Downloaded from www.clastify.

com by Dhruv Manral

Motion of a parachute

Introduction: I have always been intrigued by the concept of human flight and, in particular,
the flight systems which, in many ways, have created the sense of global interconnectedness
which shapes the modern world. After reading more in-depth about concepts such as terminal
velocity and air resistance, I began to think about the many applications Physics has in various
flight systems, and specifically how Physics can be used in optimizing the efficiency of these
systems. Due to the constraints induced by the COVID-19 Pandemic, I thought that the most
practical way to explore this interest was through the use of homemade small-scale parachutes.
Parachutes have a plethora of applications, ranging from military uses to flight safety systems
and thus, I thought that it was integral to explore ways in which both the efficiency of these
tools could be maximized. Furthering my research, I discovered that the apex vent is used in
many parachutes to reduce drag and the effects of turbulence, which made me wonder how the
size of this vent could impact drop time in a parachute. Upon further study, I discovered that
while the introduction of apex venting in a parachute increases the drop time of the parachute,
and makes the opening of the parachute less erratic and more safe, an increase in the radius of
this vent does not foll w the same trend. This, in

turn, prompted my RQ: How is drop time in a conical newspaper parachute affected by
increases in the radius of the vent in the apexdhruvsmanral13@gmailoftheparachute?
Background Theory:

There are two main forces acting on a parachute: a drag force caused by air resistance and
the combined weight of the parachute and the attached mass. Drag force was first
recognized by Sir George Cayley, who actually deduced the relatio ship between the four
forces of flight: weight, drag, lift alongside thrust. A simplified model describing this
relationship may be attributed to Lord Rayleigh and is as follows:
=2⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ 21(1)

Where:

• is air density

• is the cross-sectional area of the canopy of the parachute

 • is the velocity

• is the parachute’s drag coefficient

• is drag force

Since the cross-sectional area (A) of the parachute can be approximated to the surface of the
parachute, the above equation is a good initial basis for this investigation. Additionally, the velocity
of the parachute may be, with consideration to the kinematics of the parachute’s fall, related
indirectly to the drop-time of the parachute, which is the second variable being explored in this
experiment. For simplicity, we will assume that this parachute is under constant acceleration. The equation
that describes this movement was first established by the Italian polymath Galileo Galilei. For height ℎ, time ,
initial velocity , final velocity , he set the following equation:
:

1.
Wolfson, Richard. Essential University Physics: Volume 1

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

1
ℎ= 2( + )

Since, in this experiment, the parachute is initially stationary, then = 0 m / s, and the
velocity can be written as:
=2 ℎ

When substituted in (1), this yields:

1 2 ℎ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ℎ2

)2= 2

= ⋅⋅⋅⋅(
(2)
2 2

The only remaining problem is that the drag force needs to be replaced by an expression which
can be, for the purposes of this experiment, related to the known variable. This issue is easily
solvable through employing a different expression for the drag force, drawing from Newton’s
second law. This law states that the net force acting upon an object is equivalent to the
acceleration experienced by the object multiplied by its mass. This is expressed through the
following:
=
From this expression and the factdhruvsthatweightmanraandl13@gmaidragaretheonlyvertical
forces acting on the parachute, it can be derived that:
− =
= + ⇒ = ( + ) (3)

Where g is acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m·s−2).

Returning to Galileo's equations of motion, for a height h, initial speed , time t and
acceleration a, he established that (Simanek, 2005):
1
ℎ= +2 2

Since the parachute is being released, and not thrown, = 0 m·s− , and the acceleration can
be written as: 2 ℎ
=

This, when substituted in o (3), gives us:

2 ℎ 2 ℎ+2

= ( 2 + )⇒ = 2 (4)

This provides an expression for the drag force in terms of the height of release and mass.
Equating (2) and (4) gives:
2 ℎ+2 ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ℎ
2

2 = 2 ∙ ∙ ∙ ℎ2
=2 ⇒ 2 ℎ+

2 2

From this, drop-time can be rewritten as:

2 ∙ ∙ ∙ ℎ2−2 ℎ

=√
(5)

The only remaining unknowns are the air density and the drag coefficient which have
typical constant values of 1.2 kg·m−3 and 1.75 respectively (Benson).
Plugging these in gives:
= √4.2 ℎ2 − 2 ℎ

