Percent change in tension to achieve specified change in frequency

AI Thread Summary
To adjust the frequency of a guitar string from 224 Hz to the desired 219 Hz, a calculation for the percentage change in tension is necessary. The formula used is based on the relationship between tension and frequency, leading to the equation %change in Tension = 100 * [1 - (219/224)^2]. The initial calculation yielded a 4.41% change, but this was incorrect due to a misunderstanding of the negative sign in the formula. The correct approach requires recognizing that the tension must decrease, confirming the need for a negative percentage change. Properly addressing the sign in the calculation is crucial for arriving at the correct answer.
Jennifer_ea
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
% change in tension to achieve specified change in frequency

Homework Statement


A particular guitar string is supposed to vibrate at 219 Hz, but it is measured to actually vibrate at 224 Hz. By what percentage should the tension in the string be changed to get the frequency to the correct value?

Homework Equations


v=f(lambda)=sqrt(tension/mu)

Rearranged and combined to give:
(T1/T2) = (F1/F2)^2

The Attempt at a Solution


This seemed like it should be a very simple problem, I must be doing something basic wrong.

Subbing in the values and changing for %:
%change in Tension = 100 * [1 - (219/224)^2]
= 4.41

However this is shown wrong by the system. I also tried putting in 0.0441 just incase, but no dice. I can't think of any other way to approach this.

Thanks for any help you can give!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hi Jennifer_ea! Welcome to PF! :smile:

(have a lambda: λ and a mu: µ and a square-root: √ and try using the X2 tag just above the Reply box :wink:)
Jennifer_ea said:
v=f(lambda)=sqrt(tension/mu)

Subbing in the values and changing for %:
%change in Tension = 100 * [1 - (219/224)^2]
= 4.41

Why the "1 - " ? :wink:
 


Oops, didn't notice that option!

Yup, I knew this would be a face palmer. When doing the logic out I knew it had to decrease but somehow deemed the negative unwarranted.

Thanks a million!
 
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