Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

The relationship between mass and period

in simple harmonic motion oscillations.

Introduction Commented [A1]: Research design: A focused

and clear context is described. The title already
tells us what this investigation is about.
Simple Harmonic Motion is achieved when an oscillating object has a restoring force
proportional to its displacement and towards a fixed point. The prevalent type of simple
harmonic system is the pendulum. Another common simple harmonic system in physics is a
"mass suspended on a spring oscillating up and down, above and below its rest position"1,
also known as equilibrium point. This mass is said to be undergoing an isochronous
oscillation, meaning that the object is moving back and forth in the same period of time,
regardless of amplitude changes2
Figure 1 (on the right) shows vertical oscillation of a Commented [A2]: Research design: A simple
and clear sketch helps.
mass hanging on a spring. The weight pulls down and
the spring restoring force pulls up.

The restoring force F is given by F = – k x where k is the

spring constant and x is the displacement or extension
of the object off equilibrium position. The negative
sign means the restoring force is in the opposite
direction of the displacement.

Using Newton’s second law as the restoring force, we

can solve for acceleration:
k
F  ma  ma  kx  a     x
 m
This compares with the defining equation for simple harmonic motion (SHM), where the Commented [A3]: Research design: Relevant
theory is nicely presented.
angular frequency is  .
a   k
a   2 x  2   2  k   
x  m m

Physics assessed student work 1

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

The period of oscillation (T, in seconds) relates to the angular frequency (, in radians per
second or simply ‘per second’ or hertz) as: � � 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 . Together, we find an expression for
period and SHM in terms of mass and spring constant:

2 2 m
T   2 m Equation #1 Commented [A4]: Research design: Derivation
 k k T  2
k is nicely explained.
m

This sort of system doesn't have many real life applications; however, astronauts use it to
measure their mass in space4. None the less, a vertically oscillating mass at the end of a
spring is a classic physics investigation—the topic of my IA report. Commented [A5]: Research design: The
investigation’s aim (also known as a research
question) is a classic. The candidate explains it
Aim of this investigation well. However, what is the candidate aiming to
discover by repeating a well-known area of
physics?
My aim is to establish the experimental validity the relationship shown by Equation #1, where
Commented [A6]: Research design: The
the period is proportional to the square root of the mass. candidate is aware of the scope and limit of their
study. They do not think they are going to prove a
theory. This is an excellent expression of the
T m Equation #2 nature of science.

Variables Commented [A7]: Research design: Variables

could not be better stated. A depth of
understanding is demonstrated here.
The independent variable is the mass (m) of the oscillating object, measured in kilograms (kg).

The dependent variable is the period (T) of oscillation, a single period, measured in seconds (s).

Controlled variables are listed below.

 Spring’s constant—The spring’s constant affects the period of oscillation as illustrated

in Equation #1. The stiffer the spring the larger the value of the constant and this would
decrease the resulting period. Therefore in order to prevent this interference in the
period, I will keep the same spring throughout the entire experiment. I will also make
sure that the spring never extends beyond its elastic limit (making sure the motion is
defined by the SHM equation). I used the longest spring in “Creeya” Spring set. No Commented [A8]: Research design: Some
manufacturer’s specification would be helpful, but
more details were available (this was found in the physics lab), we cannot expect this detail from the candidate.

Physics assessed student work 2

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

 Amplitude of oscillation—Although this does not affect the period of oscillation, in Commented [A9]: Research design: Actually,
amplitude does affect period, but keeping the
order to get as accurate as possible results, I will be keeping it constant by measuring initial value fixed is a good thing. Slight variation
the height from the floor to the equilibrium position with every mass and displacing it with amplitude is not something we expect the
candidate to notice here. Perhaps an extended
15 cm below the equilibrium position. essay would address this.

 Room conditions—This includes variables such as wind, as it might affect the trajectory
of the mass and its period of oscillation, and the temperature of the spring which could
affect the spring constant and therefore the period of oscillation. However these
variables would only have a significant effect in extreme measures. Nevertheless, I will
try to maintain these constant to make sure that the results are as fair as possible.

