lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Pendula and Springs - The TA's name was Michael Schott.

This is a full lab report.
Introductory Laboratory I (University of Arizona)

StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Pendula and Springs

Lab Report

Dana Woods

Lab Partner: Katherine Andersh

Course: PHYS181-015

TA: Michael Schott

Due Date: 5:00 PM on 11/3/16

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Abstract
The first main goal of the lab was to observe how the period of a pendulum changed as
several variables were altered. The first thing that was looked at was a change in mass. It was
found that the mass does not affect the period of the pendulum. The second variable was
changing the diameter of a sphere attached to the pendulum. By increasing the diameter of the
sphere, it increases the period length. The third variable that was tested was the length of the
strings of the pendulum. The trend found for this was that as you increase the length, the period
also increases. As the mass swings, gravity is constantly acting on it. By changing the length and
using the slope of a graph made from these different length and period measurements, we were
able to calculate our value for gravity, which was 10.14 m/s2. The second goal of the experiment
was to determine the spring constant of three different springs using two methods. The first
method was Hooke’s law. By varying the mass on the spring, and determining the displacement
of these masses, the spring constants found were 6.95, 7.04, and 3.36. The period of the spring
was also used to calculate the spring constants. This method gave us spring constants of 6.40,
6.40, and 3.21.

Introduction
Two classic examples of simple harmonic motion can be observed with a pendulum and a
spring. This is because, in each case, the restoring force (the force that is restoring the object
back to its original position) is proportional to the displacement. These systems will oscillate
back and forth over time. Their restoring force will always be proportional to the displacement,
so as the displacement over time decreases, the restoring force decreases. However, for the
purposes of this lab, the angular displacement was small and the time in which the oscillations
were observed were all between 10 and 20 seconds. This displacement and this time frame were
so small that the restoring force can be considered constant. For the spring, the restoring force is
given by Hooke’s law, which states that the force is equal to the negative product of the spring
constant and the displacement. The spring constant is dependent on the mass attached to the
spring. The restoring force of the pendulum consists of the component of gravity that points
towards the pendulum’s resting vertical position. In this case, the frequency of the pendulum is
dependent upon the length of the pendulum. By utilizing the idea of restoring force and relating
all of the variables present in the lab, we were able to visualize trends, calculate the gravitational
force acting on the pendulum, and calculate the spring constant of various springs.

Theory
This lab looks at the simple harmonic motion of both a spring and a pendulum. In each
case, there is a restoring force that brings the system back to its resting positon. First, we will
examine the motion of the pendulum. The pendulum restoring force can be given by the equation

F=mg sin θ (1)

where F is the restoring force, m is the mass on the pendulum, g is the acceleration due to
gravity, and θ is the angle of the pendulum from the vertical. For the purposes of this lab, we
used the period of the pendulum, along with several variables, to look at the effect of those
variables and to get a value for gravity of the pendulum. First, we started out looking at

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

frequency, which is how many times the pendulum could swing back and forth in one second.
Frequency is given by the equation

ω (2)
f=
2Π

where f is the frequency and ω is the angular velocity (also known as angular frequency). For
this lab, we had to determine how different variables affected the period, not the frequency. By
observing the units, frequency is measured in Hertz, or inverse seconds, and period is measured
in seconds. Therefore, we can manipulate the frequency equation to get an equation for period,

1 2Π
Τ= = (3)
f ω

where Τ is the period of the pendulum. This equation can be used for any object undergoing
simple harmonic motion. One last manipulation to this equation comes from the fact that we had
no way to calculate the angular frequency directly. So, this had to be put in different terms. It is
known that the angular frequency of a pendulum is

ω=
√ g
L
(4)

where L is the length of the pendulum. Plugging this back into Equation 3, we get

2Π √L
Τ= (5)
√g
and the period of the pendulum can now be related to the length of the pendulum as well as the
acceleration due to gravity acting on the pendulum.
Next, we will analyze the motion of the spring in order to determine the different spring
constants for each spring. The first way this was analyzed was by looking at Hooke’s law.
Hooke’s law states that the restoring force of the spring is proportional to the spring constant
multiplied by the displacement, and is given by the equation

F=−k Δ x (6)

where k is the spring constant, and Δx is the displacement of the spring. The negative sign
denotes the direction of the force. In this case, the force is due to the force of the weight of the
mass added to the spring. Therefore, the equation can be rewritten as

mg=k Δ x (7)

with the right side of the equation now being positive because the force of gravity is in the
negative direction, so those two negatives cancel out.
The second way that the spring constant was determined was using the period length of
the spring as it oscillated with a mass attached. Equation 3 can again be used for the period of a

