PHYSICS EXTENDED ESSAY

Topic: Investigating the efficiency of an single circular orifice flow rate

RQ: How does changing the area(m2) and height(m) of a single orifice
affect the time(s) taken to empty a cuboid container with 250cm3 of
water?

Candidate Code: kcp134

Session : May2023

Word Count: 3975

Page 1 of 34
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 3
2. Background research ............................................................................................................. 4
3. Experimental Design .............................................................................................................. 7
3.1 Research Question ........................................................................................................... 7
3.2 Experiment A .................................................................................................................... 7
3.3 Experiment B .................................................................................................................... 8
3.4 Experiment C: ................................................................................................................... 9
3.5 Apparatus ......................................................................................................................... 9
3.6 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 9
3.7 Experiment Setup ........................................................................................................... 12
4. Data collection) .................................................................................................................... 13
4.1 Experiment A .................................................................................................................. 13
4.2 Experiment B .................................................................................................................. 16
4.3 Experiment C .................................................................................................................. 18
5. Conclusion and analysis ....................................................................................................... 25
5.1 Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 25
5.2 Strengths ........................................................................................................................ 26
5.3 Weakness ....................................................................................................................... 26
6. Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 27
7. Further extensions ............................................................................................................... 28
8. Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 29

Page 2 of 34
1. Introduction
Global warming is a dilemma that everyone in this world faces, ozone depletion and deforestation are

components to this problem, the way to solve this problem is to reduce pollution, there are many ways

to reduce pollution but one of the easiest ways is to plant trees and grow plants.

For the safety of us and our loved ones we all should the society by making an effort to keep plants

alive at the same time making sure we don’t waste water, for this reason there is a very wide range of

products that help us keep our plants alive, but the most classic and simplest product is the watering

can, many watering cans focus on the flow of water by increasing the area of the orifices/orifice

whereas some focus on being efficient with the usage of water by reducing the area of the orifice.

During the Covid 19 lockdown we planted plants in little pots on our balcony and watered them with

watering cans. Nevertheless, we discovered that the watering cans were ineffective, either taking too

long or wasting too much water.

Figure 1 Different images of watering cans with different orifice areas

I came across flow mechanics in my physics Tsokos book, intrigued by the book I tried to understand

I could make an efficient watering that would not waste water and have a decent flow rate at the same

time not wasting anyone’s time. In this paper I will talk about the way a single orifice in a container

can be changed to affect the flow rate of water. I decided to fix the problem by making an efficient

and fair passed watering can using the orifice area and the height of the can.

Page 3 of 34
2. Background research
Bernoulli's equation, which describes the relationship between pressure, kinetic energy, and

gravitational potential energy in a container, must first be used to find the optimal velocity of water in

order to determine the ideal height and area of an orifice, it talks about the relationship between the

pressure, kinetic energy and gravitational potential energy inside a container.

The equation is :

½𝑝𝑣12 + 𝑝𝑔H𝑏 + 𝑃1 = ½𝑝𝑣22 + 𝑝𝑔H𝑏 + 𝑃2 (1)

P Pressure

v Velocity

p Density

g Acceleration due to gravity

Hb Height from orifice to water level (shown in fig.1)

In this equation we can isolate velocity and find the velocity of the water as it escapes the orifice to find the

speed of water giving us a way to find the time taken for the water to escape.

The image here represents an example of the

experiment setup where there is a container with an
orifice and the distance from orifice to water level is
HeightB and the height from the ground to the orifice
is our heightA

Figure 2 : Diagram of a sample container on a stool

Figure 3: The horizontal and vertical component of the water

Page 4 of 34
Since we don’t fill the container to the top as we don’t need that much water we will use an aggregate

amount of 250cm3 which in theory should be enough for at least 10 plants, we will take two points in a

container that we will apply and use for equation(1)

The equation(1) says that the (Pressure + potential energy) plus the kinetic energy is the total energy

of the fluid. We will assume that the energy in container and energy at drainage point stays the same

as there is no other forces acting on the water inside the container.

Here we see that the pressure on both the points is equal to the Atmospheric Pressure as there is no

additional pressure so we can cancel them out on both sides getting:

½𝑝𝑣12 + 𝑝𝑔H𝑏 = ½𝑝𝑣22 + 𝑝𝑔H𝑏 (2)

The second observation is that the Kinetic energy above the orifice (point 1) is 0 as there is no

movement in the water particles the potential energy at the orifice (point 2) is 0 as there is constant

movement of water particles here so there is no stored energy at thus point. This can be justified by

the following equations:

The equation of kinetic energy inside a container with an orifice is:

𝐾𝐸 = 1/2𝑚𝑣 2 (3)

The same equation at point 1 would be;

𝐾𝐸 = 1/2(2.989 × 10−23 𝑔)(0)2 ) (4)

Hence at point1 the KE of water particles will be 0.

