IBDP PHYSICS HL INTERNAL ASSESSMENT

Resonance of a Wire in a Magnetic Field with Varying Tension

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Aim of Investigation

The aim of this investigation is to find the mass per unit length of a wire by measuring the
frequency at which the wire resonates at the first harmonic by varying tension, with the
equation:

𝑇
√
𝑚/𝐿
𝑓=
2𝐿

Where 𝑓 = frequency, 𝑇 = wire tension, 𝑚 = mass of wire, 𝐿 = length of wire (Oxford University
Press, 2020).

1.2 Background

While there are better ways of finding the mass per unit length of a wire, such as using a ruler
and a sensitive measuring scale, this method serves to assess the theory of resonance and
to prove the above formula, as well as demonstrating the advantages and disadvantages of
using an oscilloscope versus relying on possibly faulty equipment.

𝑚
The equation linking 𝑓 and 𝑇, 𝐿 , 𝐿 comes from a definition of the frequency of sound produced

by an oscillating string, but can be applied for the induced resonance of a wire as well.

1.3 Methodology

Firstly, the mass per unit length of the wire will be measured using a ruler and sensitive
weighing scale to find a exact reference value to assess the results of the investigation.

The experiment will be conducted on a table, with the wire clamped down at one end and
attached to 100g, 50g, or 20g weights hanging over the end of the table at the other end,
running over a pulley to reduce friction as much as possible. The wire will be stretched over
two wedges to anchor the wire down, in between which it will oscillate during the experiment.
An alternating current (AC) signal generator will be connected to the wire at either end, and
an oscilloscope will be connected to the signal generator output if necessary, from which the
frequency 𝑓 of the current can be read to corroborate the value displayed by the signal
generator. A horseshoe-style magnet will be placed in between the two wedges with the wire
running in between the poles to induce the oscillation.

1
 Figure 1 - Diagram Showing Setup for Experiment

The experiment will be conducted with a constant length 𝐿 as the control variable, and varied
tension 𝑇 as the independent variable. Mass will be added to one end of the wire in constant
increments to increase tension, and the frequency – the dependent variable – will be adjusted
from the signal generator until the wire oscillates at the first harmonic. Judgement as to
whether the wire is at the first harmonic or not will be made by eye, as to when the
displacement of the oscillating wire is greatest. Mass will be added to the wire until the tension
overcomes the wire’s tensile strength and it snaps.

The data will be recorded in Microsoft Excel to simplify calculations, and from there graphs
will be plotted to find mass per unit length.

1.4 Limitations

There are, of course, limitations to this method. The biggest is the measurement of the first
harmonic: it is not possible to use instrumentation to measure this, and so it must be done by
eye, which is inherently imprecise. It is therefore likely that the exact position of the first
harmonic will be unknown.

There is also an issue with the signal generator and the question of the accuracy of the
displayed frequency: it is entirely possible that this value is wrong, and so it may be necessary
to use an oscilloscope to corroborate the reported frequency.

The oscilloscope itself is not infallible however, since it may be hard to read and imprecise,
with the displayed image slightly shifting about.

There are also intrinsic inaccuracies in instruments such as the ruler and masses, which also
feed the uncertainty of the final values.

2
There also may be a small amount of wasted energy at the ends of the wire, with the wedges
deforming as the wire oscillates, skewing results; compared to the other limitations, however,
this seems negligible.

1.5 Risk Assessment

It is important to account for the risks of the experiment before starting the practical element
of the investigation.

The most obvious risk is that of the electricity, with the possibility of fault or mishandling of
equipment such as the signal generator leading to electric shock. This can be mitigated by
following correct procedure for the safe handling of such equipment, such as ensuring the
casing is earthed and not allowing overheating, and following instructions for use.

Another risk is that of the snapping of the wire if tension is too great. If the wire snaps, the
elastic potential energy given to it by the tension will cause it to rebound back, possible striking
an eye. This is exacerbated by the oscillations putting additional strain on the wire. For this
reason, it is prudent to wear eye protection and wear sleeves down to protect yourself.

Another, perhaps overlooked, risk is that of the masses falling and striking a toe or foot. With
the mass planned to exceed half a kilogramme, it is possible that, on the wire snapping, the
masses may fall from the edge of the table and hit a foot or a toe – this has the potential to be
somewhat painful. It is therefore necessary to ensure the area below the masses is clear.

2. PRELIMINARY EXPERIMENT

A preliminary experiment was conducted to find any issues in the pre-planned experimental
process.

2.1 Adjustments Made

I started with length 𝐿 at 0.2m and mass 𝑚 at 50g, with no oscilloscope. I found that the wire
oscillated too much, meaning that it was jumping off the wedge at one end, disturbing the
pattern of oscillation, and so the frequency at the first harmonic changed as the wire jumped
between different positions. The reported frequency from the signal generator display also
seemed implausible.

