Measuring the period of SHM using sound

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a student's experimental write-up for measuring the period of a simple pendulum using sound. The student aims to enhance the experiment by employing a sound source on the pendulum and measuring frequency changes via the Doppler effect for improved accuracy. However, concerns are raised about the feasibility of this method, as the pendulum's speed is too low to detect significant frequency shifts. Suggestions include using a more conventional approach with a laser and light sensor for timing or utilizing software like Garage Band for sound analysis. Overall, while the innovative idea is commendable, practical limitations may hinder its success.
Seanywil
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello! First time posting here. I'm studying the IB and need to complete my required experimental write-up.
I am looking to replicate the well-known experiment that finds the value of g by investigating the relationship between period and length of string for a simple pendulum.

1. Homework Statement

I am required to put a "twist" on my experiment in order to surprise the examiner by my understanding of physics. I have an idea, but cannot find relevant information on the internet about whether it will work.

Homework Equations


I will be using the length-period equation of a simple pendulum: T = 2pi sqrt(l/g).

The Attempt at a Solution


My idea is to measure the period of the motion more accurately using digital means, rather than the traditional stopwatch. To my understanding this should provide me with a lower absolute uncertainty.

I seek to measure the period by having a constant sound-producing source as the fixed mass on the pendulum and placing a microphone underneath the middle of the SHM (where the object's speed is greatest). I then want to somehow map the change in frequency (according to the Doppler effect) digitally and measure the time difference between each second maximum frequency to determine the period.

I have a few questions:
1) What sort of software is available for this?
2) Is my experimental setup too dodgy? Will it impair the accuracy of my measurements?
--- (My pendulum is two chairs and a broom between them as the experiment will be done at home)

3) Should I take the average of 10 periods, or just the first one? And why?

4) Any further comments on what I should do, and if this will even work will be appreciated. :)

Thanks a lot!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I was with you until you said "two chairs and a broom". That kind of put a scale on the sophistication of the experiment for me. It will be tough to measure anything brilliantly accurately with that quality of equipment, but I suppose you work with what you have.

As for coming up with something original to surprise the examiner, I love your idea of using a source on the pendulum and using the Doppler shift. I am sure that is exactly the sort of out of the box clever twist that would please him. Unfortunately I'm not sure it wil work. The Doppler shift depends on the speed compared to the speed of sound. Your pendulum will not be moving even 1% of the speed of sound, so you would need to measure Doppler shifts in the single Hz range. The fundamental problem with that is it takes a full second of listening to see that the frequency has changed by 1 Hz. Not good for timing.

You could have a quiet source pass close to the microphone and note the peak of the amplitude.

Of course the less clever but more usual approach is a laser and a light sensor. Then you time when the light interrupts the beam.

Regarding software for analyzing sound, it sounds like you are on a shoe string budget, so what might be free? If you or anyone you know has a Mac, they come with Garage Band which let's you record a track and then look at the time plot. That would be perfect for the amplitude measurement I suggested.

Other general comments: for accuracy you will want the bob to be much heavier than the string, and keep the arc of the swing short so that the small angle approximation is very good.
 
  • Like
Likes Seanywil
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