Figure 2 (shown on the right) is a photograph of my experimental set up Commented [A10]: Research design: We are
not told the length of the spring, but the
photograph shows it is long; an excellent spring
Method (step by step) for a simple harmonic motion experiment.
Commented [A11]: Research design: Probably
1. First, a stand with a 98. 5 cm stand rod was attached to the edge more detail than needed, but the candidate is
focused and their comments are relevant. There
of a table with a G‐clamp to prevent it from falling on me, or any are no unnecessary steps, like “turn on the
of my colleagues' heads. computer”.
2. Then a clamp was attached to the stand rod at a point high Commented [A12]: Research design: There are
no questions about methodology; the candidate
enough for the system to enable the maximal displacement has given this much thought.
from its equilibrium position without the weight hitting the
ground, 15 cm in this case.
3. The spring was then attached to the clamp and taped so that it
did not move and for safety purposes as if extended too much
with a light weight, it could detach and perhaps hit myself or
someone else. Yet another safety issue to consider.
4. Due to a slight wiggle in the stand rod another stand was placed
next to it with a clamp attached between both rods and attached
to the table with a G‐clamp as well. This reduced the wiggle in
the main rod and having results as accurate as possible.
5. To be able to know the displacement of the masses from the equilibrium position,
I taped a ruler to the table from the floor. I used a spirit level to insure a vertical Commented [A13]: Research design: Nice
detail.
alignment.

Physics assessed student work 3

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

6. Because the masses were separated from the ruler to avoid obstruction of the
oscillation, in order to accurately displace the mass by 15 cm, I attached another clamp
to the ruler with a rod sticking out. Therefore by setting it 15 cm below the equilibrium
position, I am able to bring the mass down until it touches the rod and release, ensuring
that it displaced 15 cm vertically.
7. The weight of the clamp caused the ruler to lean towards the table, so in order to solve
this problem I put a heavy weight behind it and taped it to the floor so that it wasn't
moved by accident.
8. Lastly, the mass hanger for the slotted weights was attached to the spring with tape,
leaving space to remove weights to change the mass without having to take the tape off
and tape it again every time.
9. Once the system is set and secure for usage, the desired amount of slotted weights Commented [A14]: Research design: Some
comments about the “desired amount” would be
were put in the mass holder helpful here, but the data table shows us the
10. Then I calculated the distance from the floor to the equilibrium position and set the range.
clamp attached to the ruler 15 cm lower than the measurement.
11. At first, I was going to use a stopwatch, but after reflecting on how this would affect
the accuracy of the results, I decided to set my mobile device recording in front of the
system allowing a much more precise recording of the period of one oscillation.
12. Before actually starting the experiment I put on safety goggles in order to prevent the
masses from hitting my eyes if extended too much with a very light weight. I also made
sure the space where I was leaving the masses not being used was spacious enough to
prevent them rolling off and hitting my toes and made sure that no one was too close
to my experiment as to putting them in any sort of danger. Commented [A15]: Research design: Safety
(and other methodological issues) are addressed
13. Then, after all the safety precautions have been taken care of, I started the experiment in the 17 steps.
by bringing the mass to where the clamp is and released it.
14. I stopped the recording and uploaded the video to my computer.
15. Using the "data collection and analysis software"5 for "logger pro", I checked the time Commented [A16]: Research design: Perhaps a
screenshot would help here.
of the frame at which I released the mass and the one when it was back to the initial
position and subtracted them, giving me the period of one full oscillation.
Commented [A17]: Research design: There is
16. I repeated steps 11‐15 three times for every mass in order to get accurate results sufficient detail for the collection of relevant and
andmake sure that the effect of random errors was limited as much as possible. sufficient data.
17. I repeated steps 9‐16 for every mass in order to get enough data points to draw a Commented [A18]: Research design: The
presentation of the relevant equations as they
solid conclusion. relate to the data clearly would allow us to repeat
the investigation. Although we do not know the
specifications of the “Creeya” spring, we cannot
expect the candidate to get this information as
they just found the spring in the physics
laboratory. The benefit of the doubt is given for
reproducing the experiment.

