How does change in additional mass affect the frequency

of oscillation of a horizontal spring?

IB Physics HL Internal Assessment

Introduction
In this investigation, I aim to examine the impact of change in mass on the frequency of
oscillation behavior of a horizontal spring. Oscillation in mechanical systems not only provided
me the most fascinating slinky toys to play with in my childhood, but also managed to play a
crucial role in nowadays daily livelihood, from timekeeping in my mechanical watches, springs
in bouncy bed mattress, to the suspension systems in my family’s van. Frequency of oscillation
then dictates the comfort and functionality of engineered systems and is critical in such products.
I hope my investigation could provide more insight into the principles of dynamics and energy to
be later used in life for design and analysis of present mechanical applications. Oscillation is
defined as a cyclical movement about the equilibrium point (Giancoli, 1997), and horizontal
springs are systems which produce an up down damped oscillatory movement.

Initially, when no force is applied, the horizontal spring will be at rest at its equilibrium
position. Then, after it is displaced from its equilibrium position outwards due to gravitational
force, the spring will return to its resting position in an inward direction. This will be repeated
until the frictional and damping forces cancel the initial displaced potential energy and reach
zero net force.

Figure 1 (Giancoli, 1997), Visual representation of damped harmonic motion. Displacement is reaching zero due to frictional forces.

Theory
This theory was constructed based on Douglas C. Giancoli’s Physics: Principles with
applications, Fifth Edition (156 – 157, 310 – 311).

1
Figure 2 (Giancoli, 1997), Diagram explaining Hooke’s Law with simple steps.

Giancoli explains Hooke’s law as:

𝐹 = −𝑘𝑥
F = force applied to the spring (N).
k = spring constant (N/m)
x = displacement of the spring from its equilibrium position (m).
The negative sign indicates that the force exerted by the spring is in the opposite direction of the
displacement.

Newton’s second law states that:

𝐹 = 𝑚𝑎
Thus, we can conclude:

𝑚𝑎 = −𝑘𝑥
𝑚𝑎
𝑥= −
𝑘

The general simple harmonic motion equation claims

𝑎 = −𝜔2 𝑥
𝑚𝑎
𝑎 = −𝜔2 (− )
𝑘
𝑘
𝜔2 = 𝑎( )
𝑚𝑎
𝑘
𝜔2 =
𝑚

2
 𝑘
𝜔=√
𝑚

And we realize.
2𝜋
𝑇=
𝜔

𝑘
𝑇 = 2𝜋√
𝑚

Therefore, the Frequency will be

1 1 𝑘
𝑓= = √
𝑇 2𝜋 𝑚

Variables

Variables Name Reason Method

Independent Mass attached to the Metal weights (500g, 400g,

Variable spring 200g, 100g) (± 0.5g) was
used as a mass.

Dependent Oscillation iPhone stopwatch / iPad Pro

Variable period slow-motion camera was
used to measure.

Control Spring Constant (k) Spring constant, k, An identical spring was used
Variables representing the stiffness of for every trials.
the spring, dominates the
investigation’s result that is Temperature and air pressure
going to stem from the are also kept consistent as
overall experiment and they may affect material
must be controlled to properties of the spring.
ensure consistent force
exerted per unit of
displacement.

3
 Spring's Unstretched Under excessive amounts The original length of the
Length of force, the spring may spring without any masses
deform and alter the attached is recorded and the
equilibrium length and spring was not stretched or
spring constant of the deformed between each trial.
spring.

Damping Forces Damping forces, including The experiment was

frictional forces, air conducted in a controlled
resistance, and internal environment, and it was
damping within the spring ensured that the spring and
should be kept constant for setup do not change so it
less variance in the data could alter the damping
acquired. effects.

Anchor Point of the Any movement could add Anchor point remained
Spring external energy to the stationary and secure.
system.

Measurement Technique The method used to Experiment was held within

measure the oscillation the same day to minimize
period must be consistent, change in human error, and
whether it's a stopwatch, the experiment was measured
sensor, or video analysis. using same tools.

Variables Defined:

𝑇 = 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑠)

𝑘 = 𝑆𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 (𝑁/𝑚)
𝑚 = 𝑀𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑎𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 (𝑘𝑔)
𝑥 = 𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑚)
𝐹 = 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 (𝑁)
𝜔 = 𝐴𝑛𝑔𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 (𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠)
𝐸𝑝 = 𝑃𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑡 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑥 (𝐽)
𝐸𝑘 = 𝐾𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑎𝑡 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑣 (𝐽)
𝑣 = 𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 (𝑚/𝑠)
𝐴 = 𝐴𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑚)

4
 𝜙 = 𝑃ℎ𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 (𝑟𝑎𝑑) (determines initial angle of the sinusoidal function)

Potential Hazard / Safety Precautions

Since this investigation requires the use of heavy metal weight, it must be noted to not
overstretch the spring beyond its elastic limit to prevent unexpected release of the mass. Also, for
the same reason, masses must be securely attached to the spring to prevent them from detaching
during oscillation. There are no environmental or human rights infringement issues regarding this
experiment.