To correct these issues, I adjusted the experiment, adding an oscilloscope to read the
frequency of the signal generator, and increased the mass to 500g in an attempt to put enough
tension on the wire to prevent it jumping out of position. After this, the oscillations became so
small that they were impossible to see, so I increased the length of the wire to 0.5m.

3
After this, an adjustment had to be made to the position of the magnet, since the wire would
hit the magnet on oscillating – it was moved closer to one of the wedges, where displacement
of the wire from centre is lesser, to avoid this. I also laid a ruler underneath the central maxima
of the wire to more accurately judge when the wire had the greatest displacement from the
centre, and therefore it was easier to assess when the wire was resonating at the first
harmonic.

3. DATA COLLECTION

3.1 Preparation

The mass per unit length was taken before the experiment to act as a reference for later
comparison.

𝑚
= 0.000960 ± 0.00000480 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1
𝐿

This was found by weighing a 1m length of the wire on a sensitive electronic scale. For the
uncertainty, the limiting factor here is the resolution of the ruler, so it is calculated as follows,
where 𝑢𝐿 = absolute uncertainty for length, 𝑢𝑚/𝐿 = absolute uncertainty for the mass per unit
length, and 𝐿 = the length, 1 metre, used to measure the mass per unit length.

𝑢𝐿 = 0.005 𝑚

Since this is half the resolution of the ruler, as is standard for analogue equipment, and so,

𝑢𝐿
%𝑢𝐿 = ∗ 100
𝐿

0.005
%𝑢𝐿 = ∗ 100 = 5.00%
1.00

From here we can calculate the uncertainty for mass per unit length,

%𝑢𝐿 𝑚
𝑢𝑚/𝐿 = ∗
100 𝐿

𝑢𝑚/𝐿 = 0.005 ∗ 0.000960 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1

𝑢𝑚/𝐿 = 0.00000480 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1

3.2.1 Varying Tension for Frequency – Data

The experiment was laid out such that 𝐿 = 0.490 ± 0.005 𝑚.

As mass was added in 20g intervals from 500g, tension increased, according to the
relationship 𝑇 = 𝑚𝑔, where 𝑚 = total mass and 𝑔 = 9.81 𝑚 ∗ 𝑠 −1 (gravitational field strength).

4
When reading from the oscilloscope, the following equation was used to find the frequency for
each level of tension:

1
𝑓𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙 = 𝑛
𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑠 𝑡𝐷𝑖𝑣
𝑛𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑠 ∗ 1000

Where 𝑛𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑠 = number of grids from first to last peak, 𝑛𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑠 = number of peaks being counted,
𝑡𝐷𝑖𝑣 = oscilloscope time division per grid square in milliseconds.

The following data were thus collected.

Firstly, for the frequency measured from the signal generator display:

Frequency /Hz
Mass /g Tension /N
(sig. gen. display)
500 4.91 72.4
520 5.10 73.7
540 5.30 75.1
560 5.49 76.5
580 5.69 77.7
600 5.89 79.3
620 6.08 80.7
640 6.28 81.8
660 6.48 83.2
680 6.67 84.5
700 6.87 85.7
720 7.06 86.7
740 7.26 87.8
760 7.46 89.6

5
Secondly, for the data measured simultaneously from the oscilloscope display:

Calculated Frequency
Tension /N 𝑛𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝐷𝑖𝑣 /ms 𝑛𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑠 Time Period /Hz
/s (oscilloscope)
4.91 3.00 10.0 4.10 0.0137 73.2
5.10 3.00 10.0 4.00 0.0133 75.0
5.30 3.00 10.0 3.95 0.0132 75.9
5.49 3.00 10.0 3.90 0.0130 76.9
5.69 3.00 10.0 3.80 0.0127 78.9
5.89 3.00 10.0 3.75 0.0125 80.0
6.08 3.00 10.0 3.65 0.0122 82.2
6.28 3.00 10.0 3.60 0.0120 83.3
6.48 4.00 10.0 4.65 0.0116 86.0
6.67 4.00 10.0 4.60 0.0115 87.0
6.87 4.00 10.0 4.55 0.0114 87.9
7.06 4.00 10.0 4.50 0.0113 88.9
7.26 4.00 10.0 4.35 0.0109 92.0
7.46 4.00 10.0 4.30 0.0108 93.0

In order to obtain a linear graph, it is necessary to find the square of the frequency, in
accordance with the original equation.

Frequency Squared /Hz2 Frequency Squared /Hz2

(sig. gen. display) (oscilloscope)
5240 5350
5430 5630
5640 5770
5850 5920
6040 6230
6290 6400
6510 6760
6690 6940
6920 7400
7140 7560
7340 7730
7520 7900
7710 8460
8030 8650

6
3.2.2 Varying Tension for Frequency – Uncertainties

It is first necessary to find the uncertainty for each value to plot error bars on the graph. There
are several initial uncertainties to account for here:

𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 = 1%

This uncertainty is as standard with mass blocks.

