Untitled document (1)

pdf

School

University of Alberta *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

130

Subject

Mathematics

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

4

Uploaded by CaptainValor9271

Report
LAB # 2: Oscillations of a Spring By Afra Tabassum Akand, 1807768 TA: Elenea Temnikova Date: December 5th, 2023 RESULTS: The experiments aimed to assess spring constants and ascertain a spring's mass. This entailed creating an oscillating system by shi±ing different masses that were attached to a spring. Equation 1 was linearized using the data in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1: Variation in a spring's displacement when suspended at varying masses : Mass (Kg) Change in Displacement Change in Mass (kg) Change in Displacement Force (change in mass*gravity) 0.250 0 0 0 0 0.275 0.0241 0.025 -0.0241 0.24525 0.300 0.0485 0.05 -0.0485 0.4905 0.325 0.0724 0.075 -0.0724 0.737575 0.350 0.0971 0.1 -0.0971 0.981 0.375 0.1211 0.125 -0.1211 1.22625 0.400 0.1453 0.15 -0.1453 1.4715 0.425 0.1696 0.175 0.1696 1.71675 0.450 0.1640 0.2 -0.194 1.962 Equation 1: ΔF= -kΔx or, ΔF=Δ mg In the experiment, data obtained and recorded in Table 1 was used to create a visual representation by graphing it. The y-axis of the graph represented the values calculated using the formula ∆F = ∆mg, which was derived from Equation 1. On the other hand, the x-axis depicted the horizontal change in displacement, ∆x. GRAPH 1:
The graph plotted data points, revealing a slope of 10.113, identified as the spring constant (k) in the static method. This parameter characterizes the spring's stiffness, revealing its behavior under applied forces and displacements. In the alternative method employed for determining the spring constant, various masses were subjected to harmonic motion by oscillating. The Logger Pro so±ware was utilized to measure and record the angular frequency ( ω ), as presented in Table 2. It's worth noting that the angular frequency ( ω ) and the mass attached to the spring exhibit an inverse relationship. In simpler terms, when a heavier mass is hung from the spring, the angular frequency ( ω ) decreases. The second spring constant is determined using Equation 2, which relates angular frequency, mass, and spring constant based on experimental data from mass oscillation. Equation 2: T^2 = (4π^2)/k m + (4π^2)/3k m_s k_2 = (4π^2)/a m Table 2: calculated “T” ( T = 2π⁄ ω ) using given omega and mass Mass (kg) T^2 Omega ( ω ) 0.25 1.421 5.273 0.275 1.518 5.102 0.3 1.613 4.948 0.325 1.711 4.805 0.35 1.806 4.675 0.375 1.907 4.551 0.4 2.002 4.441 0.425 2.097 4.338 0.45 2.202 4.233 Plotting the data from Table 2 onto Graph 2 yields a linearized equation, which is then used to find variable "a" in Equation 2. The 'x' axis on the plotted graph below denotes mass (kg), and the y axis denotes time squared. > k 2 = 10.15 y= ax + b GRAPH 2:
Since the spring constant is now solved, one can rearrange Equation 3 to solve for the mass of the spring. M s = 3b/a= = 3(0.4471)/3.89 = 0.345 kg DISCUSSION: The static method's spring constant, k=10.11±0.0106 N/m, was calculated using Excel's LINEST function, while the oscillation method's spring constant, 10.15, was determined through error propagation, as per the Lab Manual's Table 6.3. δ k= ) 2 2 ? | | | | | | ( δ? ? δ k= ) 2 2 3.89 | | | | | | ( 0.013016 3.89 δ k = ±0.0340 N/m, where δ a was obtained using the LINEST function in Excel. The spring constants obtained through both methods exhibit relatively similar values, yet a notable distinction arises when comparing their uncertainties. The static method provides a significantly more precise spring constant, as indicated by its lower uncertainty. Several factors contribute to the error in the harmonic motion oscillation method. One primary factor is the deviation from a purely vertical motion when the mass is suspended and released. Instead of a complete vertical oscillation, the mass exhibits a slight pendulum motion. This pendulum motion introduces inaccuracies in the measured time (T) since the mass takes a longer time to return to the equilibrium position. The impact of this deviation is reflected in the error propagation of the time period, further affecting the overall precision of the spring constant determination. δ m s = 3? ? | | | | ( δ? ? ) 2 + ( δ? ? ) 2 δ m s = 3(0.4471) 3.89 | | | | ( 0.013016 3.89 ) 2 + ( 0.004632 0.447056 ) 2 δ m s = ±0.000375 kg, where δ ms was obtained using the LINEST function of Graph 2 in Excel. The friction created by the spring contacting the surrounding plastic was brought about by the pendulum motion. It was observed during data recording that the oscillation was damped. One possible way to solve this and conduct an experiment with greater accuracy is to hang the spring from a rod. Furthermore, by positioning a second motion sensor horizontally, it is possible to guarantee that the mass oscillates just vertically, removing the pendulum motion and reducing friction. The goal of this modification is to set up the necessary parameters for a more accurate and regulated measurement of the spring constant. CONCLUSION This laboratory experiment aimed to assess and contrast the spring constant values derived through static measurement of the initial displacement caused by the mass versus oscillating the
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
spring with various masses. The overarching objective was to unveil the unknown mass associated with the spring. REFEREENCES [1] PHYS 130, LAB#2: Oscillations of a Spring, Lab Manual, University of Alberta, Department of Physics. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT [1] Elena Temnikova ( TA ) [2] Adiba Akand (Lab Partner) [3] HA-MIM Rahman Khan (Lab Partner)