The equation for Potential Energy inside a container with an orifice is:

𝑃𝐸 = 𝑚𝑔H𝑏 (5)

The same equation at point 2 would be:

Page 5 of 34
 𝑃𝐸 = (2.989 × 10−23 𝑔)(9.8)(0) (6)

Since Hb (hight from orifice to water level) is zero the PE at point 2 will also be 0

Hence, we can remove the equation of kinetic energy from the left side and the equation of potential

energy from the right side getting:

𝑝𝑔H𝑏 = ½𝑝𝑣22 (7)

This simply means that the potential energy at point 1 is the kinetic energy at point 2 and no energy is

lost throughout the container.

As we are using the same water sample throughout the container and there is no addition in the water

will have the same value of density and it can be cancelled out. We will end up with an equation of

𝑔H𝑏 = ½𝑣22 (8)

To find the velocity at point 2 we can algebraically rearrange the equation.

√2𝑔H𝑏 = 𝑣 (9)

Here hb is distance from point 2 to point 1.

We can use the volumetric flow rate equation1 to find the change in flow rate when the area of an

orifice is changed.

𝑉
𝑄= = 𝐴𝑣 (10)
𝑡

V = volume of the container, t= time, A= cross sectional area of orifice, v= velocity, Q= Volumetric

flow rate.

1
Tsokos, K., 2014. Physics for the IB Diploma. 6th ed. Cambridge University Press.

Page 6 of 34
This helps us understand the flow of water and the velocity, since there is a relatively constant

velocity the area of the orifice can help us determine the time taken to release 250cm3 of water from

the container.

We can make T as our subject in equation 6 and substitute the value of ‘v’ from equation 5 to create

an equation for the time taken to empty the container.

𝑉
𝑇= (11)
𝐴𝑣

Since we have the equation for velocity defined in equation 5 we can substitute it here:

𝑉
𝑇= (12)
𝐴 × √2𝑔H𝑏

This gives us a correlation between Time, Area of orifice and Height B (Hb) Which is the distance

between the orifice and water level.

3. Experimental Design
3.1 Research Question – How does changing the area(m2) and height(m) of a single orifice affect the

time (s) taken to empty a cuboid container with 250cm3 of water?

3.2 Experiment A
Hypothesis for experiment A: As the height between orifice and water level (HB) increases the time

taken for the container to empty will increase.

Variables

Independent variable Dependent Variable

Height(HB): Distance between orifice and water The time taken for the container to drain completely

level. (m) (s)

Page 7 of 34
Control Variable How to control Justification

The amount of water in Measure the volume that is poured into So that there is no change in

container (cm3) the container every time pressure and flow rate

(HA)Height at which Place it on a stand of constant height So that the height of the

container is kept (m) container to the floor doesn’t

change in each trial.

3.3 Experiment B
Hypothesis for experiment B: I believe that the area of the orifice will be indirectly proportional with

the time taken to empty the container.

Variables

Independent variable Dependant Variable

Height(HB): Distance between orifice and water The time taken for the container to empty (s)

level. (m)

Control Variable How to control Why to control

The amount of water in Measure the volume that is poured into So that there is no change in

container (cm3) the container every time pressure and flow rate

(HA)Height at which Place it on a stand of constant height So that the height of the

container is kept(m) container to the floor doesn’t

change in each trial.

Page 8 of 34
3.4 Experiment C:
Hypothesis- I believe that the height between the container and ground (HA) will be directly

proportionate to time taken to empty the container.

Variables

Independent variable Dependant Variable

Height of the container from the ground(HA) (m) The time taken for the container to empty (s)

Control Variable How to control Why to control

The amount of water in Measure the volume that is poured into So that there is no change in

container (cm3) the container every time pressure and flow rate

3.5 Apparatus
Apparatus Uncertainty Least Count Units used

containers of dimension: - - 15

(8.9 × 5 × 20)

Drill bits ±0.0001m 0.001 m 12

Metre ruler ±0.005m 0.01 cm 2

Stopwatch ± 0.01s 0.01 s 1

Recording device - - 1

Ladder - - 1

3.6 Methodology
• Experiment A: Finding the optimum HeightB (distance between orifice and water level)

o While keeping the area of the orifice and volume constant.

Page 9 of 34
 1. Take 7 narrow containers of dimensions (8.9 × 5 × 20) and drill a orifice

using a standard drill bit with the area of : 3.14 × 10−6 m at different heights

in the container

2. Fill the containers with 250 cm3 of water.

3. Keeping them at a constant height from the ground (HA) record the time taken

for the container to empty.

4. Take 3 trials of each container and analyse the data.

• Experiment A.1: Calculating the velocity of the water particles exiting the orifice.

1. Using equation 5, Find the velocity of the water particles and choose the optimum

velocity and heightB combination for the following experiments.

