-I tested on two different days. It may have been more humid on one day than the other which could have effected my test results. On a more humid day the moisture in the air may have gotten into the tiny holes in the golfball and made the ball swell a little. This would eventually create a bigger and less aerodynamic ball. Being less aerodynamic would definitely slow the ball down and stop it short of the distance it may have originally gone.
-I used duct tape to adhere each club to the swing set. Now I used quite a bit of duct tape to make sure the club was steady but there is a possibility that the club may have shifted during testing and that may have resulted in some balls going further than others.
Reliability
Even though I did list quite a few possible sources of error I still think that my data is reliable. However, I do not think I conducted enough trials to find a significant difference in distance between balls. I think that many, many trials must be conducted to show much of a difference and I think the difference these tests would show would still be quite minute. Plus conducted many, many trials would be very time consuming. It would take quite a few weeks to conduct enough trials to see any kind of difference and I just did not have the time to do this. I believe that my measurements were accurate enough. I used a tape measure to measure from where the ball was hit from to the middle of ball.
Significance
My data is not significant at all. I would need to conduct a number of more trials to find a significant difference. An inch or two in golf is nothing special. To say that one brand of golfballs has a longer carry than another takes proof of the ball out shooting its counterparts by at least ten to twenty yards. Now that s a significant difference. Two or three inches is a difference but not enough to make me go out and a box of Top-Flite balls because they traveled that extra inch.
Conclusion
My data shows that my hypothesis is heavily supported. There was no significant difference in the distances each ball went. I then conclude that because of the dwarfish difference between the materials used in each of the golfballs there is virtually no difference in the distances each went. My data shows that the Top-Flite brand carried a little further than the others but to really find a significant difference I would conduct a myriad of more trials. However my hypothesis was still somewhat supported. I hypothesized that there would be a minuscule difference between balls. It is possible that because the materials in each ball do not vary all that much that even with more testing there would be a microscopic difference. My data shows that my hypothesis is heavily supported. There was no significant difference in the distances each ball went. I then conclude that because of the dwarfish difference between the materials used in each of the golfballs there is virtually no difference in the distances each went. Then again, I am almost positive that the answer to my question (do the materials of a golfball effect how far the golfball travels) could possibly be yes. I mean, if I shaped a piece of wood into the shape of a golfball and then covered it in surlyn, the distance it traveled would not be as far as if I did the same with a sheet of aluminum. For further study I would look into golfball compression. I did not take into account this factor when testing. From my research, I learned that golfballs are designed to be hit at high speeds for them to be compressed and function normally. I hit each golfball at a relatively slow speed. I would estimate about 5mph if even that. Golfballs should be hit at about 60-120mph. So the golfballs I tested may not have been compressing like it ought to which could definitely effect my results. Apparently, through my research (refer to background research section), I was able find out that the compression of a golfball may have a certain effect on how far the golfball travels. If golfball does not compress well than it will be less aerodynamic and fall to the ground earlier than a ball that might compress better. I was unable to find out the compression of each ball I tested. So basically, I am completely in the dark on whether this might have effected my results and caused my data to come out the way it did. Compression may be the reason for some balls, such as the Top-Flite, posting farther numbers than say the Wilson Ultra ball. This may be the key to my results and the answer to why some of the balls behaved differently. Although I still stick by my reasoning, that because the materials that were used in each golfball are so similar and have basically the same purpose, that it would be natural for each golfball to perform the same way. I would still look into this as another possible answer and I would definitely conduct testing on this area to find out more. Also each type of ball did not necessarily perform the same way, compared to the other balls, when a different club head was used. When looking at my data table you can see that the Titleist HP went the furthest out of all the balls (15ft 3in, note the DT also traveled this average distance when hit with a pitching wedge) but then when I used a three iron to hit each ball; the HP succeeded in performing second worst out of all the different types of golfballs that I tested. As I have discussed before, my results may have been unreliable too. I discussed the possible sources of error. Now these possible errors which could ve effected my testing were controlled to a certain point by the number of trials I conducted but they also may have had a part in altering my results. I think this to be very unlikely, but it is still a possibility that I can not leave out.
Now here I would like to reflect on what I learned here and the value of this project. I always disliked science fair because of all the effort, work and time that is needed to put into this project to be able to pull out a decent grade. However, I think that is a good thing, seeing how this project is counted as almost half of your grade, you have to work hard and actually do some learning about the topic your testing and then in order to do everything right, you must go through and learn the scientific process and then apply to your situation. This project basically shows how much you ve learned and how well you can apply it. It forces you to work hard. But it also takes quite a bit out of the yearly curriculum. There needs to be some classtime dedicated to working on this project. Nevertheless, when your already behind in the year s curriculum then its hard to get back on track and learn everything that s is supposed to be learned throughout the course of year after the science fair. Even though this project Is of great value as a learning tool, it is also necessary to learn the science curriculum that s supposed to be taught every year. I learned quite a bit about what scientists have to go through whenever looking into any kind of question and I learned a lot about golfballs too. I never would have found out about half the stuff I now know about golfballs without the science fair. I also would not know have the things I know about the scientific process and how to conduct scientific testing without science fair. Overall I think science fair is a must. It should be kept as a yearly activity throughout middle school so that young adolescents like myself can spend time reviewing the basics of science and learning new concepts. To close I believe that I have learned a lot through my past three science fairs and I regret that this type of investigation is not carried on into high school. It presents a new way to view ideas. I hope you thoroughly enjoyed looking over my testing here. It has been a pleasure doing this project.