Physics report

Period of a Pendulum

Date performed: 25 August 2020

Report written by Joshua Hardie

1
Purpose of the experiment

To investigate how the period of a pendulum depends on its length. Based on the result, we will calculate an
experimental value for the acceleration of gravity.

Theory and background

We will investigate a mathematical pendulum, i.e. a point mass attached to the end of string length L.

The theoretical formula for the period of this type of pendulum is:

𝐿
𝑇 = 2𝜋√𝑔

In order to linearize the data, we square the period:

4𝜋 2
𝑇2 = ∗𝐿
𝑔

4π2
In a (𝐿, 𝑇 2 )-diagram, we expect to see data follow a straight line through (0,0) with gradient g

Method

The setup used to carry out the experiment involved a string suspended from the ceiling, with a weight W
attached to the bottom. The weight was pulled laterally and upwards so as to give it gravitational potential
energy, and with the string taut, was released. It thus began oscillating back and forth around the anchor point
(to be referred to henceforth as point A) on the ceiling, and a stopwatch (±0.01s), was started when it was at
the highest point of one of its oscillations (to be referred to henceforth as point B). After this point, each full
oscillation was counted, and at the end of the 10th one, the stopwatch was stopped.

T in this experiment was the variable used to describe the time taken for the pendulum to complete one full
oscillation, but measurements were instead taken for 10 oscillations, and promptly divided by 10. L is the
length of the pendulum, which was measured using a ruler as the distance in meters from point A to the entire
system’s center of mass.

2
Fig. 1
Addendum: weight was not circular, but is depicted as such for simplicity’s sake.
The independent variable (length of the pendulum) was changed by modulating the length of the string
attached to the weight, and then measuring from the anchor point to the approximate center of the weight
(±0.1cm). The dependent variable, on the other hand, was simply measured using the method described
earlier.

Another important variable to keep constant was the materials used to create the pendulum. Had we chosen
different materials for the longer pendulums in order to increase their durability, we may have gotten strange
results, due to possible differences in elasticity or other mechanical properties.

The range of the independent variable was more than sufficient to answer the research question definitively.

Data

Initials Length of pendulum Duration of 10 oscillations Period Linearization

L/m 10T / s T/s T2 / s2

BPL 0,273 10,11 1,011 1,02
JAS 0,516 14,62 1,462 2,14
TMS 0,547 14,73 1,473 2,17
KFD 0,768 17,9 1,79 3,20
GNV 0,827 17,72 1,772 3,14
MNJ 0,837 18,24 1,824 3,33
MEK 1,280 22,69 2,269 5,15
JRH 1,615 25,04 2,504 6,27
Fig. 2
3
 Period of pendulum, raw data
3
2.5
Period T / s

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Length L / m

Fig. 3

Period of pendulum, linearized data

10
Period squared T2 / s2

8 y = 3.9066x + 0.0486

6
4
2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Length L / m

Fig. 4

Conclusion

According to the linearized graph, figure 4, we see that all the points fall on a straight line through (0,0), at least
if uncertainties are taken into account. According to the formula in the theory section, our data therefore
confirms the theory.

The gradient of the proportionality is (according to the theory)

4𝜋 2
= 3.9066 s2 m−1
𝑔

From this we calculate an experimental value for the acceleration of gravity:

4
 4𝜋 2
𝑔= = 10.1 𝑚𝑠 −2
3.9066 𝑚𝑠 −2
10.1−9.82
As the acceleration of gravity in Denmark is 9.82ms−2 , the percentage error is thus = 0.0285 ≐ 3 %
9.82

Discussion and evaluation

There were many uncertainties in this experiment, and with either superior measuring equipment, tools, or
conditions, an increase in precision would certainly be observed.

The major points for possible error in the experiment were down to the limited nature of human sense. Most
notably, we chose to visually determine when to start and stop the stopwatch. Human reaction time can be
very large and unpredictable, and the human brain is designed neither for precision nor pragmatism. As the
average human reaction time for visual stimulus is a full 0.25 seconds for both starting and stopping the
stopwatch, a total uncertainty of 0.05 seconds per oscillation could be expected. However, when tracking an
object, the human reaction time can be far more precise, and thus this estimate is likely a bit high. Using a
figure of 0.1 seconds would probably be more reasonable.

A related uncertainty in our results stemmed from our lackluster measuring methodology, which relied our
ability to use standard, linear measuring tape to measure an irregularly shaped object to an estimated point.
Our visual perception is also very limited in this regard, and can often distort the appearance of objects,
exacerbating the problem of inaccurate measurement.

Finally, the most significant point of uncertainty would be in the environment itself being anything but a
vacuum. Unfortunately, the accuracy of all our measurements was hindered by air resistance, and it is very
likely that the properties of the air would have varied across the 8 different environments in which data was
measured (indoor/outdoor for example). Due to the randomly selected angles at which the pendulum was
released, this uncertainty was impossible to account for mathematically.

Documenting the experiments in video would have eliminated most of the human factor of our experiment,
and since most modern cameras can capture a very precise number of frames per second, we could calculate
the period with extreme accuracy by seeking out the exact frame during which the pendulum changes
direction.

Measurement accuracy could be vastly improved if we had discovered in advance the mass and mass
distribution information about the weight and string it was attached to. If we had done so, we could
mathematically calculate L and once again, the accuracy of our human senses wouldn’t have to be a factor.

5
As for air resistance, the most obvious solution to this uncertainty would be to conduct the experiments again
in a vacuum chamber, but, in the interest of practicality, one could still make improvements without one. If the
angle at which the pendulum was released was consistently low, and the weight used was tuned for better
aerodynamics, the effects of air resistance could be made negligible, and thus far more precise results could be
expected.