• Experiment B: Finding the optimum area of orifices.

o While Keeping the heightB constant (height of orifice) as selected in experiment A.1

1. Change the area of the orifices by initially starting at the smallest orifice and

using drill bits to increase the area of the orifice in the same container.

2. Record the time it takes for 250 cm3 to exit the container.

3. Analyse this data and select 3 of the best orifice area to continue with the

next experiment to make the process more streamlined and accurate.

• Experiment C: Finding optimum Height from container to the ground (HA).

1. Using the 3 orifices selected Procure 3 identical containers with the same width as the

one chosen in experiment 1.1.

2. Drill the optimal orifice areas that were selected in experiment two. (1 orifice for each

container)

3. Change the heightA using a ladder and note the time taken to empty the container.

Page 10 of 34
Justification

Three experiments were done to simplify the process and make it easier to find the optimum value for

each variable. The individual experiments allow us to change each independent variable

independently and it also lets us control the changes in each experiment.

Experiment A has two parts, one for finding the Height B and its effect on the time to empty the

container, the second part uses the time that was found from the first part to find the velocity of the

water particles escaping from the orifice. Within this experiment we will select a Height B to use for

the next experiments to reduce a variable to change.

Subsequently in Experiment B We will use the HeightB selected in experiment A and change the

area/size of the orifice to find the correlation between area of orifice and time to empty container.

Here we will select 3 Areas that give us a value of time that would be effective to use in a watering

can.

Experiment C has 3 parts in each part a different constant value of orifice Area is used, these 3 areas

were selected in experiment B. All 3 parts in experiment C analyse the change in HeightA and its

effect on time while using a different Orifice Area in every part.

Page 11 of 34
3.7 Experiment Setup

Figure 3 is the experimental setup

for Experiments A, B and C.

➢ In experiment A the
variables changing are
HeightB
➢ For experiment B the
variables changing is the
area of orifice.
➢ In Experiment c the
variables changing are
HeightA (HA)

HA

Figure 3 : Experimental setup.

Page 12 of 34
 4. Data collection (Volume for all experiments is at 250 cm3)

4.1 Experiment A: Finding the Optimal HeightB between the orifice and the water level

Constants for Experiment 3.1

Volume- 2.50 x10-4 cm3 Area of cross-section of orifice = 3.14x10-6 m2

Processed Data for first experiment (constant volume and orifice area but change in Height B)

Table 1.1.1 Processed Data for the raw data in table 1.1 which is presented in the appendix.

HeightB (height between Average time (s) Absolute uncertainty Percentage uncertainty Percentage error for the

orifice and water level) for the average time for the average time ± measurement of heightB

(m) (±)(s) (%) ± (%)(m)

0.040 87.50 8.770 10.02 2.500

0.045 86.62 7.280 8.400 2.220

0.050 78.10 8.800 11.27 2.000

0.055 76.56 7.160 9.350 1.820

0.060 76.96 4.260 5.540 1.670

0.065 74.38 3.560 4.780 1.540

0.070 70.52 6.000 8.510 1.430

Calculation for the Processed data for raw data in Table 1.1 which is present in the appendix.

We can find error in time using the half range method for example for the first value set (0.015m

distance)

Maximum Value = 156.85, and the Minimum Value = 141.66

Absolute Uncertainty =

𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 − 𝑀𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

(13)
2

Page 13 of 34
Absolute uncertainty in time =

156.85−141.66
= ±8.770 (14)
2

Through this we can also find the percentage uncertainty which is

8.77
𝑥100 = ±10.02% (15)
87.50

We are measuring heightB which has a least count of 0.001m so the calculation for the percentage

error would be:

0.001
𝑥100 = ±2.50% (16)
0.04

Experiment A.1: Calculating the velocity at which the water is flowing.

Since we know the area of the cross-section of orifice, the Time and the volume, we can substitute

these values to find the velocity of the water for the different orifice area:

𝑉
𝑇= (17)
𝐴𝑣

Such as the calculation for the Height B of 0.04 m2 would be:

0.00025 0.00025
87.50 = ⇒𝑣= = 0.91 (18)
(0.00000314)𝑣 (0.00000314)(87.50)

Since we got the value of time from the previous equation we know the percentage uncertainty of time

and we just multiply that value to the result of the equation above

10.02
0.91 ∗ ( ) = ±0.091 (19)
100

Page 14 of 34
Table 1.2 (Deriving velocity of water particles from HeightB found in table 1.1 as presented in the appendix)

HeightB Velocity(m/s) Uncertainty in velocity Percentage error in

(m) (±)(m/s) velocity ± (%)

0.040 0.910 0.091 10.02

0.045 0.920 0.077 8.400

0.050 1.020 0.115 11.27

0.055 1.040 0.097 9.350

0.060 1.030 0.057 5.540

0.065 1.070 0.051 4.780

0.070 1.130 0.096 8.510

The highlighted values are the values chosen for the next experiment, We have chosen the

heightB of 0.07 for the next experiments as a constant as it gives us the optimal uncertainty to be

able to flow water at a steady rate of water.