Materials and Equipment

Image 1, Full experiment setup with all the equipment specified below. The weight is omitted in the image.

Item Quantity Uncertainty

100cm Wooden Ruler 1 ± 0.5cm

Spring 1 N/A

iPad Camera (120fps) 1 N/A

Horizontal Spring 1 N/A

Support Stand 1 N/A

5
 Set of Masses (Slotted weights) 4 ± 0.5g (not specified by the
(500g, 400g, 200g, 100g) manufacturer)

iPhone stopwatch 1 ± 0.01s

Experimental Procedure
1. Securely attach one end of the spring to support on the top side of the wooden board to
minimize the spring’s vertical movement during the oscillations. The spring must lie
horizontal when at rest and should not be a subject to any tension or compression.
2. Attach a known mass (500g, 400g, 200g, 100g) (± 0.5g) to the free end of the spring.
Maintain the equilibrium position of the spring using hand.
3. Release the mass without any additional force (pushing or throwing the mass) to start
the horizontal oscillation.
4. Use electronic stopwatch to time and record the first 5 period of oscillation, which is
the time it takes for the mass to take a cycle. Use a high-speed camera to record the
oscillation and the stopwatch for more precise frame by frame measurement.
5. Repeat this measurement three times to get an average period for accuracy.
6. Repeat step 2 – 5 using a different known mass (500g, 400g, 200g, 100g) (± 0.5g)

Raw Data

Time for first 5 oscillations (s) (±0.01s)

Mass (g) Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5 Trial 6 Trial 7 Trial 8 Trial 9 Trial 10
100 (±0.5) 2.04s 1.78s 2.16s 1.99s 2.21s 1.92s 1.88s 2.00s 2.23s 1.93s
200 (±0.5) 2.50s 2.60s 2.47s 2.60s 2.48s 2.69s 2.52s 2.52s 2.45s 2.55s
400 (±0.5) 3.29s 3.42s 3.58s 3.56s 3.50s 3.56s 3.43s 3.78s 2.98s 3.42s
500 (±0.5) 3.77s 4.56s 4.49s 4.36s 4.00s 4.18s 4.02s 3.91s 4.53s 4.34s
Table 1, raw data acquired from the experiment.

Calculations / Error propagation

Average time for each mass
Sample calculation of 200g (±0.5) weight’s time for first 5 oscillations:
2.50+2.60+2.47+2.60+2.48+2.69+2.52+2.52+2.45+2.55
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = s
10

6
 25.38 (±0.1s)
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = s
10

𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 ≈ 2.538𝑠 (±0.1s)

Mass (g) (±0.5) Average time for first 5 oscillations (s) (±0.1s)
100g 2.02s
200g 2.54s
400g 3.45s
500g 4.22s
Table 2, processed average data for 4 different masses, 3 significant figures.

Period calculation
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑇= 5

Sample calculation for of 200g (±0.5) weight’s period for first 5 oscillations:

2.54𝑠 (±0.1s)
𝑇= = 0.508 (±0.1s)
5

Mass (g) (±0.5) Period for first 5 oscillations (s) (± 0.1s)

100g 0.404s
200g 0.508s
400g 0.690s
500g 0.844s
Table 3, processed period data for 4 different masses, 3 significant figures.

Frequency calculation
1
𝑓=
𝑇

Sample calculation for of 200g (±0.5) weight’s period for first 5 oscillations:

7
 1
𝑓= = 1.968 (±0.1 s)
0.508𝑠 (±0.1s)

𝑓 ≈ 1.968 Hz (±0.1Hz)

Mass (g) (±0.5) Frequency for first 5 oscillations (Hz) (±0.1Hz)

100g 2.48
200g 1.97
400g 1.45
500g 1.18
Table 4, processed frequency data for 4 different masses, 3 significant figures.