𝑢𝑓,𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 0.01 𝐻𝑧

This uncertainty corresponds to the resolution of the signal generator display, as is standard
for digital displays.

𝑢𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑠,𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑝𝑒 = 0.025

This uncertainty is derived from half of the resolution of the grids on the oscilloscope display,
as is standard for analogue equipment.

From these, the following can be calculated:

%𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 = %𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠

𝑢𝑓,𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟
%𝑢𝑓,𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 = ∗ 100
𝑓𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟

%𝑢𝑓2 ,𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 2 ∗ %𝑢𝑓,𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟

𝑢𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑠,𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑝𝑒
%𝑢𝑓,𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑝𝑒 = ∗ 100
𝑛𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑠

%𝑢𝑓2 ,𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑝𝑒 = 2 ∗ %𝑢𝑓,𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑝𝑒

Where 𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 = uncertainty of tension, 𝑢𝑓2 ,𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 = uncertainty of the frequency
squared from the signal generator display, 𝑢𝑓2,𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑝𝑒 = uncertainty of the frequency
squared from the oscilloscope, and 𝑓𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 = uncertainty of the frequency displayed
by the signal generator.

Therefore, the uncertainties are as follows. See Table 2 in the Appendix for the full table of
data. Note that the order is the same as in the previous table (i.e. row 1 corresponds to 500g,
row 2 corresponds to 520g, etc.).

7
 Frequency Frequency
Tension Frequency Frequency
Squared Squared
Uncertainty Uncertainty / % Uncertainty / %
Uncertainty / % Uncertainty / %
/% (sig. gen. display) (oscilloscope)
(sig. gen. display) (oscilloscope)
1.00 0.0138 0.0276 0.610 1.21
1.00 0.0136 0.0271 0.625 1.25
1.00 0.0133 0.0266 0.633 1.27
1.00 0.0131 0.0261 0.641 1.28
1.00 0.0129 0.0257 0.658 1.32
1.00 0.0126 0.0252 0.667 1.33
1.00 0.0124 0.0248 0.685 1.37
1.00 0.0122 0.0244 0.694 1.39
1.00 0.0120 0.0240 0.538 1.08
1.00 0.0118 0.0237 0.543 1.09
1.00 0.0117 0.0233 0.549 1.10
1.00 0.0115 0.0231 0.556 1.11
1.00 0.0114 0.0227 0.575 1.15
1.00 0.0112 0.0223 0.581 1.16

3.2.3 Varying Tension for Frequency – Graphs

With this data, the graph for the relationship between tension and the square of frequency
(according to the signal generator display), can be drawn thus:

8
The data forms a line with equation 𝑓 2 = 1070𝑇, accounting for a rounding of 3 significant
figures as throughout the investigation, with gradient 1070. The line crosses through the origin
as expected, verifying the validity of the data.

While the error bars here are too small to be visible, the maximum gradient line 𝑓 2 = 1100𝑇 −
188 has been formed from the points 𝑇 = 4.91 and 𝑇 = 7.46, which are the points which looked
best suited to form the maximum gradient, plus or minus their uncertainties.

The minimum gradient line 𝑓 2 = 1040𝑇 + 175 has been formed from the points 𝑇 = 4.905 and
𝑇 = 7.26, which, similar to the process for the maximum gradient line, are the points which
looked best suited to form the minimum gradient, plus or minus their uncertainties.

For the frequencies from the oscilloscope:

9
Immediately, the less precise and less accurate nature of the data can be seen. The graph is
imprecise, as the points do not fit the straight line well; the graph is also inaccurate, displaying
undesirable behaviour by not intersecting the origin, as would be expected. Additionally, the
size of the uncertainties shows the ambiguity of this result, further framing it as the less suitable
data set to use for analysis, and the uncertainties themselves seem to be incorrect, since the
line of best fit misses several of the error bars. For this reason, maximum and minimum graphs
have not been drawn, since this graph will not be used for further calculation – the graph taking
frequencies from the signal generator is much more desirable.

4. DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Comparison between the Signal Generator Display and the Oscilloscope for Frequency

When observing the graphs, it is clear that the signal generator display gives a more accurate
and more precise value for frequency, and so these are the values that should be trusted as
reliable enough to find mass per unit length. It seems that the digital process used by the
signal generator to find frequency is better than the analogue process of reading the
oscilloscope display, despite the measures I took to maximise the accuracy of the oscilloscope
values, such as reading the distance between the peaks of multiple waves.

However, that is not to say that the use of the oscilloscope added no value to the investigation.
It served to corroborate the signal generator display to some extent, ensuring that there was
not a catastrophic error.