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

spring because as the spring oscillates, it undergoes simple harmonic motion. Again, however,
the angular frequency is not directly known. So, the equation for angular frequency has to be
used to make the period in terms of variables we are able to measure. The angular frequency of a
spring is given by

ω=
√ k
m
(8)

and can then be plugged into Equation 3

2 Π √m (9)
Τ=
√k
to determine the period of the spring and what affects it. These equations for both the pendulum
and the spring can be used during the lab to determine the relationship of variables as well as
determining the values of several variables.
After these calculations were done, calculations determine the error and differences in
our measurements could be done. First, a standard deviation calculation can be used whenever
we took averages of the period length.

√
N 2
( x́−xi )
σ= ∑ (10)
i=1 N

Next, a percent error can be calculated for part three of the lab. We got a value for gravity from
our graph, and we can compare that value to the actual gravity value.

% Error= | Actual Value−Theoretical

Theoretical Value
Value
|∙ 100 (11)

Finally, the value for the spring constants in parts four and five could be compared to each other
using a percent difference calculation. This allowed us to see how different each of our spring
constants were using the two different methods.

Difference Between Values (12)

% Difference= ∙100
Average of Values

Procedure

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Figure 1. Apparatus for part 1 of the experiment, showing the strings of the pendulum and the different masses.

In part one of the lab, we looked at the period length as we changed the mass attached to
the strings. Figure 1 shows this setup. Four different masses were added the pendulum, and the
same protocol was done for each one. The length from the bottom of the bar to the middle of the
mass was measured and recorded. This was only done once because all of the masses were the
same height and the string length was kept constant. The pendulum with the mass attached was
pulled out to some angle; in reference to the figure, the mass was pulled towards you/out of the
page. The pendulum was then released and allowed to swing freely. A stopwatch was used to
record the amount of time it took for the mass to complete ten periods (go back and forth ten
times). The time that was given on the stopwatch was then divided by ten in order to get the
(average) time of one period. Three trials were completed for each mass, and an average time
was found and used for our calculations.

Figure 2. Apparatus for part 2 of the experiment, showing the strings of the pendulum and the spheres with different diameters.

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Figure 2 shows the apparatus for part two of the experiment. Four spheres with different
diameters were added to the pendulum. The same protocol as in part one was done for the four
spheres. The only difference with this part was the fact that the length from the bottom of the bar
to the middle of the sphere had to be measured for each different sphere. This is because a sphere
with a larger diameter makes the overall length of the pendulum larger as well, and this had to be
accounted for in the calculations.

Figure 3. Apparatus for part 3 of the experiment, showing the strings of the pendulum with a mass attached and a photogate.

Part three of the lab had us change the length of the pendulum to see how it affected the
periods recorded using a photogate, as seen in Figure 3. Again, the same protocol as the first two
parts was executed. However, the period time was calculated using a photogate and the PASCO
Capstone software on the computers. The mass was released, and the software was set to start
recording. The way this appeared to work was that the photogate would measure the time it took
from when it first passed it and went up, swung back down and up the other side, and finally
back down to where the photogate was. The time given on the computer was the average time it
took for one period most likely measured in this manner.

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Figure 4. Apparatus for parts 4 and 5 of the experiment, showing the spring attached to the force sensor and the different
masses.

Figure 4 was the setup used for parts four and five. In both parts, the end goal was to
calculate the spring constant of the different springs. Each part, however, used two different
techniques. In part four, Hooke’s law was used. The spring was placed on the force sensor and its
length at rest was measured. Then, five different masses were added to the end of the spring, and
this extended length was measured. This was repeated for all three springs. This displacement
was determined for the springs and was then plugged into Hooke’s law (along with the mass) to
determine the spring constants of the different springs.
The other way to determine the different spring constants was by using the period and
was done in part five. A mass was placed on the end of the spring, and the force sensor was
zeroed. The spring was then displaced downward, and released so it bounced up and down. The
attached force sensor allowed PASCO Capstone to record the time it took to go up and down
each time. This was done for each spring. The period between ten oscillations was determined,
and was then used to calculate the spring constant of each spring.

