Physics

experimental work

Circular motion
Circular motion of a mass on a string

Avtor vsebine: Dora Drašković Mentor: Peter Gabrovec

1. Introduction

The aim of the experiment was to investigate and prove the relationship between
the period of a mass and the length of the string from which it is hanging, and to
determine the acceleration of free fall from the slope of a linearized graph.

2. Theoretical background

By analyzing the forces of a mass fixed on a string, pushed in such a way that it
moves in a circle in a horizontal plane, the relationship between the length of the string l
and the period of the mass T can be found. The described situation is graphically
represented in Figure 1 as shown below:

Figure 1

From the drawing it can be deducted that F c, the centripetal and thus net force, is
the sum of the weight of the mass, F g and tension of the string, F T .
Seeing as the three forces form a right-angle triangle, it can be concluded that:

Fc
tan α =
Fg

Since for small angles it holds that tan α ≈ sin α , the above expression can be rewritten as:
 r
F c ≈ F g sin α ≈ F g
l

From 2nd Newton's Law, it can be expressed that:

2
F c =m ac =m ω r

When combined with the previous expressions, we derive:

r mgr 2
Fg = =m ω r
l l

2π
As ω= , through a few simple algebraic transformations it can finally be concluded
T
that:

T =2 π
√ l
g

Therefore, the experiment will aim to prove the hypothesis that the longer the string from
which a mass is hanging is, the greater the period of that mass.

3. Materials and variables

3.1. Materials

 Measuring tape
 String
 Two metal rods
 Stopwatch
 Metal Ball

3.2. Variables

 Independent variable: length of the string - l

 Dependent variable: Period of the string - T
 Constant variable: acceleration of free fall - g

4. Procedure
 Firstly, using the mentioned materials, we created a simple pendulum. Then, we
adjusted the starting length of string to 80cm. We dropped the metal ball attached to the
string at an angle and measured the time of ten periods with our stopwatch. We then
continued by reducing the length of the string by 10cm and repeating the measurements
five times for each trial until the length of the string reached 10cm.

5. Raw (collected) data

I will present the data in a table (Table 1), which has values of the ten lengths of
the string and all five measurements of the time of the period for each trial.

Table 1

The time of ten periods ( s) ± 0.1 s

Length (m ) ± 0.005m
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5
0.8 17.43 17.62 17.54 17.81 17.73
0.7 16.38 16.50 16.29 16.49 16.52
0.6 15.35 15.46 15.30 15.32 15.29
0.5 14.36 14.17 14.22 14.18 14.13
0.4 12.63 12.61 13.18 12.54 12.63
0.3 10.94 10.88 10.99 10.81 11.19
0.2 9.22 8.82 9.16 8.94 9.07
0.1 6.15 6.36 6.13 6.24 6.18

Notes on uncertainties:

 The measuring tape accurately measured the string's length to three decimal
places, but due to the limitations of human perception and precision during
alignment, in this case the uncertainty would be ± 0.005m.
 The stopwatch accurately measured the time of then periods to two decimal
places, but due to the unpredictable reaction time of the person measuring, the
uncertainty in this case would be ± 0.1s.

6. Data processing
 The processed data, with the calculated average time of ten periods for each
length of the string, Tavg , and the absolute uncertainty in the measurements, δTavg , is
presented in Table 2:

Table 2

Length (m ) Tavg( s) δTavg ( s)

0.8 17.63 0.20
0.7 16.44 0.12
0.6 15.34 0.09
0.5 14.21 0.12
0.4 12.72 0.32
0.3 10.96 0.19
0.2 9.04 0.20
0.1 6.21 0.12

In Table 3, the calculated time of one period, tavg , along with its' uncertainty,
δtavg , for each length, is presented.

Table 3

Length (m ) tavg ( s) δtavg ( s)

0.8 1.76 0.01
0.7 1.64 0.01
0.6 1.53 0.01
0.5 1.42 0.01
0.4 1.27 0.03
0.3 1.10 0.02
0.2 0.90 0.02
0.1 0.62 0.01

I continued processing the data by plotting a graph to investigate the relationship between
the length of the string and the period of the mass, which is presented in *figure 2:
Figure 2

The graph shows a square root relationship between the variables, which is
representative to the formula derived earlier, thus proving the first part of the hypothesis.
From there, it would be appropriate to linearize the graph, in an attempt to calculate g,
the acceleration of free fall.

To linearize the graph, we simply square both sides of the previously used formula:

T =2 π
√ l
g

From which we get:

2 2 l
T =4 π
g

The now linearized graph is presented below, in *figure 3:

Figure 3

From this graph, we can deduce the acceleration of free fall, g .Since the function is in
linear form, y=mx+b , we can read the slope, m , from the graph, while, from the formula,
we see that b=0.

From there, we read that:

2
4π
m=
g
Therefore:
2
4π
g=
m
After calculations:
2
4π
g= 2
s
3.84
m

m
g ≈ 10.3 2
s
7. Conclusion/Evaluation

The hypothesis set by the original formula was proven successfully. The graph showed a
clear square root relationship between the two variables, with no significant errors, other
than random ones that resulted from human reaction times and difficulties in completely
precise measurements.
On the other hand, the calculated acceleration of free fall appears greater than the known
magnitude established previously. This is most likely due to, again, human random
errors, such as not exactly measuring the angle at which the mass was pushed, and
reaction time which impacted the time measured by the stopwatch. Thus, such limitations
are possible improvement which could be made to a repeated experiment, to reach more
precise results. Nevertheless, the difference in value is not largely inaccurate, therefore
implying that the experiment in its entirety can be deemed successful.