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

The above expression provides a relatively simple, theoretically backed relation between
the drop time of the parachute and its surface area, and hence between the radius of the
apex vent and its surface area, allowing for a strong theoretical framework for the analysis
that follows. Using this model, a theoretical data table may be produced:

Serial no. Radius of apex vent/m Theoretical drop time/s

1 0.01 3.966

2 0.02 3.950

3 0.03 3.924

4 0.04 3.887

5 0.05 3.839

Table 1: Radius of apex vent/m and corresponding theoretical drop time/s for height of 3.5
m

Sample calculation for first row of table 1:

4.2 ℎ2 − 2 ℎ
=√

dhruvsmanral13@gmail

For an apex vent with a radius of 0.01 m, the new corresponding canopy
surface area will be:
is 0.12567 − × 0.012 ≈ 0.1253 2.

Given that the drop height is 3.5 , the mass is 0.04 kg and the initial radius of the parachute
canopy is 0.2 m (as specified in the experimental design), the theoretical value for the drop
time may be calculated as:

= √4.2 × 0.1253 × 3.52 − 2 × 0.04 × 3.5

0.04 × 9.81
= .966

This can be more easily vi ualized through a graph:

 − . + . + .

Graph 1: Theoretical model of drop time/s vs. radius of apex vent/m (self-made, using
google sheets

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

Hypothesis: Since an increase in the radius of the apex vent would result in a decreased
surface area of the canopy of the parachute, and considering drop time and canopy surface
area have an inverse square relation, my hypothesis is that an increase in the size of the
apex vent will result in a decrease in drop time.
Design:

Independent variable:

● Radius of apex vent

Dependent variable:

● Drop-time of parachute

Control variables:

● The mass attached to the parachute was kept constant and measured to be 0.04 kg .
In order to control this, the same object (a set of keys) was used throughout all
stages of the experiment.

● The length of the strings used was 0.25 m. To control this, the length of each of the
eight strings was measured using a ruler.

● The distance from which the top of the parachute is dropped was kept constant at
3.5m .In order to control this, the parachute was dropped from the s me height
throughout all stages of the experiment.

● The number of strings used was 8.

● The radius of the canopy was kept constant and measured to be 0.2 m. This was
controlled by using the same newspaper canopy in e ch trial.

● Temperature: the temperature in the surroundings was measured to be 20°C. This

was not

controlled by explicit owever, since the data was gathered over a relatively
means, short
time span inside my home, it was a sumed to be consistent.
The reaction time was nted for through the use of a video editing software
● acco called
SloPro.
Apparatus:
Newspaper dhruvsmanral13@gmail
● (recycled)
● Weighing scale
3m measuring
● pe
● Apple iPhone
model 11
● Clastify
 Software used:
SloPro

• Clear tape

• Wool Strings (8 used, each 0.3 m in length)

• 1m ruler

• Scissors

• Marker, pencil

• Mathematical compass

• Mass used (set of keys with mass 0.04kg)

Procedure:

1. I used a single, rectangular newspaper and marked a centre point on this. After this,
I used a metre rule to measure 8 points 0.2m from the centre point.

1. Following this, I folded the paper twice into a square and cut a quarter circle shape
using scissors. This, when opened, formed a full circle with radius 0.2m.

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

1. After this, I drew 4 lines extending from equidistant points around the circle, each
connecting to an opposite point on the circumference of the circle.

1. Then I cut 8 pieces of woollen string, each measuring 0.25m in length and attached
these to the eight points around the circumference of the circle using clear tape.

1. Following this, I knotted all of these strings tightly together and the centre of the
circle, and, using tape- attached this knot to the 0.04 kg mass(set of keys).

1. In order to perform this experiment, I measured the height (inside the shaft) from the
first and second floors inside my house to the ground floor (using a ladder and
measuring tape).
 2. After this I cut a circle with radius 0.5cm in the centre of the circle.

1. I dropped this completed model from the aforementioned point with my father
recording a video of the process. The video was taken using a video-editing software
(SloPro) that allowed for shooting at 1000 fps, hence allowing for a more accurate
measure of time taken.
2. I repeated this three times to minimize random error.

1. Step (7) was repeated 9 more times, with an additional 0.5 cm being added to the
radius of

the apex vent each time.

Risk assessment:

1) Since the experiment was conducted inside the shaft, with me dropping the parachute from
windows on the first anddhruvsmanral13@gmailsecondfloors,Imadesurethatmy brother and
father, who were helping with the experimental procedure and keeping track of the time, were a
safe distance
from the perceived landing point of the parachute so that they would not get hit.