Graph (1) data for Table 1.2

HeightB(m) vs Velocity(m/s)
R² = 0.9047
1.4

1.2

0.8
Velocity

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
HeightB

Velocity(m/s) Linear (Velocity(m/s))

Linear (Minimum line) Linear (Maximum line)

Page 15 of 34
 4.2 Experiment B: Finding the cross-section area of orifice to have an optimal flow rate.
Constants for Experiment B

Height(HB) = 0.070 m Volume = 0.00025m3

Processed Data from second test where area of cross section of orifice is changing but volume and

Height(HB) stays the same.

Table 2.1.1 Processed data for raw data in table 2.1 presented in the appendix

area of orifice(m2) Average time Absolute uncertainty Percentage Percentage error for the

(s) for the average time uncertainty for the measurement of heightB

(±) average time ± (%) ± (%) (m)

(s) (s)

0.00000314 69.93 1.825 2.610 1.430

0.00001256 17.75 0.700 3.940 1.430

0.00002826 8.480 0.205 2.420 1.430

0.00005024 5.000 0.300 6.000 1.430

0.0000785 3.420 0.035 1.020 1.430

0.00011304 2.670 0.055 2.060 1.430

0.00015386 1.880 0.060 3.190 1.430

0.00020096 1.590 0.155 9.750 1.430

0.00025434 1.610 0.095 5.900 1.430

0.000314 1.290 0.130 10.08 1.430

0.00037994 1.180 0.075 6.360 1.430

0.00045216 1.160 0.125 10.78 1.430

Calculation for the Uncertainty for raw data in Table 2.1 which is present in the appendix.

Absolute uncertainty can be calculated using equation 12; maximum value is 72.02 and the minimum

value is 68.37.

Page 16 of 34
Absolute error=

(72.02−68.37)
= 1.82 (20)
2

Percentage Uncertainty =

1.82
× 100 = 2.61
69.93

The HeightB is constant, so the uncertainty of heightB. We can use equation (16) as a reference and

change the denominator to 0.070.

Uncertainty for heightB =

0.001
𝑥100 = ±1.43% error (21)
0.070

The 3 areas that are highlighted in table 2.1.1 will be used in the following experiments, since

the time taken for them to empty is not too large or too small which would help us to not change

our heightA extensively.

Graph (2) data for Table 2.1.1

Log(area of orifice) vs Log(average time)

2.5
R² = 0.9879
2
log(area) (m^2)

1.5

0.5

0
-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
-0.5
log(time) (s)

Page 17 of 34
4.3 Experiment C: using the values of HeightB and Optimal Area of cross-section of orifice
found in earlier experiments, to find the optimal height from the floor to the container(HA).

Data of the 3rd test is for the following cross-section area of orifice: 0.00001256m2, 0.00002826m2,

0.00005024m2

Experiment 3.1

Constants for Experiment 3.1

Constant HeightB = 0.070m Constant Area Of cross-section of orifice = 0.00001256 m2

Processed Data Table 3.1.1 (Uncertainties from raw data in table 3.1 presented in the appendix)

HeightB : Height from container Average time Absolute Percentage Percentage error Percentage error

to ground(m) (s) uncertainty for uncertainty for for the for the

the average the average measurement of measurement of

time (±) time ± (%) heightB heightA between

(s) (s) ± (%) container and floor

(m) ± (%)

(m)

0.015 37.02 0.160 0.432 1.428571 6.670

0.020 32.24 0.205 0.636 1.428571 5.000

0.025 29.02 0.255 0.879 1.428571 4.000

0.030 26.70 0.310 1.161 1.428571 3.330

0.035 24.51 0.215 0.877 1.428571 2.860

0.040 22.99 0.225 0.979 1.428571 2.500

0.045 21.61 0.195 0.902 1.428571 2.220

0.050 20.60 0.220 1.068 1.428571 2.000

0.055 19.58 0.190 0.970 1.428571 1.820

0.060 18.63 0.140 0.751 1.428571 1.670

0.065 17.98 0.165 0.918 1.428571 1.540

Page 18 of 34
 0.070 17.57 0.250 1.423 1.428571 1.430

Calculation for the Uncertainty for raw data in Table 3.1 which is present in the appendix.

For finding the uncertainty in time again we can use equation 13 which is:

(37.22−36.90)
= ±0.16 (22)
2

Percentage Uncertainty =

0.16
× 100 = ±0.432199%. (23)
37.02

The value of HeightB is the same as Table 2.1.1 so the uncertainty also stays the same.