Physics assessed student work 4

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

Data collection

By manipulating equation #1 we obtain the general form for graphing of the independent
variable, dependent variable and graph gradient. Here is Equation #3:

y = a x + c
Square Root
Period = Gradient + No Constant
Mass
T = 2 + 0
m
k

I graph period against the square root of mass and I find a linear and almost proportional
function between the two variables. Here is my data.

Data Table #1: Results of the period of oscillation for each mass Commented [A19]: Data analysis: The table is
clear, concise and easy to follow. One or two
significant figure inconsistencies but these might
be artefacts of a spreadsheet. Column headings
could also spell out the quantity, but this is not
required as we see in the text what the data is.

Units of the square root of mass are not kg.

Physics assessed student work 5

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

The frames per second (fps) of the recorded videos of the trials was 30, therefore the
uncertainty for the period of one oscillation would be ±1/30 or ±0.0333 second. As a decimal Commented [A20]: Data analysis: The
uncertainty with the images is nicely explained.
this is one significant figure more than “30” but logger pro software only allows three decimal
places which makes this ±0.033 seconds.

Because the value of (Tmax – Tmin)/2 of for each mass is lower than the uncertainty of the
individual trials, the uncertainty of the mean is ±0.033 s as well. Moreover, I measured the Commented [A21]: Data analysis: A most
detailed and appropriate approach here. The
uncertainty of the masses by weighing 5 different 0.050 kg slotted masses on an electronic candidate knows what they are doing.
scale individually and seeing how much off they were from the claimed value. Thus the
uncertainty of one slotted mass of 0.050 kg was around 0.00015 kg. For any value of mass, the
uncertainty remains at ±0.3%. It is common in physics that the independent variable is known
with more precision than the dependent variable.
mass 0.00015
100  100  0.30%
mass 0.050

Therefore, the percentage uncertainty of the square root of the mass is going to be one‐half Commented [A22]: Data analysis: Again, a
detailed and most appropriate analysis,
this or just ±0.15%. This is too small to graph. Below is the graph of the processed data. demonstrating a sound understanding of IB skills.

Graph 1: Average period (one oscillation) against the square root of mass. Commented [A23]: Data analysis: This is a
lovely graph and it clearly addresses the research
aim head on and most accurately.

Physics assessed student work 6

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

As seen in the graph 1, there is a very clear linear relationship between the square root of mass
and the average period. The uncertainty of the period of one oscillation is represented by the
vertical error bars, while the uncertainty of the square root of mass (±0.15%) is so small it
cannot be appreciated on the graph.

From the best fit line on the graph we see the statistical results: Commented [A24]: Data analysis: The analysis
of both statistical and experimental approaches is
clear and precise. The rounding of consistent
gradient  gradient Statistical   1.843  0.01464s kg05 significant figures is left to the final result.

0.01464
gradient%Statistical  100  0.7943%  0.8%
1.843

The uncertainty here was determined by statistical methods looking at the scatter of data
about the best fit linear line. Standard deviation does not consider any experimental
uncertainty, only a statistical scatter. Therefore, for the experimental uncertainty in the Commented [A25]: Data analysis: This is a most
relevant approach to analysis and nicely
gradient I constructed (see Graph 2) minimum and maximum gradient lines by eye considering demonstrates key IB skills of analysis.
all the error bars.

Graph 2: Minimum and Maximum Gradients for Graph 1 Commented [A26]: Data analysis: The range
analysis is well done in a most accurate way here.

Physics assessed student work 7

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

Using the experimental method of one‐half the range between minimum and maximum line
gradients we find an uncertainty of about 4%, a more realistic value compared to a statistical Commented [A27]: Data analysis: An insightful
approach. The candidate knows what they are
value of 0.8%. doing and communicates it well.
 1.924 1.776 
gradient  gradientExpMinMax   1.843     1.843  0.074  s kg
0.5

 2 
0.074
gradient experimental%  100  4%
1.843

Now look at the y‐intercept using the statistical analysis.