2) I ensured that I was not leaning over the window (as it was low-lying) so that I did
not risk falling and injuring myself.

Ethical and environmental considerations:

1) The newspaper used in the experiment was recycled, so there was no wastage of
new paper or other materials while making the parachute.

2) Looking back on the experiment, I could have been more conscious of the amount
of clear plastic tape I used, which I wil keep in mind during future investigations.

3) There were no ethical concerns in this experiment.

Assumptions:

1. The first assumption I made was that my hand was fully extended in all stages of
the experiment and that hence, the parachute was being dropped from the same
height in each stage of the experiment.

1. The second assumption I made was that the extension in all 8 strings was equal,
and hence the tension in all 8 strings was equal.

1. The third assumption I made was that the direction of air flow and air pressure in
the room remained constant throughout all stages of the experiment.
 1. The fourth assumption I made was that the temperature in the room was constant
and therefore that the viscosity of the air was constant throughout all stages of the
experiment.

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

Model:
Image 1: Actual, self-taken image of my model without weight attached, shows the initial
stage of the experiment in which the 8 woollen strings are attached to equidistant points on
the circumference of the newspaper circle.

Image 2: Actual, seClastify-takenimage of my model with weight attached, shows the

finalised model, without any apex vent.

Data collection and processing:

I took three trials in order to minimize random error:

Averages of three trials:

In order to make this calculation, I added the drop times for all three trials and divided the
result by three.

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

Serial no. Radius of apex Drop time/s (±0.001) Average Drop New surface
vent/m for three trials time/s (±0.001) area of
(±0.0005) for three trials canopy/ 2

Trial Trial Trial

1 2 3

1 0.0100 1.716 1.714 1.715 1.715 0.1253 ±

0.0007

2 0.0200 1.710 1.710 1.711 1.710 0.1244 ±

0.0007

3 0.0300 1.673 1.669 1.671 1.671 0.1228 ±

0.0007

4 0.0400 1.624 1.623 1.622 1.622 0.1206

± 0.0008

5 0.0500 1.563 1.564 1.563 1.563 0.1178 ±

 0.0008

Table 2: Radius of apex

vent/mdhruvsmanral13@gmailandcorrespondingdroptie/sfor each trial and

average drop time for height of .5 m

Sample calculations for first row of Table 2:

Since the initial area is × 0.22 = 0.12567 2, the new surface area of the canopy may be calculated by subtracting the area of the apex vent from the initial surface area. Using the data in the first row of Table 2, the new surface
area is 0.12567 − × 0.012 ≈ 0.1253 2.

Calculating uncertainties:

- To calculate the uncertainty in the radius of the apex vent, I divided the least count
in the metre rule (0.1 cm) by 2, which equals 0.05 cm. I then converted this to m,
which equals 0.0005m.

- To calculate the uncertainty in the drop time, I observed the least count of the
phone’s timer, which was 1ms. I then converted that to seconds, which equals
0.001s. As stated before, the uncertainty in drop time resulting from reaction time
was accounted for through the use of a video-editing software.

- The uncertainty in the surface area of the canopy of the parachute is a fractional
uncertainty which may be written as:
∆ ∆

=2×
Making ∆ the subject:
∆ =2×∆ ×

Sample calculation for uncertainty in surface area of parachute canopy:

Using the above formula:

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

∆ =2×
∆ ×
For the first row of Table 2, the surface area of the canopy is 0.1253 2, and the radius of the apex vent is 0.0100, and the uncertainty in the radius is 0.0005 m.
We may write the radius of the parachute as the radius of the apex vent deducted from the original radius of the parachute (0.2 m):
= 0.2 − 0.01 = 0.19

Hence,
0.0005
× 0.1253 = 0.000659 ≈ 0.0007 2
∆ =2×

0.19

Graphical analysis:

Below, I plotted a graph of the radius of the apex vent in m (x-axis) versus the average
drop time for the three trials in seconds (y-axis) for a drop height of 3.5m. The software I
used for this was Google Sheets.

− + . + .
 Graph 2: Radius of apex vent /m versus average drop time/s (self-made, using google
sheets)

Noticing the quadratic relationship between the variables as can be seen in the above graph,
I decided that a better idea would be to linearize the graph by instead plotting the radius of
the apex vent squared against the average drop time. This may be seen in the below graph:

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

 − . + .
− . + .
− . + .

