Designing a Force Scale Test w/ Rubber Bands

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the best method to define a force scale using rubber bands, with Joe advocating for a single rubber band stretched incrementally to measure force, while Larry argues for using multiple rubber bands in parallel to ensure accuracy due to potential non-linearity. Joe's approach simplifies the measurement process, but Larry raises concerns about the rubber band's behavior at different stretch levels. A hint referencing Hooke's Law suggests that the force exerted by the rubber band is independent of mass, which only affects acceleration calculations. The debate highlights the importance of understanding the properties of rubber bands in force measurement. Ultimately, the choice of method could significantly impact the accuracy of the force scale test.
UrbanXrisis
Messages
1,192
Reaction score
1
Two physics students are having a debate about the best way to define a force scale using rubber bands. Each one is trying to convince you to do it their way. They have the following apparatus to use in tests:

A bunch of identical small rubber bands
10N spring scale
meter stick

Joe argues that: “It’s so much easier to use one rubber band to define a force scale than many. All I have to do is to stretch the rubber band by 1 cm to get one unit of force, then by 2 cn to get two units of force, and then by 3 cm to get three units of force and so on.”

Larry counters: “We do not know whether or not rubber band are linear. Maybe the force the rubber band exerts at 3 cm is not really three times tan the force it exerts at 1 cm. I think it is absolutely necessary to use many identical looking rubber bands in parallel with each other to define a force.”

How could I design a test using the same apparatus Joe and Larry have to prove who is right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sounds like homework to me O_O...wrong section.

A hint is to look up Hookes law.
 
in the equation F=kx...why doesn't mass come into play?
 
UrbanXrisis said:
in the equation F=kx...why doesn't mass come into play?

Why should it? The force is due completely to the rubber band. The rubber band doesn't care if it is pulling a 1 gram mass or a 10000 kg mass- it exerts the same force.

Of course, when you are calculating the acceleration due to that force, THEN mass comes into play.
 
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 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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