Since HeightA is being changed we calculate that as well :

The least count of height = 0.001m

Percentage uncertainty of heightA =

0.001
× 100 = ±6.67% (24)
0.015

Page 19 of 34
 Graph (3) data for Table 3.1.1

Height vs (1/(average time)^2)

0.0035

0.003
(1/(average time)^2) (s^)-2))

0.0025

0.002

0.0015

0.001

0.0005

0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
Height(m) y = 0.0469x + 2E-05
R² = 0.999
(Average time)^-2 Linear ((Average time)^-2)
Linear (Maximum Line) Linear (Minimum Line)

The y axis here is raised to the power of negative 2 to make sure that the data is linearized to give us

an equation in the form of y=mx + b

Experiment 3.2

Constants for Experiment 3.2

Height(HB) = 0.070 m Constant Area Of cross-section of orifice = 0.00002826 m2

Processed Data Table 3.2.1 (Uncertainties from raw data in table 3.2 presented in the appendix)

Height from Average time Absolute Percentage Percentage error for Percentage error for

orifice to (s) uncertainty for the uncertainty for the the measurement of the measurement of

ground(m) average time (±) average time ± heightB height between

(s) (%) ± (%)(m) container and floor

(s) ±(%)(m)

0.015 16.78 0.2050 1.222 1.429 6.670

0.020 14.63 0.2250 1.538 1.429 5.000

Page 20 of 34
 0.025 13.23 0.2550 1.927 1.429 4.000

0.030 11.95 0.1900 1.590 1.429 3.330

0.035 11.03 0.1650 1.496 1.429 2.860

0.040 10.31 0.1550 1.503 1.429 2.500

0.045 10.00 0.2500 2.500 1.429 2.220

0.050 9.690 0.3100 3.199 1.429 2.000

0.055 9.040 0.2250 2.489 1.429 1.820

0.060 8.580 0.1950 2.273 1.429 1.670

0.065 8.120 0.1450 1.786 1.429 1.540

0.07 8.040 0.2150 2.674 1.429 1.430

Calculation for the Uncertainty for raw data in Table 3.2 which is present in the appendix.

For finding the uncertainty in time again we can use equation 13 which is:

(17.04−16.63)
= ±0.205 (25)
2

Percentage Uncertainty =

0.205
× 100 = ±1.222%. (26)
16.78

The value of HeightB is the same as Table 2.1.1 so the uncertainty also stays the same.

Since HeightA is being changed we calculate that as well :

The least count of height = 0.001m

Percentage uncertainty of heightA =

0.001
× 100 = ± 6.67% (27)
0.015

Page 21 of 34
 Graph (4) data for Table 3.2.1

Height vs (1/(average time)^2)

0.018
0.016
0.014
0.012
Height(m)

0.01
0.008
0.006
0.004 y = 0.2201x + 0.0003
0.002 R² = 0.9941

0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
(1/(average time)^2) (s^(-2))

Height Linear (Height) Linear (Maximum Line) Linear (Minimum Line)

The y axis here is raised to the power of negative 2 to make sure that the data is linearized to give us

an equation in the form of y=mx + b

Experiment 3.3

Constants for Experiment B

Height(HB) = 0.070 m Constant Area Of cross-section of orifice = 0.00005024 m2

Processed Data Table 3.3.1 (Uncertainties from raw data in table 3.3 presented in the appendix)

HB: Height from Average time Absolute Percentage Percentage error for Percentage error for the
orifice to (s) uncertainty for uncertainty for the measurement of measurement of heightA
ground(m) the average time the average time heightB between container and
(±) ± (%) ± (%) floor
(s) (s) (m) ± (%)
(m)

0.015 9.590 0.190 1.981 1.429 6.670

0.020 8.540 0.255 2.986 1.429 5.000

Page 22 of 34
 0.025 7.690 0.245 3.186 1.429 4.000

0.030 7.240 0.305 4.213 1.429 3.330

0.035 6.530 0.230 3.522 1.429 2.860

0.040 6.050 0.195 3.223 1.429 2.500

0.045 5.580 0.140 2.509 1.429 2.220

0.050 5.520 0.220 3.986 1.429 2.000

0.055 5.120 0.160 3.125 1.429 1.820

0.060 5.060 0.205 4.051 1.429 1.670

0.065 4.760 0.165 3.466 1.429 1.540

0.070 4.750 0.220 4.632 1.429 1.430

Calculation for the Uncertainty for raw data in Table 3.3 which is present in the appendix.

For finding the uncertainty in time again we can use equation 13 which is:

(9.83−9.45)
= ±0.190 (28)
2

Percentage Uncertainty =

0.190
× 100 = ±1.981%. (29)
9.59

The value of HeightB is the same as Table 2.1.1 so the uncertainty also stays the same.