Graph 3: Radius of apex vent dhruvssquared/manral13@gm2versusaveragedropailtime/s,

including the maximum and minimum best-fit trend lines (self-made, using google sheets)

Using graph 2, we may deduce a linear relation including uncertainties based off the best-
fit trend line as well as the maximum and minimum slopes for the best-fit trend line:
= = 2
= −65.9 + .73
= = −66.4
= = −65.4
= − = | − 66.4 − (−65.4)| = 0.5

2 2

Since the y intercept of both curves are approximately the same, the uncertainty in the y
intercept is negligible.

Therefore the final linear equation including uncertainties may be re-written as:
= (−65.9 ± 0.5) + 1.73

Or:
= (−65.9 ± 0.5) + 1.73

Where = 2

From graph 1, we can see a clear negative quadratic relationship between the average drop
time of the parachute and the radius of the apex vent of the parachute. Clearly, as there is
an increase in the radius of the apex vent, there is a large decrease in the drop-time of the
parachute. This is further supported through the high R-squared value of 0.993, suggesting
a strong negative correlation between the variables. However, there are anomalies to this
trend, particularly at r= 0.02m, which will be evaluated in further sections.

9
 Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

Result

As can be seen from Graph 1, the average drop time generally decreased with an increase
in the radius of the apex vent. The quadratic equation which models this relation(from
graph 1) is:
= −85 2 + 1.19 + 1.71

A simple linearized model, as derived in the analysis section is:

= (−65.9 ± 0.5) + 1.73

Where = 2

Evidently, there is a clear, strong negative correlation between the two variables being
discussed.

Conclusion and evaluation:

My results are in line with my hypothesis, namely that an increase in the radius of the apex
vent of the parachute results in a decrease in the drop-time of the parachute. In the context of
current scientific research (Brighenti et Al.), a similar trend has been identified. Namely, an
increase in the radius and therefore area of the apex vent in a parachute causes an increase in
the lift coefficient of

the parachute. Since the lift coefficient directly contrasts the drag coefficient, and an increase in

drag coefficient causes an increasedhruvsmanral13@gmailinthedrop-timeofaparachute,tmay

be stated that an increase in the lift coefficient will result in a decrease in the drop-time of the
parachute, which is in
agreement with my hypothesis and experimental results.

Resulting from my choice of apparatus, there were minor uncertainties in the data,
critically the ±0.001 seconds uncertainty in drop-time, and the ±0.0005 meter uncertainty
in the measurements of the radius of the apex vent and canopy of the parachute. A few
other minor uncertainties which were not fully accounted for were the uncert inties in the
measured mass (±0.001 kg) as well as in the length of the woollen strings used ( ±0.0005
m). However, what was more prominent in the experiment were the random nd systematic
errors resulting from the sometimes varying experimental conditions and choice of
apparatus.

Critically, it must be noted that due to the experiment having taken place during COVID-
19 and a national lockdown, sufficient experimental materials could not be procured and
instead I had to work with recycled newspaper, woollen strings, and weighing scales
intended for cooking ingredients. Therefore, while this investigation was useful in terms of
exploring the relationship between the radius of the apex vent and the drop-time, it does
not accurately represent the typical conditions in which parachutes are utilised (namely
from larger drop heights), and more so, does not reflect the typical materials and quantities
used in parachuting. For instance, parachutes are most commonly used by humans (who
have a much larger mass) and the canopy of the parachute is typically much larger and
made out of more durable materials such as plastic.

Additionally, using the theoretical model derived in the background theory section and the
data procured from it, one can see that while the trend mirrors that of the background
theory (an increase in the radius of the apex vent results in a decrease in drop-time), the
values of drop time are higher than those procured from the experiment. This may be
attributed to certain random and systematic errors, which are evaluated below:

1
0

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

Random errors Impact on experiment Possible improvements to

experimental method

Fluctuations in
environmental
conditions (such as wind
speed and temperature)
Changes course of parachute
motion, thereby increasing
or
decreasing displacement and
consequently decreasing or
increasing drop time.
• Repeat experiment
more times.
• Use thermometer to
keep track of
temperature during
course of experiment

Landing location of the During the experiment, the • Use of motion

parachute location at which the software in order to
parachute arrived was not more accurately
constant. Thereby, the measure the path of
 displacement was impacted, the experiment.
causing increases or
decreases in observed drop
time.