10
It also served to demonstrate the limits of the oscilloscope as a measuring device, proving that
digital solutions are often more accurate and more precise.

4.2.1 Finding m/L for Varying Tension for Frequency

The graph shows the following relationship between the square of the frequency and tension:

𝑓 2 = 1070𝑇

It is also possible to derive an equation for mass per unit length 𝑚/𝐿 from the equation relating
frequency, tension, mass, and length.

𝑇
√
𝑚/𝐿
𝑓=
2𝐿

𝑇 1
𝑓2 = ∗ 2
𝑚/𝐿 4𝐿

𝑇
(𝑓 2 )(4𝐿2 ) =
𝑚/𝐿

𝑇
𝑚/𝐿 =
(𝑓 2 )(4𝐿2 )

Since 𝑓 2 = 1070𝑇 and 𝐿 = 0.490,

𝑇
𝑚/𝐿 =
(1070𝑇)(4)(0.490)2

From here, 𝑇 can be cancelled out, so,

1
𝑚/𝐿 =
(1070)(4)(0.240)

𝑚
= 0.000980 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1
𝐿

4.2.2 Uncertainty

With 𝑢 = final absolute uncertainty, and 𝑢𝐿 = absolute uncertainty for length,

𝑢𝑚,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = uncertainty of gradient to maximum, 𝑢𝑚,𝑚𝑖𝑛 = uncertainty of gradient to minimum,

1070 − 1040
%𝑢𝑚,𝑚𝑖𝑛 = ∗ 100%
1070

%𝑢𝑚,𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 2.98%

1100 − 1070
%𝑢𝑚,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ∗ 100%
1070

11
 %𝑢𝑚,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 3.42%

The uncertainty of the gradient to the maximum slope is greater, so that will be used for the
total uncertainty 𝑢. For this calculation, recall that %𝑢𝐿 = 5.00%,

%𝑢 = 2(%𝑢𝐿 ) + %𝑢𝑚,𝑚𝑎𝑥

%𝑢 = 2(5.00) + 3.42%

%𝑢 = 13.4%
13.4
𝑢= ∗ 0.000980 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1
100

𝑢 = ±0.000131 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1

4.2.3 Final Calculated Value for m/L

𝑚/𝐿𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐 = 0.000980 ± 0.000131 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1

And again, for easier reference, the measured value for mass per unit length:

𝑚/𝐿𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑑 = 0.000960 ± 0.00000480 𝑘𝑔 ∗ 𝑚−1

5. EVALUATION

5.1 Conclusion

In accordance with the aim, the investigation was a success. An accurate value for mass per
unit length was found, with the measured value falling within the uncertainty for the calculated
value. It has proved the usefulness of this equation and verified this method, proving that
theory of resonance can be applied practically to find usable data.

There are some limitations to this, however. The most important is that of the uncertainty,
which leaves open a broad range of values – if I did not have the measured value available, I
would still be left with a relatively vague idea of the mass per unit length, not precise beyond
two significant figures.

This limitation is not the fault of the theory, but the fault of the way the experiment was
conducted. More precise equipment could have been used to reduce the uncertainty with
respect to frequency, using dedicated digital instruments, designed to measure frequency, but
also with respect to the length of the wire, using more precise equipment to find the distance
between the wedges. If the investigation was conducted thus, the error of the gradient of the
relationship between frequency squared and tension would have been lower, alongside a
lower error for length, leaving a lesser uncertainty for the final calculated value of mass per
unit length.

12
However, the manual method for judging when the first harmonic is achieved did not prove to
be as problematic as first predicted, since it was insignificant comparted to other uncertainties.
This could, however, still be improved, perhaps using a slow motion camera to better judge
this.

5.2 Possible Extension

Other methods to find mass per unit length could be evaluated to improve this calculated value
– looking into other methods involving the equation linking frequency, tension, wire mass, and
wire length would be useful. While I also took data with constant tension and varying length
during this investigation, analysis of this data was not within the scope of this investigation:
these data and graphs are available in the Appendix in Tables 3 and 4, and Figures 1, 2, 3,
and 4. A full analysis of this would be very useful to understanding the theoretical and practical
elements of electricity and magnetism.

13
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Oxford University Press (2020) ‘Sonometer’, Oxford Reference. Available at:

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100518553b
(Accessed 1 October 2020)

14
APPENDIX

Table 1 – Varying tension for frequency: data collection

Table 2 – Varying tension for frequency: uncertainties

Table 3 – Varying length for frequency: data collection

15
Table 4 – Varying length for frequency: uncertainties

Figure 1 – Varying length for frequency: graph using signal generator frequency

16
Figure 2 – Varying length for frequency: linearised graph using signal generator frequency

Figure 3 – Varying length for frequency: graph using oscilloscope frequency

17
Figure 4 – Varying length for frequency: linearised graph using oscilloscope frequency

18