How Do I Express the Spring Constant with Significant Figures?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mircobot
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The spring constant is calculated as 0.1368 N/cm with an uncertainty of 5x10^-4, which can be expressed as k = 0.1368 +/- 0.0005 N/cm. There are differing opinions on the best way to present this value, with some suggesting scientific notation for clarity. The graph from the lab shows two linear relationships in the Force vs. Delta X data, with a sudden change in slope that is not related to the nylon sheath's strength. The discussion emphasizes the importance of adhering to lab standards while also considering clarity in reporting results. Proper expression of the spring constant is crucial for accurate scientific communication.
mircobot
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I know this seem pretty ridiculous to ask to such a large forum, but for my physics lab I have found a spring constant to have a value of 0.1368 N/cm with an uncertainty of 5x10^-4. How do I express the spring constant?

So far I think it is (13.68 +/- 0.05)x10^-2 N/cm but the scientific notation is wrong on the 0.1368 value.

Also, on a side note. For my lab I made a graph Force vs Delta X of Spring. We used a nylon sheath and put mass on the end of it and recorded the distance stretched. The graph shows two linear relationships. One linear slope that starts up with a very small slop, and then suddenly jerks to the right to another linear relationship with a larger slope. My professor has already told me that it has nothing to do with the yield or ultimate strength of the nylon sheath. Any ideas to help me out?

Thanks for your time.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think there is anything wrong with simply writing k = 0.1368 +/- .0005 N/cm. That's how I would personally write it, but I know how labs can be pretty strict on these sorts of procedures.
 
probably 1.368 (+/- 0.005)x10^-1 but i would prefer evict's as clearer
 
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