Systematic errors Impact on experiment Possible improvements to

experimental method

Material used for the The use of newspaper,

making while • Use of a more durable
environmentally
of the parachute beneficial, material, such as a
was not ideal in terms of
its plastic sheet or cloth.
durability. For stance, in • Adding layers to the
certain trials, the
newspaper newspaper, rather
tore slightly and had to
be than having a single
replaced, causing a
decrease layer.
in observed drop time.

Material used for The use of thick wool

strings and was
dhruvsmanral13@gmail • Use of thin string in
attaching strings inconvenient in terms of attaching the mass to
attachment to the
newspaper, the newspaper.
as it often broke off from
the
newspaper. More
critically,
the wool may have added
a
slight amount of mass to
the
parachute, which may
have
resulted in a decrease in
observed drop time.

Measurement of
drop-height The measurement of drop • Measuring drop
height may have been
slightly height from a
inaccurate as the completely vertical,
 measuring
tape only extended to 3m
and slightly shorter
hence a ruler needed to
be displacement.
used in conjunction
causing
the drop-height to be
decreased/increased.

11

Downloaded from www.clastify.com by Dhruv Manral

Recommendations for future investigations:

Some possible investigation ideas based off this investigation are:

1. Exploring the relationship between apex vent radius and drop time from two
different heights

1. Exploring the relationship between apex vent radius and drop time with differently
shaped parachutes

1. Exploring the relationship between apex vent radius and drop time with differing
diameters of the parachute’s canopy

Bibliography:

• “Performance of Round Vented Parachutes.” Web.Wpi.Edu, web.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-

project/Available/E-project-042407-
112440/unrestricted/Brighentidhruvsmanral13@gmailDuffenHeadVentedPrchutes_M
QP.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2021.
 • “Lab Measurements and Error Analysis.” Https://Www.Deanza.Edu,
www.deanza.edu/faculty/lunaeduardo/documents/LabMeasurementsandErrorAnaly.
pdf. Accessed 5 May 2021.

• Nobel, Imti. “Parachut Project Report.” Www.Slideshare.Net,

www.slideshare.net/imtisaalahmed1/parachut-project-report. Accessed 3 May
2021.
• “Velocity During Recovery.” Www.Grc.Nasa.Gov, www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-
12/VirtualAero/BottleRocket/airplane/rktvrecv.html#:%7E:text=Typical%20values%2
0of %20drag%20coefficient,produces%20a%20lower%20terminal%20velocity.
Accessed 5 May 2021.

• Wikipedia contributors. “Density of Air.” Wikipedia, May

2021, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Density of air. Accessed 6
May 2021.

• History.com Editors. “First Parachute Jump Is Made over Paris.” HISTORY, 18 Oct.

2019, www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-first-parachutist HYPERLINK

"http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-first-parachutist". Accessed 3 May
2021. ● Wolfson, Rich rd. Essential University Physics: Volume 1 (4th Edition). 4th
ed., Pearson,
2019. Accessed 4 May 2021.

● The softwareClastifyusedinthis investigation were Google sheets for the graphs

included and SloPro for measuring and analysing drop time

ASSESSMENT -

Criterion A - Personal Engagement :

Marks Received:

2 /2

Criteria Correct
The choice of the topic is justified through apparent personal significance, interest, or curiosity
Why is it correct?
The student justifies their choice to investigate the motion of a parachute with their interest in flight systems

Highlights (2):
I hav...
After...
Evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation, or presentation of the investigation is
present
Why is it correct?
The student includes photos of the model created for the purpose of the experiment to present their involvement
in designing and conducting the experiment

Highlights (2):
Image...
Image...