Since HeightA is being changed we calculate that as well :

The least count of height = 0.001m

Page 23 of 34
Percentage uncertainty of heightA =
0.001
× 100 = ± 6.67% (30)
0.015

Graph (5) data for Table 3.3.1

Height vs (1/(average time)^2)

0.05
0.045
0.04
(1/(average time)^2)

0.035
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
y = 0.6469x + 0.001
0.005
R² = 0.9904
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
Height (m)

(Average Time)^(-2) Linear ((Average Time)^(-2))

Linear (Maximum Line) Linear (Minimum Line)

The y axis here is raised to the power of negative 2 to make sure that the data is linearized to give us

an equation in the form of y=mx + b

Page 24 of 34
5. Conclusion and analysis
5.1 Analysis
The objective of this experiment was to see how orifice area and the height at which a watering can is

used can affect the time taken to empty the container. We can see through the data tables and graphs

that the values of time decrease, as the heightA and area of orifice increases.

This can also be noticed while going through the data, graphs 1,2 have high have a high R2 value

which is close to one, this means that the graph has strong relationship between the two variables and

the graph can be used to extrapolate data outside the current set, the graphs show direct

proportionality in graph 1 between HeightA and time and inversely proportionate values in graph 2

between HeightA and time. We can see that as the orifice area increases the time decreases due to

higher amounts of water exiting through one point in the container. The same is evident for height A in

graphs 3, 4 and 5 we see a direct proportionality of HeightA to (average time)-2 which means that time

and heightA are inversely proportionate. Which meant that the hypothesis of the experiment was

partially correct as there in an indirect proportionality between, the area of orifice and time but has the

same relationship, for height and time as well, which initially I assumed to be proportionate. I think it

is inversely proportionate due to the creation of a vacuum around the orifice which allowed the water

to be spewed out quicker with higher heightA. This also makes sense as the experiment was partially

conducted in a balcony, we know there would be less air resistance and pressure under the railing of

the balcony due to the walls stopping the wind, but once we cross the barrier there would be a change

in air resistance.

I ran into problems initially while accurately measure the area of the orifice, to fix that I used standard

drill bits that help me reduce the uncertainty to almost negligible, the existing uncertainty was due to

the minute particles of plastic stuck to the edges of the orifice. Most of it was filed and uncertainty

was reduced further. When analysing table 2.1.1, we can see that the 1st value does not follow the

trend of the other values, while recording my data I thought that it was a systematic error but when

further analysed it is understood that the correlation between x and y is a power correlation so a

change in either axis can dramatically affect the other axis.

Page 25 of 34
Due to the closely packed max/min lines in Graph 3, the trend line is unclear, indicating minimal error

and precise measurements. Some graphs exhibit little uncertainty and have close spacing between the

max/min and trendlines.

Improvements could have been made by making adjustments such employing sensors for precision

and running tests in a contained space to reduce air resistance.

5.2 Strengths
1. Throughout the graphs we can see high relationship between the two axis which is why there

is a high value of (R2).

2. All experiments were conducted multiple times to make sure that there is a reduction in the

random error and to evade abnormalities.

3. A lot of data was collected therefore I was able to analyse the data well this also allowed me

to analyse and find the limitations of each and every experiment.

5.3 Weakness
1. A limitation was the change wind speed as that would have significantly altered the velocity

of the particles as it could create resistance at the orifice.

2. There is significant error in time, this was due to the error in accurately measuring the time it

took for the container to empty and water to reach the ground. This is due to the slow reaction

of the stopwatch as well as a delay in the reaction of the human.

3. Errors were also be found in measuring height between the container and the ground (HA)

even though these were small they had an effect on the final result. This was due to the

systematic error in the rulers, as they were old and had minor damages.

4. A general weakness of my experiment was wastage of water, I tried to reuse the water that

was falling out of the container significant amount of it fell and was wasted.

Page 26 of 34
6. Evaluation
Source of error Significance Possible improvements

Systematic Errors

Measurement of heightb and There is high significance. Possible improvements are that

heightA. This is because incorrect while measuring 2 rulers can be

The error was propagated due to the measurements in heightb used for the same measurements

lack of better materials as our can affect the speed at to ensure there is no systematic

equipment room rulers had scratches which the water escapes as error in the equipment used.

and dents which could have led to well as the time when

error while measuring. using equations to find

values as they increase the

uncertainty.

Measurement in time Moderate significance Possible improvements are

There was some error in this due to This is because this can using a more accurate

the limitation of the digital affect our trendline but stopwatch and using a sensor

stopwatch and the variance in the since we have accounted that automatically registers the

reaction rate of the human and the for the error in the time when there is no water in

device. calculation of average time the container.

it will not directly affect

the value.

Random Errors

Identification of range of water. Low significance I could use a cloth that would

Since the water spews unevenly This is because we are not allow me to pinpoint where the

finding the accurate spot at which measuring range and we water has landed and how much

most of the water lands could have are just keeping it constant of it has landed at a point.

some errors so it doesn’t affect our

research

Page 27 of 34
Volume of water High Significance A plug could have been used to

Since every time I added water to the This is significant as my block the orifices and normal

container to conduct multiple trials, I experimentation is based pressure leakage tests could

had to block the orifice to ensure the on there being a constant have been conducted to fix this

water stays in some of it could have volume of water at the start problem.

possibly leaked. of every trial this can

change the time as with

less water the pressure

inside the container

changes as well as the

amount of water leaving

the orifice changes.