Sample Calculation and Results

In part one of this experiment, we had to determine how changing the mass on a
pendulum affected the period. The only calculations that were done in this section were finding
the average of the period trials for each mass and then calculating the standard deviation of those
averages. The average period was calculated by

n 1+n 2+n 3+... 0.734 s +0.750 s +0.732 s

Τ ave= = =0.739 s (13)
N 3

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

and is seen in Table 1. The trend seen was that there was no correlation between mass and
period.
In part two, the period as a function of diameter was assessed. Again, the only
calculations were the average and the standard deviation, and then the trend of the data was
assessed. The standard deviation was calculated using the equation

√ √
N 2 2 2 2
( x́−xi ) ( 0.762−0.759 ) + ( 0.762−0.763 ) + ( 0.762−0.765 )
σ= ∑ = =0.004
i=1 N 3 (14)

and the rest of these calculations can be seen in Table 2. The trend found for this section was that
as the diameter of the sphere increases, the period length increases.
In part three, the length of the pendulum was changed in order to determine its effect on
the period. The different lengths, their average period times, and the standard deviation
calculations can be seen in Table 3. Graph 1 also contains data from this section. The graph
shows the period as a function of the square root of the length. This can be related back to
Equation 5 to give us what the slope stands for.

2Π √L
Τ=
√g (15)
Τ 2Π s
= =1.9734 1/ 2
√L √ g m

This indicates that the slope is equal to 2pi divided by the square root of gravity. We can now
solve for the experimental value of gravity, which is 2pi divided by the slope squared.

2Π s
=1.9734 1/ 2
√g m (16)
( )
2
2Π m
g= =10.14 2
1.9734 s

Because there is a known value for gravity, the percent error was calculated for this value.

| |
m m
10.14 −9.8 2
| Actual Value−Theoretical |∙ 100=
Value s 2
s (17)
% Error= ∙ 100=3.44 %
Theoretical Value m
9.8 2
s

This indicates that there was an error of 3.44% from the actual amount. This error is due to the
reasons discussed in the next section.
For part four of the experiment, we switched our focus over to springs. This section
required us to use Hooke’s law to determine the spring constant of different springs. Table 4
compiles the data for the measurements of the equilibrium and extension lengths of the three
springs. The extension length as a function of the mass was graphed in Graph 2. The slopes of

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

these lines can be related back to Hooke’s law (Equation 7) to determine what the slope is telling
us. We will use the slope of spring one as an example.

mg=k Δ x (18)
Δx g m
= =1.4097
m k kg

This equation tells us the slopes of this graph represent gravity divided by the spring constants.
By using the known value for gravity, we are able to solve for the spring constants of each
spring.

g m
=1.4097
k kg (19)
m
9.8 2
s
k= =6.95
m
1.4097
kg

The other two spring constants were all calculated in the same manner for this section of the
experiment for values of 7.04 and 3.36.
Finally, for part five, the spring constant was calculated again. However, this time the
period of the springs’ oscillations was used. Again, the first spring will be used as an example.
Equation 9 can be used, which is the equation of the period of a spring.

2 Π √m
Τ=
√k
(20)
(
2 Π √m
) (
2 Π √ 0.06955 kg
)
2 2
k= = =6.40
Τ 0.655 s

The equation was manipulated to show what the spring constant was. The other springs’ spring
constants were determined to be 6.40 and 3.21 using this same method. Because two different
methods were used to calculate the exact same value, a percent difference calculation could be
done to determine by how much the two measurements differ. The percent difference for spring
one was found to be

Difference Between Values ( 6.95−6.40 )

% Difference= ∙100= ∙100=8.24 % (21)
Average of Values 6.95+6.40
2 ( )
and the percent differences for the other two springs using this method were determined to be
9.52% and 4.57%.

Discussion and Conclusions

There were two main goals of this experiment. The first goal was to see how the period of
a pendulum was affected by several variables: mass, diameter, and length. The first variable

