Help with understanding an experiment with masses on a spring

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter FaraDazed
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experiment Spring
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around an experiment involving masses on a spring, focusing on understanding the application of Hooke's Law and the relationship between mass, spring constant, and oscillation period. Participants seek clarification on the theoretical background and calculations involved in determining the spring constant from two different experimental setups.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants explain that the first experiment demonstrates Hooke's Law, where the spring constant k can be calculated using the formula k = gΔm/Δx, relating force to mass and extension.
  • Others describe the second experiment as illustrating how the period of oscillation of a simple harmonic oscillator is influenced by mass and spring constant, represented by T = 2π√(m/k).
  • A participant notes the potential impact of the spring's own mass on the oscillation frequency, suggesting that this could account for discrepancies in the calculated values of k from the two experiments.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the interpretation of mass in the oscillation period equation, questioning whether it refers to the mass of the weights or the mass of the spring itself.
  • There is mention of a significant difference in the calculated values of k, with one participant indicating a difference of 1.12 and discussing the accuracy of the experimental methods used.
  • One participant acknowledges the complexity of the mathematics involved and the challenges in achieving precise measurements in the experiments.
  • Another participant suggests that the frequency and period equations are interchangeable, depending on the context of the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the basic principles of Hooke's Law and the relationship between mass and oscillation period. However, there is no consensus on the exact reasons for the discrepancies in the spring constant values obtained from the two experiments, and multiple competing views regarding the influence of the spring's mass and measurement errors remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the accuracy of the experiments, including the potential impact of the spring's mass and the method of calculating the spring constant. There are also unresolved questions about the definitions and assumptions related to the mass in the oscillation equations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and educators interested in experimental physics, particularly those exploring concepts related to Hooke's Law, oscillations, and the practical challenges of measuring physical constants in laboratory settings.

FaraDazed
Messages
347
Reaction score
2
We did an experiment not so long ago that involved suspending masses on a spring and not knowing much about the background to what was found is hindering my ability to fully grasp the results. The experiment was not part of any assessment so I thought this forum would be best but feel free to move if necessary.

I knew of Hooke's law before hand, F=-kx, but that was it, kind of lacking knowledge with the rest of theory that is involved.

For the first part we simply added masses onto the spring, one by one (0.05kg incremenets) and measured the extension. Plotted a graph of the weight of the masses versus the extension and then drew a line of best fit. Found the spring constant by taking the reciprocal of the gradient.

For the second part, we did the same thing by adding masses incrementally (in 0.05kg increments) but this time we lifted the masses slightly and let them bounce and we timed 30 oscillations (to get better accuracy of one period). We then calculated what ω^2 is by (2π/T)^2 and plotted a graph of the reciprocal of the masses (1/m) against ω^2 and drew a best fit line. And found the gradient to get a different value for k the spring constant to compare with the previous value.

I just don't understand how the reciprocal of the gradient in part one gets you the spring constant and in part two, which I especially don't understand how doing what we did provided us with a another value for the spring constant.

Any help with a general understanding of the theory behind this experiement would be very much appreciated. Merry Christmas :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The first experiment just shows how metals follow Hooke's Law. k = gΔm/Δx
The second shows how the period of oscillation of a simple harmonic oscillator depends upon mass and spring constant.
T (period) = 2∏√(m/k). This is a more advanced bit of the course and involves some harder Maths.
You say there was some disagreement between the two experiments but you don't say by how much. The mass of the spring will affect the natural oscillation frequency (the spring's own mass also has to be pulled about by its stiffness.). Each coil of the spring moves a different amount as the spring flexes and each piece will have a mass. The total effect of all the pieces (and the stiffnesses of the various lengths of spring where each coil sits) will be like another added mass. - an 'equivalent extra mass'. The end portion of the spring will have more effect than the higher portions.

You could calculate this equivalent mass by assuming that k is the same in both cases. If it goes as I'm suggesting, this equivalent mass would be something less than the actual mass of the spring (can you get a spring and measure its mass?)
 
sophiecentaur said:
The first experiment just shows how metals follow Hooke's Law. k = gΔm/Δx
The second shows how the period of oscillation of a simple harmonic oscillator depends upon mass and spring constant.
T (period) = 2∏√(m/k). This is a more advanced bit of the course and involves some harder Maths.
You say there was some disagreement between the two experiments but you don't say by how much. The mass of the spring will affect the natural oscillation frequency (the spring's own mass also has to be pulled about by its stiffness.). Each coil of the spring moves a different amount as the spring flexes and each piece will have a mass. The total effect of all the pieces (and the stiffnesses of the various lengths of spring where each coil sits) will be like another added mass. - an 'equivalent extra mass'. The end portion of the spring will have more effect than the higher portions.

