Good afternoon, rdhdbrnis!
I am sorry to see that you're encountering some challenges with this Science Buddies experiment! In addition to kgudger's great advice, I would like to add a couple of things.
First off, I am not entirely sure what the angle measurement with regards to the "outermost spatter" is supposed to represent. I might hypothesize that as the drop height increases, you would see the size (diameter) of the spatter pattern increase. In addition, the outermost spatter may become more and more elliptical (stretched out) in shape. However, how one might use this to actually predict anything is rather curious - especially if you attempt to repeat this experiment on a variety of surfaces. (In bloodstain pattern analysis, the material which the blood strikes plays an important role.)
Ordinarily, in order to calculate the approximate angle of impact of blood, width and length measurements are taken of one of the stains (as shown in figure 3 of the project guide (
https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science- ... o&from=TSW) - and excluding the "tail"), with the smaller measurement being divided by the larger one. As the project guide and kgudger explained, the inverse sine of this number is then calculated using the trig function on your calculator, and this provides an estimate as to the angle of impact for that specific drop. (Although not asked for, nor needed, for this experiment, the *directionality* of the bloodstain is very important, and can be determined by an examination of the features present in the stain. You will notice in figure 3 that the drop has a tail (to the right of the droplet). This tail points in the direction that the stain is *heading*. In fact, at a certain angle, the tail will also have a separate dot at the end of it - which looks sort of like an exclamation point "!")
In practice (that is, when this is performed out in the field at crime scenes), this estimated angle of impact then allows for a piece of string (or other suitable material) to be taped at one end of the drop (pattern) and then extended out (at the measured angle) and anchored - this then provides the analyst with an approximate origin of that particular drop of blood. Does that make sense? Multiple droplets are then similarly measured which, depending on the nature of the bloodshedding event, will all return to an "area of origin", in three dimensions. This is one of the critical parts of crime scene reconstruction!
In order to provide some sort of idea as to whether or not the estimated angle calculation has any worth, a simple experiment can be set up. This can be done by angling the 'floor' rather than attempting to angle the blood drop - which can be rather tricky! Taking something that can produce drops (an eye dropper, pipette, etc.), and secure this to an immobile surface (hand tremors can introduce error). Then, simply allow the first drop to strike the 'floor' at 90 degrees (that is, with the 'floor' perpendicular to the dropper). This should produce an approximately circular drop. If you measure this, it might measure, say, 1 cm x 1 cm. Consequently, the inverse sine of 1/1 (=1) is 90 - that is, 90 degrees. If you then angle your 'floor' to, say, 45 degrees (using a protractor to measure this accurately), and then repeat the procedure, this should produce a droplet that, when measured, provides width and length measurements which calculate to approx. 45 degrees. You will find, however, that this approximation gets more challenging the closer you approach vertical (i.e. 90 degrees), but it still produces some great data. Simply repeat this experiment at 10 degree intervals and measure the widths and lengths of the drops at each recorded angle - and see how they compare. (I would also suggest performing multiple tests at each angle so as to allow for potential variation.) If you use some food coloring in the water and white cardboard, this would also produce some terrific displays!
Also, I think the reason why (in figure 2) that the measurement is being taken from the center of the impact pattern to the *start* of the outermost droplet, is because this is how far the droplet was cast *before* it struck the ground. Again, why this is critical is rather confusing, I'm afraid.
Anyway, I hope this helps (a little!), and please be sure to post back if you need more clarification or if you have any other questions.
Best wishes, and good luck!
Geoff.