Criterion B - Exploration
Marks Received:

6 /6

Criteria Correct
A focused and detailed topic of the investigation is identified
Why is it correct?
The topic of the exploration is stated at the beginning of the work and is further supported by a detailed research
question

Highlights (2):
Motio...
How i...
A relevant and fully focused research question is clearly described
Highlights (1):
Upon ...
The physics is explained well enough for the reader to fully and easily understand it without the need of rereading
Why is it correct?
The theory behind the topic (e.g. the description of forces acting on a parachute) is clearly described in the
Background Theory section

Highlights (4):
There...
Since...
𝛥ℎ =...
The a...
The methodology of the investigation is clear and easy to follow
Why is it correct?
The methodology of the exploration is divided into sections: Variables, Apparatus, Procedure, Assumptions, Model

The methodology of the investigation is focused on addressing the research question

Why is it correct?
The student correctly identifies the independent (radius of apex vent) and dependent (drop-time of parachute)
variables to pursue the research question

Highlights (2):
Radiu...
Drop-...
The methodology of the investigation includes steps to assure the relevance and reliability of the collected data
Why is it correct?
The student correctly lists the variables that have to be controlled or maintained constant for the results to be
valid

Highlights (7):
The m...
The l...
The d...
The n...
The r...
Tempe...
The r...
The student shows full awareness of safety hazards that can arise during the procedure
Highlights (2):
Since...
I ens...
The student shows full awareness of the ethical issues that are relevant to the procedure
Highlights (1):
There...
The student shows full awareness of environmental issues that are relevant to the procedure
Highlights (2):
The n...
Looki...

Criterion C : Analyis -
Marks Received:

6 /6

Criteria Correct
The report includes relevant raw data that could support a detailed and valid conclusion to the research question.
Why is it correct?
The raw data includes the measurements obtained in 3 experimental trials that will be used by the student for
further calculations

The report includes enough raw data that could support a detailed and valid conclusion to the research question.
Why is it correct?
The student conducts 3 experimental trials for each value of the independent variable

Appropriate data processing is carried out to enable a conclusion to the research question to be drawn
Why is it correct?
The student calculates the values of the dependent variable and presents the relationship between the
investigated variables in graphs 2-3

Highlights (2):
Graph...
Graph...
The student interprets the processed data correctly
Why is it correct?
The student interprets the gradients presented in graphs 2-3 to deduce that there is a strong negative correlation
between investigated variables

Highlights (1):
As ca...
The data processing is fully consistent with the experimental data
Why is it correct?
The student uses the data collected in the experiment to calculate the values of the dependent variable

Sources of uncertainty are identified

Highlights (3):
To ca...
To ca...
The u...
The student fully considers and describes how the uncertainty impacted the results
Why is it correct?
The student states that uncertainties resulting from the apparatus had a negligible effect on the results

Highlights (2):
Since...
Resul...
The processed data is correctly interpreted to deduce a valid and detailed conclusion to the research question
Why is it correct?
The student refers to graph 1 and derived equations to conclude that an increase in the radius of the apex vent of
the parachute results in a decrease in the drop-time of the parachute

Highlights (3):
My re...
Namel...
As ca...

Criterion D : Evaluation

Marks Received:

6 /6

Criteria Correct
The conclusion fully answers the research question
Highlights (1):
My re...
The conclusion is fully supported by the data presented
Why is it correct?
The conclusion is supported by the data presented in graph 1 and by the derived equations

Highlights (1):
From ...
The student makes a relevant comparison to the accepted scientific publication or context
Highlights (1):
n the...
Strengths of the investigation are discussed
Highlights (3):
Resul...
this ...
the t...
Weaknesses of the investigation are discussed
Highlights (2):
Criti...
the v...
Sources of error are recognized
Highlights (5):
Fluct...
Landi...
Mater...
Mater...
Measu...
The student shows a clear understanding of the methodological issues
Highlights (5):
Chang...
Durin...
The u...
The u...
The m...
Realistic and relevant suggestions for their improvement are suggested
Highlights (5):
Repea...
Use o...
Use o...
Use o...
Measu...
The student provides suggestions for the extension of the investigation
Highlights (3):
Explo...
Explo...
Explo...

Criteria E : Communication

Criteria Correct
The presentation of the investigation is clear (no need to reread any sections to understand them)
Any errors do not hamper the understanding of the focus, process and outcomes
The necessary information on focus, process and outcomes are present coherent
Why is it correct?
All calculations and data presentations are focused on achieving the aim of the exploration

Lack of irrelevant information

Appropriate use of subject-specific terminology and conventions
All conclusions throughout the investigation are justified
Why is it correct?
Conclusions are based on the student's interpretation of the processed data

Data presentation in tables is graphically consistent

Highlights (1):
Comment...
The pages are numbered
Any external information is provided alongside a reference (footnote or in-text citation)
Highlights (1):
Comment...
All graphs, tables and figures are labelled correctly (number and short description is provided)
Highlights (1):
Comment...
12