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

tested was mass, as seen in Table 1. The data shows a slight increase in period length as the mass
increases, but the change is very small and is due to the errors explained later. The mass does
not have an effect on the period length. This is because, by looking at Equations 4 and 5, it can
be seen that this angular frequency equation does not contain mass, and therefore the period will
not change if the mass changes. Changing the diameter was the tested next, and these results can
be seen in Table 2. The trend seen was that as the diameter of the sphere increased, the period
length also increased. By looking at Equation 5, however, there is no variable for the diameter of
the object hanging on the pendulum. So, at first glance this may seem like some type of error.
But, by looking at the equation again, it can be seen that the angular frequency, and therefore the
period, of a pendulum is affected by the length of the pendulum. This length is measured from
the top of the pendulum, to the middle of the object (in this case, it would be the radius of the
sphere). As the sphere increases in diameter, it also increases in radius, and therefore the length
of the pendulum as a whole is longer. This is why this trend is observed. The third test was
changing the actual length of the pendulum. This gave us the same result as changing the
diameter since we are doing almost the same thing in each case. This data is compiled in Table 3,
and a graph was made showing the period as a function of the square root of the length of the
pendulum. By looking at Equation 5, we can solve for period over square root of length (rise
over run) to get that the slope equals 2 pi divided by the square root of gravity. When we solved
for gravity, we got a value of 10.14 m/s2. This is close to the actual value of gravity, but not
exact. The percent error calculated was 3.44%, and is due to the errors explained shortly.

Figure 5. Free body diagram of pendulum.

Figure 5 shows a free body diagram

of a simple pendulum over time. It starts
out on the left and as it swings to the other
side, the free body diagram changes to
what is seen on the right. As the pendulum
swings, the tension force in the spring
changes to equal the vertical component of
the weight force. The horizontal component
of the weight is the restoring force of the
pendulum, which as explained previously,
is the force that brings the pendulum back

10

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

to its resting vertical position. This is why there is no restoring force in the middle diagram; the
pendulum at that moment is in its resting vertical position. In the case of our pendulum, we had
two strings contributing to the tension force. The way the diagram was drawn, we are viewing it
from the side in order to better view where the restoring force was, so I combined both of the
tensions of the strings into one tension force. The actual tension force, however, was evenly split
between these two strings, and the sum of these two tension forces would be equal to the vertical
component of the weight force.
The second main goal was to determine the spring constant of three different springs
using two methods. The first method was using Hooke’s law, which, according to Equation 6,
states that the restoring force is equal to the negative product of the spring constant and the
displacement of the spring. The data for the resting and extension lengths of the different springs
with different masses can be seen in Table 4, and Graph 2 shows the extension length as a
function of mass for each spring. By manipulating Equation 7 above, the slope of this graph,
which is equal to the extension length (displacement) over the mass, equals the gravity divided
by the spring constant. By using the value of 9,8 m/s2 for gravity, we obtained spring constants
of 6.95, 7.04, and 3.36. The second method was using the period to determine the spring
constant. This was done by using Equation 9. The values for the spring constants found by this
method for the same springs were 6.40, 6.40, and 3.21. Because there is no known value for each
of these spring constants, there is no right or wrong answer. However, in order to compare the
two methods, a percent difference calculation can be done. This allows us to determine how
different the two values are from each other. These percent differences were 8.24%, 9.52%, and
4.57%. According to the data we got, I would predict that the first method, using Hooke’s law,
gave more accurate results. This is because using the second method, two of the spring constants
were identical, and it was known that these springs were not the same. For the Hooke’s law
method, all of the spring constants were unique.
Figure 6 shows the free body diagram for a spring. The force in the
spring (labeled T in the diagram), is equal to the force of the weight attached to
the spring when the spring is at rest. As the spring oscillates, the tension force
changes. When the spring expands, the tension force increases in order to
restore the spring back to its resting position. When the spring compresses, the
tension force decreases, again, to restore it to its resting position. For this lab,
we measured multiple periods of oscillation, rather than just one, because it
allowed us to get a more accurate measurement of the period length (the more
data points you have, the closer the average is to the actual value). One major
difference between the spring and the pendulum is that the period of the spring
depends mass, whereas the period of the pendulum, as previously explained,
does not. This is because of Equations 8 and 9. Mass is present in the equation
for angular frequency, which is inversely related to the period. So, the
frequency, and therefore the period, depends on the mass that is attached to the
Figure 6. Free
spring. body diagram of
One source of error for the lab was the way we measured the length of spring.
the pendulum. We measured it from the bottom of the top bar to the middle of
the mass on the pendulum. This was hard to do because it was hard to keep the ruler still and we
were just estimating where the middle of the mass was. A more accurate way we could have
measured the length would have been to measure one of the strings and measure from where that
string attached to the middle of the top rod. Then, the Pythagorean theorem could be used to

