You are on page 1of 5

Analysis

Our 5th experiment is all about hookes law

In the first part of the experiment, the group set a mass of about 0.01 kg for 1st

Trial. Computing for the force exerted by it, weve got 0.098 N.We measured the

displacement of the spring, and the group got it at about 0.014 m. Therefore, dividing the

force by the displacement they measured, the group got an 7 N/m force constant. For four

trials, the average force constant was 6.29 N/m. Graphically, our group got a computed

slope of a line (Force vs Displacement) of about 6.125 N/m.This produced a 2.66 %

difference.

For the second part of the experiment, our group set a mass of about 0.01 kg for

the 1st trial. The force exerted by this then was 0.098 N. Our group measured the springs

displacement due to this force, and weve got 0.09 m. Computing for the force constant,

the group got a 10.89 N/m force constant. For four trials, the average force constant was

10.08 N/m. Using the graphical method, the group got a 9.8 N/m force constant, and this

produced a 2.82 % difference.

In the last part of the experiment, the group determined the work done on the

spring for the two previous parts. Using the formula, W = kx2, the group got 0.068 J

for the first part and 0.042 J for the second part. Using the graph as the reference for

comparison (force vs displacement), the group acquired 0.0135 J for the first part and

0.0082 J for the second part. Amusingly, the group got a 3.63 % difference for the first

part and a 2.8% difference for the second part.


The first part results produced the biggest error percentage among the other trials.

The most probable cause of this was in the measuring process of the displacement. The

group got inefficient in measuring the displacement. Inefficiency occurred due to error in

understanding the computation in the data. The group thought that given force constant

on the two springs will be used as a reference in measuring the force, but they realized

that they would have to compute for it experimentally. Left with the lesser time to work

on the corrections, the group probably got careless in measuring the displacement,

causing a big percentage difference.

These are some of the picture weve taken during our 5th experiment.
Looking at the force vs. displacement graph, we can see that the graph formed is a straight line
with positive. Based from previous discussions, the force constant is the slope of the line. Also,
the area under the graph is also the work done on the spring.

TABLE 1A. Determining the Force Constant of the Spring


TRIAL mass (kg) force (N) displacement (m) force constant (N/m)
1 0.01 0.098 0.014 7
2 0.02 0.196 0.03 6.53
3 0.03 0.294 0.05 5.88
4 0.04 0.392 0.068 5.76
average 6.29
slope of the line 6.125
% difference 2.66

TABLE 1B. Determining the Force Constant of the Spring


TRIAL mass (kg) force (N) displacement (m) force constant (N/m)
1 0.01 0.098 0.09 10.89
2 0.02 0.196 0.019 10.31
3 0.03 0.294 0.03 9.8
4 0.04 0.392 0.042 9.33
average 10.08
slope of the line 9.8
% difference 2.82
TABLE 2. Determining the Work Done on the Spring
average area under the
%
TRIAL final displacement(m) work (Joule)
difference
force constant (N/m) vs. graph
Table 1A 0.068 6.29 0.014 0.0135 3.63
Table 1B 0.042 10.08 0.008 0.0082 2.80

Conclusion

Understanding the physics concept of elasticity is through understanding the

Hookes law, which states that the force applied on any elastic body (given its elastic

limit) is in a direct variation with the measurement of the elongation of the body. This

law was proven in the experiment, and the data acquired agrees with it. The graph was in

a positive-slope line.

For any elastic body, each of them should have unique force constants, which

depends on their properties of elasticity. In the experiment, the first spring had a tight

elasticity while the second one is loose, and they had different force constants. The first

one had an almost 6.29 N/m while the second one was about 10.08 N/m; thus, this proves

the hypothesis.

Despite the fact that the second one had the lower force constant, the work done

by the second spring is higher compared to the first one. This is due to its loosened

elasticity that produces a higher displacement.


For the improvement of this experiment, it would be good to include a part in

which theres a simple introduction of Youngs module of elasticity. It may positively

enhance the effectiveness of the purpose of this experiment and also the productivity of

the performers.