SPRING CONSTANT- simple harmonic motion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around measuring the spring constant in a damped oscillation experiment using a mass held between two springs. The initial method of measuring the spring constant by hanging masses from a single vertical spring is deemed valid, but the user is confused about transitioning to a setup involving two springs. The effective spring constant for two springs in parallel is greater than that of each individual spring, and the user is encouraged to apply Hooke's law to derive it. The conversation emphasizes that adding a pulley is unnecessary and complicates the situation. Ultimately, understanding the relationship between the individual spring constants and their configuration is key to solving the problem.
linyen416
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
I'm investigating damped oscillations using a mass held between two springs.
In the experiment, I measured the spring constant using a method which now doesn't make sense.

I measured it by hanging masses from ONE vertical spring and graphing the force exerted by spring (mass times 9.8) against the elongation of spring

I think that's wrong. I think I should have used a pulley or something like this:
the glider is held between two springs. Record its equilibrium
position.
2. Attach a piece of audio tape to the glider and lay it across the “air
pulley” with a small mass suspended on the end of the tape.
3. Measure the displacement of the glider from equilibrium for 4
different hanging masses.
4. Graph the weight of the hanging mass (y axis) vs. the measured
displacement.

But I don't even understand how this method works. What does it mean by attaching a piece of tape to the glider and laying it across the 'air pulley'?

My second and main concern is that because I cannot redo the experiment, I have to somehow use the k values that I've measured using the masses hanging on the single spring. How can I fix the k values to get one that will equal the k value resulting from two springs, one on each side of the mass?

URGENT!
any input appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
linyen416 said:
I measured it by hanging masses from ONE vertical spring and graphing the force exerted by spring (mass times 9.8) against the elongation of spring
That's a perfectly fine way to measure the spring constant. I assume you measured the spring constant of each spring?
My second and main concern is that because I cannot redo the experiment, I have to somehow use the k values that I've measured using the masses hanging on the single spring. How can I fix the k values to get one that will equal the k value resulting from two springs, one on each side of the mass?
How do you find the effective spring constant of the two springs together? Hint: With a spring attached to each end, is the effective spring constant greater or less than each individual spring constant?

To figure that out, imagine the mass between both springs in equilibrium. Pull it a distance X to one side. What net force (due to both springs) acts on the mass? Set that net force equal to KX, where K is the effective spring constant.
 
I think I know what you're saying Doc. If you put two springs in seires then the effective spring constant is k times two

But my situation is where the mass is held BETWEEN the two springs.
 
So I think one way to get the effective spring constant is to use a pulley somehow.
 
unless there's an equation that relates the individual spring constants to the effective spring constant when the mass is held between two identical springs
 
linyen416 said:
I think I know what you're saying Doc. If you put two springs in seires then the effective spring constant is k times two
You have it backwards.
But my situation is where the mass is held BETWEEN the two springs.
I know. :wink:
linyen416 said:
So I think one way to get the effective spring constant is to use a pulley somehow.
Huh? No need to complicate things by adding a pulley to the mix.

The way to get the effective spring constant is to do what I said in my last post. (You'll have to apply Hooke's law.)
linyen416 said:
unless there's an equation that relates the individual spring constants to the effective spring constant when the mass is held between two identical springs
Of course there is. But rather than look for such an equation in a book (you might get lucky!), just figure it out for yourself by doing what I suggested.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top