Sample Solution

gure X1 shows that the relationship between 1/Time and the Brake Force forms a clear linear relationship with a positive gradient of 0.03849. This means that the time is inversely proportional to brake force, as predicted by the hypothesized results in table XX. Figure X1 also shows, that the line of best fit has a Y-intercept of 0.06133, indicating a systematical error of the setup (a directly proportional relationship would have the Y-intercept at the origin of the graph.
The quality of this observed data is also very good, as the line of best fit intersects all but one set of error bars. The fact that the maximum and minimum gradients are within ±0.01 of the line of best fit, shows that the random errors within the individual trials do not cause large error bars. The line of best fit doesn’t intersect the error bar for a brake force of 7.848N, as this error bar specifically is very small, suggesting accurate measurement or a lack of collected data values, to increase the margin of error.

In order to test how accurately the observed values, follow the trend from the predicted values, both sets of data are graphed in figure X3.

Figure X3: Graph of the hypothesized values as well as 1/timevs the brake force

Figure X3 shows that the observed results have a much smaller gradient, meaning that braking times are longer than predicted. The gradient of the linear trendline of the predicted values is 0.06694, whereas the gradient for the linear trendline of the observed values is 0.03849, meaning that the predicted gradient is roughly 1.7 times greater than that of the observed values.
There are 15 predicted values in order to better show the trend of the experiment. After a brake force of 14.715N (10 masses), however the errors in the collected data are too high to be included into the data processing.

Compares the predicted results and the observed results to highlight the difference between them. This graph includes the 15 predicted values as well as the 10 measurable values.
There was an unexpected intercept between the predicted and observed values in figure X3. This was because the mean time for 0.981N of braking force was shorter than the hypothesized values. This was not expected before the conducting of the experiment. A reason for this deviation may be th