7. Further extensions
To Further expand this extended essay, I could have included another dependant variable for range

which would have extended this EE an experiment could have been conducted with Height and Area

of orifice as independent variables and range as a dependant variable. An equation For finding range

could have also been created by substituting equations 5-8 into the horizontal range formula as there

is no vertical component before the particle start falling. This would give us an equation:

2𝐻
Range = √2𝑔ℎ𝑏 ∗ √ (31)
𝑔

The derivation for this equation is in the 7th part of the appendix.

Page 28 of 34
8. Bibliography

“Chapter 4: The First Law of Thermodynamics for Control Volume.” Chapter 4A: First Law -
Control Volumes - Energy Equation (Updated 10/12/09),
https://www.ohio.edu/mechanical/thermo/Intro/Chapt.1_6/Chapter4a.html. (12/12/22)

“Continuity Equation.” Princeton University, The Trustees of Princeton University,

https://www.princeton.edu/~asmits/Bicycle_web/continuity.html. (16/12/22)

“Energy from Water.” Energy from Water - Energy Education,

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Energy_from_water. (21/12/22)

Hutagalung, sutrisno Salomo. “Effect of Release Coefficientof Orifice Plate on Water Fluid Flow ...”
Journal of Physics: Conference Series, IOPScience,
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1230/1/012086. (29/12/23)

Jian-bin, Zhang, et al. “Journal of Physics: Conference Series.” Experimental Research on the Water
Spray Orifice Flow Coefficient, IOPscience, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-
6596/1965/1/012026. (7/1/23)

“Orifice Flow.” Orifice Flow - an Overview | ScienceDirect Topics,

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/orifice-flow. (7/1/23)

“Poiseuille's Law.” Pressure, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ppois.html. (11/1/23)

“Zhabinskaya, Dina. “5.3: Fluid Flow.” Physics LibreTexts, Libretexts, 8 Nov. 2022,
https://phys.libretexts.org/Courses/University_of_California_Davis/UCD%3A_Physics_7B_-
_General_Physics/5%3A_Flow_Transport_and_Exponential_-
_working_copy/5.03%3A_Fluid_Flow. (11/1/23)

Tsokos, K., 2014. Physics for the IB Diploma. 6th ed. Cambridge University Press.

Page 29 of 34
 9. Appendix

1. Table 1.1 Data from first test (constant volume and area of orifice but change in Height B)

Volume HeightB Area of time Time Time Average time

(m^3) between orifice(m^2) Trial 1 Trial 2 Trail 3 (s)

orifice and (s) (s) (s)

water level

(m)

2.50 x10-4 4.00 x10-2 3.14x10-6 98.25 80.71 83.53 87.50

2.50 x10-4 4.50 x10-2 3.14 x10-6 92.88 88.67 78.32 86.62

2.50 x10-4 5.00 x10-2 3.14 x10-6 88.63 71.03 74.63 78.10

2.50 x10-4 5.50 x10-2 3.14 x10-6 84.85 74.31 70.53 76.56

2.50 x10-4 6.00 x10-2 3.14 x10-6 79.83 71.31 79.73 76.96

2.50x10-4 6.50x10-2 3.14 x10-6 76.94 69.83 76.38 74.38

2.50 x10-4 7.00 x10-2 3.14 x10-6 77.23 65.23 69.09 70.52

2. Table 2.1 (finding the optimal area of cross-section)

volume(m^3) HeightA (m) area of cross-section gravity (m/s^2) time Time Time Average

(m^2) Trial 1 Trial 2 Trail 3 time

(s) (s) (s) (s)

0.00025 0.070 0.00000314 9.81 72.02 69.42 68.37 69.93

0.00025 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 17.21 18.61 17.43 17.75

0.00025 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 8.390 9.080 7.980 8.480

0.00025 0.070 0.00005024 9.81 5.260 4.660 5.090 5.000

0.00025 0.070 0.0000785 9.81 3.380 3.420 3.450 3.420

Page 30 of 34
0.00025 0.070 0.00011304 9.81 2.630 2.740 2.630 2.670

0.00025 0.070 0.00015386 9.81 1.810 2.130 1.690 1.880

0.00025 0.070 0.00020096 9.81 1.420 1.630 1.730 1.590

0.00025 0.070 0.00025434 9.81 1.670 1.680 1.480 1.610

0.00025 0.070 0.000314 9.81 1.160 1.230 1.490 1.290

0.00025 0.070 0.00037994 9.81 1.230 0.920 1.380 1.180

0.00025 0.070 0.00045216 9.81 1.120 1.050 1.300 1.160

4. Table 3.1 (Time taken for a container to empty from an orifice with an area of 12.56

x10-6 m2 and varying heightA)

volume(m^3) HeightA HeightB area of gravity time Time Time Average time

from orifice (m) cross-section (m/s^2) Trial 1 Trial 2 Trail 3 (s)

to (m^2) (s) (s) (s)

ground(m)

