5BL Lab 3 Assignment
(Ameen Khawaja, Emily Stenzler, Itasha Kooner,
2/11/22, G26 & Table 2).
Note: this a group assignment to be completed during lab, downloaded as PDF, uploaded as an
assignment on gradescope, and all names, date, section & table info must be put into this first page.
1
Slide 2:
Scientific Question: How is the angular frequency of the spring mass system impacted by changes in mass,
amplitude, and, consequently, changes in the oscillations?
Experimental Setup: We will have a weight with a spring attached, and we will obtain our theoretical spring
constant by measuring the number and amplitude of oscillations over a set period of time. We will be changing the
mass of the weight attached to the spring, as well as the amplitude of our oscillations to observe how these
changes in parameters change our angular frequency.
To obtain our theoretical spring constant using the physics theory, we will use the equation k=mg/(l-lo). We are
able to measure our experimental spring constant by measuring the mass of our weight and length of our spring
and plugging these values, along with the acceleration of gravity, into the spring constant equation.
Prediction: I think the measured frequency will depend directly on the four experimental setups and will be
directly impacted by changes in parameter values, such as mass of the spring, frequency of oscillations, length of
the spring and weight on the spring. I predict lower frequency will correlate with a greater mass, and vice versa. I
predict a shorter spring will lead to increased oscillation frequency.
k(3.5)=[(0.035*9.8]-(0.1*9.8)]/(0.175-0.035)=0.637/.14=4.45 Lf=17.5
K(5.3)=[(0.053*9.8)-(0.1*9.8]/(.226-0.053)=0.5194/.173=2.67 Lf=22.6 cm
2
Slide 3:
Mass spring system trials 3.5 cm spring 5.3 cm spring
100 g mass 1.15 cycles/sec 1.33 cycles/sec
200 g mass 0.95 cycles/sec 0.83 cycles/sec
This does match our prediction because the shorter spring led to an increase in oscillation frequency. A
greater mass also decreased the oscillation frequency.
For 3.5 cm, 100g: W=(sqrt4.55/0.1)/6.28=0.77 cycles/sec; SE=|0.77-1.15|/1.15*100%=33.04%
For 3.5 cm, 200g: W=(sqrt4.55/0.2)/6.28=0.76 cycles/sec; SE=|0.76-0.95|/0.95*100%=20%
For 5.3cm, 100g: W=(sqrt2.67/0.1)/6.28=0.82 cycles/sec; SE=|0.82-1.33|/1.33*100%=38.34%
For 5.3 cm, 200g: W=(sqrt2.67/0.2)/6.28=0.58 cycles/sec; SE=|0.58-0.83|/0.83*100%=30.12%
Error could result from human error in dropping and counting the weight frequency, as well as error in
calculating the height.
3
Slide 4:
Scientific Question: How is the frequency of the pendulum impacted by the mass of the object and
length of the string?
Experimental setup: The pendulum will be hung from a certain height and we will change the mass of
the ball and length of the strong. We will try to find the angular frequency of the pendulum and will count
how many times it swings around.
Prediction: We predict that the shorter length in string will increase the frequency of spins and the longer
length will decrease the frequency. Greater mass will not have any effect on the frequency of the
pendulum.
4
Slide 5:
Pendulum system trials 34.5 cm string 5.1 cm string
Light Ball 0.83 cycles/sec 1.67 cycles/sec
Heavy Ball (45g) 0.67 cycles/sec 1.43 cycles/sec
For light ball, 34.5 cm string: W= (sqrt9.8/0.345)/6.28=0.85 cycles/sec; SE=0.85-0.83/0.83*100%=2.41%
For light ball, 5.1 cm string: W=(sqrt9.8/0.051)/6.28=2.21 cycles/sec; SE=2.21-1.67/1.67*100%=3.23%
For heavy ball, 34.5 cm string: W=(sqrt9.8/0.345)/6.28=0.85; SE=0.85-0.67/0.67*100=12.06%
For heavy ball, 5.1 cm string: W=(sqrt9.8/0.051)/6.28=2.21 cycles/sec; SE=2.21-1.43/1.43*100=54.55%
The frequency did change in line with our predictions. The shorter length in string increased the frequency
of spins and the longer length decreased the frequency. Greater mass did not have any effect on the
frequency of the pendulum.
Possible sources of error are inaccuracy in measuring the length of the string and being inconsistent in the
force given when swinging the pendulum.
