melwin standing ewave

Name: Standing Mass of object,M (?): 0.5kg Mass of the total string, m (?): 0.0032 Length of the total string, L (?): 2.16 Length from A to B, l (?): 1.44m Mass per unit length, µ (?): 0.001481481 Tension, T (?): 4.905N 57.184 Table to obtain an experimental velocity (Vexp): **Use excel to calculate Cell D16-21 and E16-21 Mode No. Frequency, f (?) 1 21.2 1.45 2.9 0.344827586 2 43.2 0.75 1.5 0.666666667 3 64.2 0.5 1 1 4 87.2 0.38 0.76 1.315789474 5 107.2 0.29 0.58 1.724137931 LINEST 63.19350302 0.756594047550912 2.340780884 2.62069296161884 0.99590066 2.52536727169788 728.825126 3 4648.06756 19.1324395708883 Experimental velocity, Vexp (?): 63.193 Percent difference(%): 10.5 Theoretical velocity, V theo (?): Distance between the nodes, l (?) Wavelength, ƛ (?) 1/ƛ (?) If you are not using Excel to calculate the Tension: 0.5x9.81=4.905N Theoretical= squareroot of T/mass per un Summarize the lab and com Suggest one specific possib In this Lab, we were able to The expected velocity is 57 accurate and precise data c a 1m ruler to measure the 0.3 0.35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 f R Frequency

g Waves values for Cell C7-9 then show all your calculation in this text box. nit length= sq. root of (4.905/0.00148)=57.184 mpare the expected velocity to the one you obtained from the slope of your graph. Do they agree with in reason? ble source of uncertainty (be more specific than human error). o notice that as the frequency increased, the wavelength decreased. 7.2 and the measured velocity is 63.2. There is only 10.5% difference between these two values, suggesting a high collection with barely any room for errors. one possible source of uncertainity could be the measurement error as length of standing waves is extremely tedious and source of uncertainity due to the constant movements. 5 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 f(x) = 68.3571428571429 x − 2.37142857142858 R² = 1 Velocity of Waves in String 1/Wavelegth