11

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

determine the length from the bar to the mass. A second error could be from using the stopwatch
to calculate the period. Even though this is what the procedure told us to do, it added in some
error to our calculations for parts one and two. We may not have started and/or stopped the timer
at the exact right time, in order to measure the correct period time. Another error could be in
measuring the length of the springs. This posed a similar problem as measuring the length of the
pendulum; it was hard to keep the ruler still and we could not have the ruler right up against the
spring or else it would move and throw off our measurements. The mass also may not have been
released from the same angle each time. The angle it was released from was approximated, and
we tried to release it from the same point each time. However, these measurements were not
exact, and gave us slight variations in our periods. Finally, one other source of error could be that
at one point, the string broke, and we had to attach the remaining string to the left side of the bar,
where the string was not supposed to move from. The string was not attached to the bar
correctly, and was lose for a couple of trials before it was fixed. This could have potentially
changed the length of the pendulum slightly, but enough to cause fluctuations in the period
measurements.

Period versus Mass

Mass (kg) Length (m) Period (s) Average Period (s) Standard Deviation
0.007 0.171 0.734 0.750 0.732 0.739 0.014
0.014 0.757 0.753 0.753 0.754 0.003
0.023 0.753 0.759 0.763 0.758 0.007
0.070 0.769 0.771 0.769 0.770 0.002
Table 1. Data for part 1, period of the pendulum versus the mass on the string. The mass on the pendulum does not affect the
period of the pendulum. Standard deviation of the averages was calculated.

Period versus Diameter

Diameter (m) Length Period (s) Average Period (s) Standard Deviation
(m)
0.020 0.172 0.759 0.763 0.765 0.762 0.004
0.031 0.181 0.784 0.781 0.778 0.781 0.004
0.051 0.193 0.840 0.825 0.835 0.833 0.011
0.060 0.201 0.856 0.856 0.853 0.855 0.002
Table 2. Data for part 2, period of the pendulum versus the diameter of a sphere on the string. As the diameter increased, the
period length increased. Standard deviation of the averages was calculated.

12

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Period versus Length

Length (m) Mass (kg) Period (s) Average Period (s) Standard Deviation
0.180 0.070 0.880 0.870 0.870 0.870 0.010
0.230 0.980 0.980 0.990 0.980 0.010
0.266 1.050 1.060 1.060 1.060 0.010
0.361 1.220 1.220 1.220 1.220 0
0.396 1.270 1.270 1.270 1.270 0
0.449 1.350 1.360 1.360 1.360 0.010
0.521 1.460 1.460 1.460 1.460 0
Table 3. Data for part 3, period of the pendulum versus the length of the pendulum strings. As the length of the strings increased,
the period length increased. Standard deviation of the averages was calculated.

Spring Constant (Hooke's Law)

Equilibrium Length Extension Length
Spring 1 0.028 Mass (kg) Spring 1 (m) Spring 2 (m) Spring 3 (m)
Spring 2 0.054 0.007 0.032 0.056 0.087
Spring 3 0.064 0.014 0.042 0.059 0.102
0.023 0.055 0.066 0.135
0.070 0.121 0.136 0.266
0.105 0.170 0.188 0.372
Table 4. Data for part 4, calculating the spring constant using Hooke's law. As the mass added to the spring increased, the
extension length of the spring increased.

Spring Constant (Period)

Springs Period (s) Spring Constant
Spring 1 0.655 6.400
Spring 2 0.655 6.400

13

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Spring 3 0.925 3.210

Table 5. Data for part 5, calculating the spring constant using the period. As the period length increased, the spring constant
decreased.

Period as a Function of Square Root of Length

1.6

f(x) = 1.97 x + 0.03

1.4
R² = 1
1.2

1
Period (s)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75

Square Root of Length (m)1/2

Graph 1. Period length of pendulum as a function of the length of the pendulum strings. As the length increased, the period
increased. The black line indicates the best fit line for the data. Standard deviation bars are added to each point. The percent
error for gravity was calculated to be 3.44%.

14

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|5986190

Woods

Extension Length as a Function of Mass

0.4
f(x) = 2.92 x + 0.06
0.35
R² = 1
0.3
Extension Length (m)

Spring 1
0.25 Linear (Spring 1)
Spring 2
0.2
f(x) = 1.39 x + 0.04 Linear (Spring 2)
0.15 f(x)
R² ==0.99
1.41 x + 0.02 Spring 3
R² = 1
Linear (Spring 3)
0.1

0.05

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12

Mass (kg)

Graph 2. Extension length of the springs as a function of mass added. As the mass increased, the extension length increased. The
black lines indicate the best fit lines for the data.

15

Downloaded by Liliane alameddine ([email protected])