yintercept  ystandard deviation  0.04339  0.00982

A zero y‐axis is not included here (albeit a small amount). Commented [A28]: Data analysis: Considering a
zero-zero origin may seem like a subtle point (and
might be ignored by other candidates) but it will
yintercept  ystandard deviation  0.03419 prove to be important to the research aim. Looking
at possible systematic error also helps in the
conclusion and the evaluation assessment.
Statistically, the zero origin is not included (as 0.03 is greater than zero). However, using
minimum and maximum gradient lines which appreciate all the uncertainty bars we find a
y‐intercept uncertainty as:
0.08793   0.0003048
yexp intercept   0.044117s
2

yintercept exp min  0.04339  0.044117  0.000727s  0.0007s

A zero origin is included here (as the extreme y‐intercept is a negative value) but looking at four Commented [A29]: Data analysis: There is more
thoughtful analysis here and this will support a
decimal places is not an accurate view, as the expression is no doubt due to rounding and conclusion.
random variations. A more realistic lower limit would just be zero:

yintercept  yexp intercept  0.04339  0.044117 s   0.04  0.04  s

Using this method we see that a zero origin is just on the line with the experimental
uncertainties; zero then is acceptable. This allows me to conclude that there is indeed an Commented [A30]: Conclusion: The research
aim has been answered. Given the high-quality
experimental proportionality exhibited in the data. data, the appropriate graphs and detailed
analysis, the research aim of a proportional
function between period and the square root of
As my teacher tells me, experimental uncertainties are themselves uncertain, so being a small mass has been justified within strong experimental
fraction of a second off a zero origin seem to be a reasonable (and even expected) result. evidence.

Physics assessed student work 8

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

Summary Box (repeated from text) Commented [A31]: Conclusion: The “Summary
Box” is not required, but it is helpful to have the
experimental results all in one place.
The computer generated best fit linear line gradient and the experimental uncertainty are:

gradient experimental uncertainty experimental   1.843  0.074  s kg0.5

Rounded:
gradient experimental uncertainty experimental   1.84  0.07  s kg 0.5

The experimental uncertainty is 3.5% or about 4% here (an acceptable value). This is more
realistic than the standard deviation uncertainty of about 0.8%.

The expected zero origin was not included within the statistical error for the y‐intercept. Commented [A32]: Conclusion: The expected
zero is based on the known equation and hence
Statistically (using standard deviation) the lowest y‐intercept value would be 0.034 seconds this suggests justification with accepted theory.
above zero. This is close to but not zero. Indeed, the candidate derived the accepted
theory.
yintercept SD  yintercept SD   0.04339  0.00982  s yintercept minimum SD  0.034s

However, the experimental y‐intercept range (using minimum and maximum lines) does touch
the expected zero value., justifying a proportional function.

yintercept  yexperimental   0.04  0.04s

Conclusion and Evaluation

After having collected and processed the data, it can be concluded that a change in the Commented [A33]: Conclusion: The
experimental proportionality nicely aligns with
mass of an oscillating object indeed changes the period as described by the known textbook theory (the accepted scientific context).
equation. This establishes the validity of the equation for the limited range of my Commented [A34]: Conclusion: This was the
experiment. aim of the investigation: to confirm the validity of
the simple harmonic motion equation for a given
spring and limited range.
Nevertheless, there have been some inaccuracies, weaknesses and limitations throughout Commented [A35]: Evaluation: The candidate
the study. No experiment is every perfect. The uncertainties for the square root of the now starts an extensive discussion on the
evaluation of the methodology and procedures.
mass are very small, therefore they are considered negligible. Moreover, the uncertainties
of the period of one oscillation are relatively small, yet, somewhat significant. In some
cases, while finding the period of one oscillation going frame by frame, on one frame I was
holding the masses, and on the next the masses had already been released and displaced a
little, therefore affecting the accuracy of the results for the period of one oscillation. A

Physics assessed student work 9

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

solution for this is listed under procedures (see below)

