1. The average air speed for model 5 was assessed at 2.82 m/s (Collins 2013).
Model 6 was a Mantis paper aeroplane. The length of the aeroplane was 0.149 m. The wing width was 0.041 m. The wings were 0.153 m tall. The wing angle was established at 50°. The total plane width was 0.1467 m. Model 6 flew effectively due to its wing area. The model six was one of the best performers in terms of flight. The average air speed for model 6 was assessed at 3.47 m/s (Collins 2013).