Need Reliable Data for Young's Modulus Graph?

GaussModulus
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I was not in for the Young's Modulus of copper wire experiment, so a friend gave me their data. It seems very wrong and the graph will in no way give proportionality.


The Attempt at a Solution


Does anyone have data or results from old school days or anything at all that will help me? I just need to draw a graph and come up with some conclusive statements...It's due in tomorrow. I've been ill so I couldn't do it for those who want to accuse me of leaving it too late. I would really just appreciate load and extension values so I can do something quick...

Something like this, but for say 100g to 1300g, not that big.

Mass (kg) Extension (mm)
5 0•2
10 0•5
15 0•8
20 1•0
22•5 1•5
25 1•3
27•5 1•4


Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This data from your friend doesn't seem TOO bad... in general, as more mass is added the extension lengthens. Did you plot this data (maybe even with error bars)? For Young's modulus you'd be looking for a linear relationship (Young's modulus will relate to the slope in some manner... it depends on how you plot your data). I think there's only one value that seems terribly off, and perhaps you could exclude that point.
 
This isn't my friends...this is something i got off the internet, but unfortunately the only one i could find, and the masses used are too big. My friend's one had 0 0 0 0 for the first 5 loads' extensions!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top