You could calculate this equivalent mass by assuming that k is the same in both cases. If it goes as I'm suggesting, this equivalent mass would be something less than the actual mass of the spring (can you get a spring and measure its mass?)
The two values do technically agree if you take the error in k into account but the error in k for the first part was like 1.5, calculated using a 'line of worst fit' which wasn't the most accurate thing ever. If the two absolute values were looked at there was a difference of 1.12 between them.

I know it is quite a big difference, it was not the most accurate experiment all together but it was interesting and fun t do nonetheless. Even more so now I am beginning to get an idea of what actually was going on.

Thanks.
 
sophiecentaur said:
The first experiment just shows how metals follow Hooke's Law. k = gΔm/Δx

Right ok I think I get that bit. Since F=kx, k=F/x. And in this case the force is the weight, mg, of the masses? I can see now why the gradient can produce the spring constant, thanks.

sophiecentaur said:
The second shows how the period of oscillation of a simple harmonic oscillator depends upon mass and spring constant.
T (period) = 2∏√(m/k).

In this equation, is the m the mass of the masses attached to the spring, or the mass of the spring itself?

Also, I have seen the equation f=\frac{1}{2\pi}\sqrt{\frac{m}{k}} on the web relating to harmonic oscillators, is this just a different permeation of the one you stated but using the frequency instead of the period?
 
Last edited:
FaraDazed
It is always a good idea to read around a subject as well as asking questions on a Forum. The formula for frequency of a mass on a spring refers to an ideal, massless spring with a mass one end and clamped firmly, at the other.
As Period = 1/Frequency (by definition), either way round is OK and the one you use will depend upon the circumstances.
My comments about the spring mass were applied to a real spring (the one you used) and, if you take the spring mass into account, can sometimes explain the difference between the two measurements of k. If the error is as high as yours, the spring mass is not enough to account for the difference, IMO. Find out the mass of the spring and see for yourself how close you can get by including the spring mass, as I described.
Perhaps my comments have confused you rather than enlightened you -sorry. Later, they may make more sense to you.
Happy reading.
Try this link.
 
sophiecentaur said:
FaraDazed
It is always a good idea to read around a subject as well as asking questions on a Forum. The formula for frequency of a mass on a spring refers to an ideal, massless spring with a mass one end and clamped firmly, at the other.
As Period = 1/Frequency (by definition), either way round is OK and the one you use will depend upon the circumstances.
My comments about the spring mass were applied to a real spring (the one you used) and, if you take the spring mass into account, can sometimes explain the difference between the two measurements of k. If the error is as high as yours, the spring mass is not enough to account for the difference, IMO. Find out the mass of the spring and see for yourself how close you can get by including the spring mass, as I described.
Perhaps my comments have confused you rather than enlightened you -sorry. Later, they may make more sense to you.
Happy reading.
Try this link.

No you have helped a lot, thanks. Thanks for the link, its hard to find reliable info on the web.

Sadly, I can't get access to the same spring we used or even if we had access we would have no way to identify the spring we used.
 
You wouldn't need to identify it as it would only be an estimate. It would be quite acceptable to ask your teacher. Impress him/her!
 

Similar threads

High School Why is my experimental spring constant an order of magnitude off?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Questions about a spring and its principle
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Undergrad Work-Energy Theorem for Moving Block and Spring System?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad Is Hooke's law really not working, or is it me being dummy?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Undergrad How Does Changing Mass and Spring Force Affect Watch Oscillators?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Graduate Visualizing the SHM of 2 blocks attached by a spring
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Need to find the spring constant to achieve Max Velocity
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Undergrad Damped oscillator with changing mass
  • · Replies 131 ·
5
Replies
131
Views
8K
Springs connected to a mass in series?
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
Undergrad Does Reducing Reciprocating Mass in Firearms Affect Recoil?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K