Analysis

Relationship between mass and frequency in

spring's first 5 ocillations
3
2.48
Frequency for first 5 oscillations (Hz)

2.5
1.97
y = -0.0031x + 2.706
2
R² = 0.9787
1.45
1.5 1.18
(±0.1Hz)

0.5

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Mass (g) (±0.5g)

Linearized trendline showcases equation of y= −0.0031x+2.705, which suggests that for each
increase of 100 grams in mass, the frequency decreases by 0.31 Hz. The y-intercept, even though not
shown on the graph, would indicate the theoretical mass at which the frequency would be zero, which is
not meaningful in this investigation’s context but is a mathematical artifact of the model. 200g mass data
not on the best fit line could mean possible error made during the data acquisition process and may be
reviewed if there is another chance.
The coefficient of determination, 𝑅2 , is 0.9821, which is very close to 1. It means that
approximately 98.21% of the variation in frequency can be explained by the linear. This indicates a very
good fit and suggests that my model provided is a strong predictor of the relationship between mass and
frequency.
Forecasted trendline are hypothetical masses’ frequency when they are added to the same spring.

8
 From the graph above and my analysis, I believe I am confident to assume that the relationship
between mass and frequency is linear and inversely proportional and that the mass added to a spring is a
critical factor in determining the frequency of oscillation as indicated by the negative slope of the
regression line. This conclusion is also supported by the theoretical prediction mentioned above using the
formula.

1 1 𝑘
𝑓= = √
𝑇 2𝜋 𝑚

Relationship between mass and frequency in

spring's first 5 ocillations
2.81
3 y = -0.0043x + 3.24
2.48
Frequency for first 5 oscillations (Hz)

2.5 2.24
1.97 y = -0.0031x + 2.706
2 R² = 0.9787
1.45
y = -0.0023x + 2.4675 1.33
1.5 1.18
1.09
(±0.1Hz)

0.5

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Mass (g) (±0.5g)

Green and orange lines represent min/max gradient line and could also be utilized as a uncertainty
rather than using the previously calculated ones.

Evaluations
Uncertainties arise due to the existence of systematic and random errors. Systematic
errors are known as predictable biases in measurement which leads to mean of many separate
measurements differing significantly from the true value. Random errors are errors that arise
from variations and inconsistencies, in this case, the timing of oscillations or posture changes
when releasing the mass.
Here are some of the errors identified in the process:
Systematic Errors Reason
Unstable wooden support stand The old wooden structure I used throughout the
experiment caused spring to begin oscillating
when adding or removing masses, which made
me not only sacrifice a lot of time stabilizing
the spring but also leading to variation in the

9
 starting point of the oscillation cycle as it added
additional forces to the system.
Non-ideal spring Spring used throughout the experiment often
did not perfectly follow Hooke's Law and was
not strong enough to maintain its elasticity
when heavier mass was added.
Oscillating in unwanted directions I noticed that the spring did not purely oscillate
horizontally (as planned) but had minor
movements perpendicular to its general
direction of motion. This may have caused
further energy loss of the spring, leading to a
systematic error of period overestimation.
This was mainly due to the string I used to
connect support stand with the spring.
Reaction time Even though the effect of reaction time was
dramatically reduced with the use of slow-
motion camera and timer, 120fps camera did
lead to significant error made during the
acquisition process. Also, t I was not able to
correctly determine the most accurate time I
released the mass since my hand was covering
the mass most of the time stabilizing the spring.

To reduce major systematic and random errors and improve the validity of the results, we
may consider calibrating measures or using more control experiments to identify the effect of
such errors on the overall experiment processes.
If I were to do another experiment, I would want to make sure I purchase brand new
spring, support stand, and better camera. I believe the spring I used, which was provided by my
physics teacher, was experiencing material fatigue over time with repeated use. Also, when
connecting the spring with the support stand and masses, I believe changing the flexible
connectors such as strings with rigid attachment like plastic and metallic rings could reduce
further energy loss and ensure purely translational oscillations.
To mitigate issues with my reaction time, I believe using an advanced frame rate camera
may solve such problem.
Some strengths I noticed in my investigation is how I faced no significant alterations
from the original theory proposed in the introduction. Rather, my results were considered more
accurate and followed the general rule of physics, providing strong foundation for what is
considered the most basic rule of simple harmonic motions in macroscopic physics.

Further Investigations
For further investigation, I would want to address one interesting fact that I found in
Douglas C. Giancoli’s Physics: Principles with applications, Fifth Edition that in fact, Hooke’s
law is not universally applicable as it is not valid under all conditions. An extension of such

10
discovery could include exploring beyond this investigation’s range of 500g to analyze the
system’s deviation from ideal behavior due to spring's physical limitations. This would be
extremely relevant in real world implications since most mechanical systems (such as in bridge
cables and vehicle suspensions) that utilize springs and oscillations are designed to operate
within heavier mass.
In addition to purely mechanical testing, more multi-disciplinary approach could be used
to assess the impact of environmental conditions. For instance, the influence of weather /
climates (temperature) on the spring's strength could be a further area to be explored later.

11