Analyzing Hookes Law Experiments: Taking it to the Next Step

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around enhancing the analysis of Hooke's Law experiments, particularly addressing the reduced extension observed at low loads. Participants note that this phenomenon may be linked to the initial tensioning of the spring and its material properties, which influence the spring constant and deformation. Suggestions for further exploration include investigating the effects of combining springs in parallel or series to derive new spring constants and their relationships. The importance of specifying the educational level for the analysis is emphasized, as it affects the complexity of the suggested experiments. Overall, the conversation seeks innovative ways to deepen the understanding of Hooke's Law beyond standard analyses.
hays_scott
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
hi can anyone suggest a way to take an analysis of a hookes law experiment at alavel up to "the next step"

at low loads there is a reduced amount of extension - can anyone suggest why? is this due to intial tensioning of teh spring in question?

i have doen all of teh standard analysis i just want someing to make it stand out.

any suggestions

thanks

scott
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A spring's spring constant determines how it will handle a force, and inhernetly tension. The higher the spring constant, the higher the force required to induce tension in the spring. The proportion is bluntly written in Hooke's Law.
 
already covered that

i need something to really make it stand out



anyone?
 
hays_scott said:
at low loads there is a reduced amount of extension - can anyone suggest why? is this due to intial tensioning of teh spring in question?

A spring's deflection based on force goes all the way back to the parent material's properties and the other Hooke's Law. In the elastic range of the material, the strain (in your case deformation) is directly proportional to the load. That is why in some basic FEA applications, the elements used are modeled after springs.

A properly designed spring (a coil spring in your case) will reach it's solid height before reaching it's material's yield point and thus entering a non-linear result. I'd say that unless you want to get into the design or stress analysis of a spring, you may have reached the limit of the scope of your report.

Keep asking questions though. Perhaps we can come up with more.
 
hays_scott said:
hi can anyone suggest a way to take an analysis of a hookes law experiment at alavel up to "the next step"

at low loads there is a reduced amount of extension - can anyone suggest why? is this due to intial tensioning of teh spring in question?

i have doen all of teh standard analysis i just want someing to make it stand out.

any suggestions

thanks

scott

You neglected to indicate at what educational level this should be designed for. This info is often left out in many questions being asked on here, and yet, it is a major piece of the puzzle for us to know how elementary or sophisticated of an answer that can be given.

If this is at the elementary level, then I suggest two different experiments:

1. Take two springs with roughly idential spring constant, hook them up in parallel (side by side), and then hand a common mass. Figure out the new spring constant of the system, and see if you can figure out the relationship between the new spring constant with the individual spring constants.

2. Same principle as above, but this time, hang the springs in series, i.e. hook one spring to the other to make a longer spring. Do the same thing and find the new spring constant, and the same analysis.

Zz.
 
done that and for various other combinations

and expressed mathmatically
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top