0.00025 0.015 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 36.90 37.22 36.94 37.02

0.00025 0.020 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 32.10 32.51 32.13 32.24

0.00025 0.025 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 28.84 29.35 28.87 29.02

0.00025 0.030 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 26.48 27.10 26.51 26.70

0.00025 0.035 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 24.36 24.79 24.39 24.51

0.00025 0.040 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 22.83 23.28 22.86 22.99

0.00025 0.045 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 21.47 21.86 21.51 21.61

0.00025 0.050 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 20.45 20.89 20.48 20.60

0.00025 0.055 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 19.44 19.82 19.47 19.58

0.00025 0.060 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 18.53 18.81 18.56 18.63

0.00025 0.065 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 17.86 18.19 17.89 17.98

0.00025 0.070 0.070 0.00001256 9.81 17.39 17.89 17.42 17.57

Page 31 of 34
 5. Table 3.2 (Time taken for a container to empty from an orifice with an area of 28.26

x10-6 m2 and varying heightA)

volume(m^3) HeightA from HeightB area of cross- gravity time Time Time Average time

orifice to (m) section (m^2) (m/s^2) Trial 1 Trial 2 Trail 3 (s)

ground(m) (s) (s) (s)

0.00025 0.015 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 16.63 17.04 16.66 16.78

0.00025 0.020 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 14.47 14.92 14.50 14.63

0.00025 0.025 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 13.05 13.56 13.08 13.23

0.00025 0.030 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 11.81 12.19 11.84 11.95

0.00025 0.035 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 10.91 11.24 10.94 11.03

0.00025 0.040 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 10.20 10.51 10.23 10.31

0.00025 0.045 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 9.82 10.32 9.85 10.00

0.00025 0.050 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 9.47 10.09 9.50 9.69

0.00025 0.055 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 8.88 9.33 8.91 9.04

0.00025 0.060 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 8.44 8.83 8.48 8.58

0.00025 0.065 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 8.01 8.30 8.05 8.12

0.00025 0.070 0.070 0.00002826 9.81 7.89 8.32 7.92 8.04

6. Table 3.3 (Time taken for a container to empty from an orifice with an area of 50.25 x10-
6
m2 and varying heightA)

volume(m^3) HeightA from HeightB area of gravity time Time Time Average time

orifice to (m) cross-section (m/s^2) Trial 1 Trial 2 Trail 3 (s)

ground(m) (m^2) (s) (s) (s)

0.00025 0.015 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 9.450 9.830 9.490 9.590

0.00025 0.020 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 8.360 8.870 8.390 8.540

Page 32 of 34
0.00025 0.025 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 7.520 8.010 7.540 7.690

0.00025 0.030 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 7.030 7.640 7.050 7.240

0.00025 0.035 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 6.360 6.820 6.400 6.530

0.00025 0.040 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 5.910 6.300 5.940 6.050

0.00025 0.045 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 5.480 5.760 5.510 5.580

0.00025 0.050 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 5.360 5.800 5.400 5.520

0.00025 0.055 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 5.000 5.320 5.040 5.120

0.00025 0.060 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 4.910 5.320 4.940 5.060

0.00025 0.065 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 4.640 4.970 4.670 4.760

0.00025 0.070 0.070 0.00005024 9.810 4.600 5.040 4.630 4.750

7. Derivation of the formula for range in terms of HB and H.

Since there is no angular component in the motion of the water particles, to find the distance we will

be using equation for horizontal range.

Range is another word for distance and that equals to 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 × 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 we can find the time of flight

of a projectile and use the velocity found in Bernoulli’s Principle to solve for distance.

The time of flight can be determined by the equation for motion on the y axis, using the basic

principle of motions we can derive this equation to be:

S = VyT + 1/2gt2

Where S is initial height which is the height from the ground to the orifice and Vy is the initial velocity

which again is 0

So,

S = 0*t + 1/2gt2

Page 33 of 34
and T can be made the subject and written as:

2𝐻
T=√𝑔

Here S has been replaced by the conventional symbol for height (h/H)

We can then multiply horizontal velocity by the time which we get as

2𝐻
Range = u ∗ √
𝑔

We can use the equation 5 to substitute for horizontal velocity component which will give

2𝐻
Range = √2𝑔ℎ𝑏 ∗ √ 𝑔

Here we know hb is the height between the orifice and the surface level of the water and “H” is the

height from the ground to the orifice.

Page 34 of 34