Spring Constant from Best Fit Line - sqrt(m) versus T

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the spring constant (k) from a plot of the period (T) versus the square root of mass (√m) using a specific equation related to oscillatory motion. Participants are analyzing data collected from an inertial balance experiment, where periods and masses are measured to derive k.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the correct interpretation of mass units and the implications for the calculated spring constant. There are questions about the data values used in the plot and the relationship between T and √m. Some participants suggest alternative plotting methods to verify the linearity of the data.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the data and questioning the validity of the results. Some guidance has been offered regarding the plotting methods and the expected relationship between variables, but no consensus has been reached on the correct approach or values.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a lab assignment, which includes specific measurements and the goal of determining an unknown mass. There is uncertainty regarding the unit conversions and the expected behavior of the spring constant based on the data collected.

icefall5
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Construct a plot of T versus [itex]\sqrt{m}[/itex]. Fit a straight line through your data and use Eq. (3.2.3) to obtain the spring constant k from the slope, as well as an uncertainty estimate for k.

T is the period of an inertial balance with various masses of mass m. Periods are measured in seconds -- we measured 10 oscillations and divided by 10. Masses are measured in grams; mass was given for each mass.

Homework Equations


Eq. (3.2.3): [itex]T = 2 \pi \sqrt{\frac{m}{k}}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


Solving this equation for k gives [itex]\sqrt{k} = \frac{2\pi \sqrt{m}}{T}[/itex]. I graphed [itex]\sqrt{m}[/itex] on the y-axis, because with rise over run for the slope this makes sense. Then doing 2*pi times that number and then squaring that number gave me a spring constant of 167207, which is incredibly off (the equation for my trendline, done using Excel, is [itex]\sqrt{m} = 65.08T - 11.779[/itex]).

What am I missing? Thank you!
 

Attachments

  • Graph-Data.png
    Graph-Data.png
    12.6 KB · Views: 2,348
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
[strike]After tons upon tons upon tons of Googling, I determined that the spring constant is correct if the input mass is given in kg, not g. Dividing by 1000 gives roughly 167, which seems much more correct. Woohoo![/strike]

Not woohoo. 167 is still incredibly high for the spring constant. The ultimate goal of the lab is to determine the mass of an unknown mass, and this spring constant would make the mass 88 kg. I know that the mass was between 300 and 500 g.
 
Last edited:
What are your values? I mean, which value is mass and which is T? For example, what is 10 in the Excel table? A mass in grams, a period in seconds or the time for 10 periods?
 
Sorry for not specifying this initially. The top row is the values on the x-axis: the period T in seconds. The bottom row is the values on the y-axis: [itex]\sqrt{m}[/itex] in g. The masses were 100 g, 200 g, 300 g, 400 g, and 500g.
 
icefall5 said:
[strike]After tons upon tons upon tons of Googling, I determined that the spring constant is correct if the input mass is given in kg, not g. Dividing by 1000 gives roughly 167, which seems much more correct. Woohoo![/strike]

Not woohoo. 167 is still incredibly high for the spring constant. The ultimate goal of the lab is to determine the mass of an unknown mass, and this spring constant would make the mass 88 kg. I know that the mass was between 300 and 500 g.
167 Newtons/meter ≈ 0.95 lb/in .
 
I looked at your data and is not really following the pendulum formula with a constant k.
k seem to double when going from the small mass to the large one.
No surprise that what you get from the linear fit does not make sense.

If you plot 1/(4pi^2T^2) versus 1/m (the slope should be k) you can see that the points are not on a straight line.
 
the original statement asks you to plot T against √m.
This should give a straight line through the origin with gradient = 2π/√k.
Finding k should then be straight forward
 
Did you measure the spring constant directly?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
8K
Replies
24
Views
4K