Theory. The expression relating period to mass and a spring constant, equation #1, is a well‐
known and established equation. It is easily found in numerous textbooks and online. Commented [A36]: Conclusion: Again, we can
accept this understanding as justification of the
relevant context.
Assumptions. However sound the theory, there are still assumptions. We assume that the
spring constant remains constant. We assume that the restoring force follows Hooke’s law
relating extension and restoring force, and we assume this holds true for both the extension of
the spring (stretching) and when compressing the spring (when the spring has a shorter length
compared do its equilibrium length for a given handing mass). We assume all data are recorded
within the elastic limit of the spring. Some advanced textbooks point would a slight change in
period relating to the amplitude, but I have not found an equation for this. I assume a fixed
amplitude for one oscillation. Finally, for extremely long springs, there could be a noticeable Commented [A37]: Evaluation: An interesting
(and most perceptive) example of a slight error
unwinding of the spring as it stretches. In fact, I noticed this with the larger masses. The net introduced by the method.
effect is well within the uncertainty of length measurements so I ignored this effect.

Procedures.
 I modified the timing procedure from using a stopwatch to a video analysis. The frame rare
was relatively low. It might be that a set of images missed the peak either at the highest or
lowest positions. This would be slight but still it would be a weakness in precision. Also, my
analysis was of a single oscillation. To improve this I should have measured a number of Commented [A38]: Evaluation: A specific
methodological improvement. The candidate could
consecutive oscillation and found a single period by dividing by the number of oscillation. have done this originally, but they focused too
 A photogate timer could be used to measure period. Instead of depending on the maximum much on one oscillation.
displacements for timing, the photogate could record time in any place of the oscillation Commented [A39]: Evaluation: Another specific
methodological improvement.
and record consecutive half periods. The school’s photogate timer is good to 0.1
millisecond.
 Another way to improve upon the timing procedure limitation is use a sonic motion
detector. There are such units that can measure up to a 0.1 mm distance and can take data Commented [A40]: Evaluation: This would be a
major improvement.
samples at 1000 per second. Data would be recorded every 0.001 second (compared to 30
fps or 0.033 s). An additional improvement would suggest measuring multiple oscillation
(perhaps 10) and dividing the total time by ten (thus reducing any error in the identification
of maximum and minimum displacements).

Limitations. Obliviously my results are limited in the range of masses and the extension of the
given spring. There is no reason to think my results would be atypical comparted to other
springs and ranges.

Physics assessed student work 10

 Internal assessment example 7: Harmonic motion oscillations

Major Analysis Issue: Systematic Error Commented [A41]: Evaluation: The candidate
has addressed both random and systematic
 The best fit linear line (computer produced by the method of least squares) yields a y‐ errors, and offered genuine improvements. The
intercept of +0.04339 seconds and a standard deviation of ± 0.009824 s. Making suitable candidate demonstrated insight with their
understanding of the y-axis shift and other
rounding off and aligning proper significant figures, we have (+0.04 ± 0.01) s. This allows a relevant issues. There are more than enough
minimum y‐intercept at +0.03 s. Thus there seems to be an inherent systematic error in the excellent comments here to earn top marks for
evaluation.
data, although rather small.
 When the y‐intercept and its uncertainty are expressed using experiential uncertainties in
the gradient range, I got a value of +0.04339 seconds and an experimental range of
± 0.04411 s. Making suitable rounding off and aligning proper significant figures, we have
(+0.04 ± 0.04) s. This is more realistic and this value allows a zero origin, hence supporting a
proportionality analysis. Note, however, that when ignoring significant figures the minimum
y‐axis value is negative, meaning that a zero origin is included. It was argued, however, that
this claim of precision was most likely due to rounding error and random noise, not
precision.
 After performing my experiment I discovered that in some cases the mass of the spring
itself contributes the theoretical value of mass in equation #1. This is because a free Commented [A42]: Evaluation: Another
insightful observation. The known theory here
hanging slinky spring can be made of oscillated under its own mass (i.e. with no mass takes about one half to one third of the spring’s
attached to the end). This might well be the systematic shift that is subtle but apparent in mass, but we cannot expect the candidate to know
this.
my data.
 Finally, as mentioned in steps 7 and 8 of my “Method” I added some tape to the system,
thus adding a systematic amount of mass to all measurements. My graphs says that with
zero hanging mass there still is a small period. Hence there is some systematic mass hiding
in my data.

Physics assessed student work 11