Dynamics of Machinery – MEK 453/HH Rev.

01-2023

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA

KOLEJ KEJURUTERAAN-PENGAJIAN KEJURUTERAAN MEKANIKAL

Program : Bachelor of Mechatronics Engineering Technology with Honours (CEEM242)

Course : Dynamics of Machinery
Code : MEK 453
Lecturer : Hafizan Hashim
Group : 3
MEK 453 – Assignment

TITLE : PHYSICAL PENDULUM

No NAME STUDENT ID SIGNATURE

1 MUHAMMAD ARIF IZUDDIN BIN SHAMSUL 2023503205

2 MUHAMMAD AMMAR BIN AMRAN 2023126741

3 MUHAMMAD AMIR HAKIM BIN ABDULLAH 2023503181

4 MUHAMMAD AKIL BIN AMBERIN 2022917509

5 MUHAMMAD ADIB HAIKAL BIN ISHAK 2023367849

REPORT SUBMISSION : 15/12/2023

*By signing above, you attest that you have contributed to this submission and confirm that all work you have contributed to this
submission is your own work. Any suspicion of copying or plagiarism in this work will result in an investigation of academic misconduct
and may result in a “0” on the work, an “F” in the course, or possibly more severe penalties.

Marking Scheme
No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
 TABLE OF CONTENT

TITLE PAGE
ABSTRACT
2
INTRODUCTION
3
THEORY
4
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

• Apparatus
5-7
• Experimental procedure

TABLE OF RESULT

• Calculation
8-14

DISCUSSION
14-18

CONCLUSION 18-21

REFERENCE 22
 ABSTRACT

The simple pendulum is another mechanical system that moves in an

oscillatory motion. It consists of a point mass ‘m’ suspended by means of light
inextensible string of length L from a fixed support. The goal of this experiment
was to utilise oscillation to determine the mass moment of inertia at the
suspension points (IO1 and IO2) as well as the centre of gravity (IG). Begin the
experiment by determining the dimensions of the wooden pendulum. The
dimension was chosen for calculating purposes. The vee supports were
employed in this experiment because we needed a place to suspend the
wooden pendulum. When we set the beginning angle of the wooden pendulum
to 15 degrees, we may begin the experiment. It is then let to oscillate owing to
gravity force, and a periodic duration of 10 seconds is recorded using a timer.
We will take an average of three time periods for each suspension point. After
the experiment, the theory may be utilised to calculate the values of IG and IO.
1.0 INTRODUCTION

A pendulum is a contrivance comprising of a mass suspended from a fulcrum, enabling

it to oscillate unrestrictedly. When a pendulum is displaced sideways from its resting,
equilibrium position, it is subject to a restoring force due to gravity that will accelerate
it back toward the equilibrium position [1]. The pendulum's mass experiences a
restoring force that induces oscillation, causing it to swing to and fro around the
equilibrium point. The duration required for a full cycle, encompassing both a left swing
and a right swing, is referred to as the period. The period depends on the length of the
pendulum and also to a slight degree on the amplitude, the width of the pendulum’s
swing .

Pendulums were employed for timekeeping and served as the most precise
timekeeping technology worldwide until the 1930s. The pendulum clock invented by
Christiaan Huygens in 1656 became the world’s standard timekeeper, used in homes
and offices for 270 years, and achieved accuracy of about one second per year before
it was superseded as a time standard by the quartz clock in the 1930s . Pendulums
find application in scientific instruments like accelerometers and seismometers.
Historically they were used as gravimeters to measure the acceleration of gravity in
geo-physical surveys, and even as a standard of length

The mass moment of inertia of a pendulum can be approximated by measuring its

oscillation at two points: the gravitational centre (Ig) and the suspension point (Io).
Theoretical calculations of moments of inertia can be derived using a formula that is
dependent on the geometry of the object. The equation Ig=mr^2 represents the
moment of inertia at the centre of gravity for a pendulum. In this equation, m represents
the mass of the pendulum and r is a vector that is perpendicular to the force and points
from the force to the axis of rotation. The parallel axis theorem is utilised to calculate
the mass moment of inertia at the suspension point, Io. Io=Ig+md^2, where d is the
distance from the center of the portion to the center of the profile, is the parallel axis
theorem
2.0 THEORY

A physical pendulum consists of a rigid body that undergoes fixed axis rotation
about a fixed point S

Figure 2.1: Physical pendulum

The gravitational force acts at the center of mass of the physical pendulum. Denote the
distance of the center of mass to the pivot point S by rcm. The torque analysis is nearly
identical to the simple pendulum. The torque about the pivot point S is given by:

τS=rS×mg=lr×mg(cosθr^−sinθθ^)=−lmgsinθk^

Following the same steps that led from Equation (24.1.1) to Equation (24.1.4), the
rotational equation for the physical pendulum is:

−mglsinθ=ISdt2d2θ

where IS is the moment of inertia about the pivot point S. As with the simple pendulum,
for small angles (sinθ≈θ), Equation above reduces to the simple harmonic oscillator
equation:

dt2d2θ=−ISθmgl

The equation for the angle θ(t) is given by:

θ(t)=Acos(ω0t)+Bsin(ω0t)

where the angular frequency is given by:

ω0=ISmgl(physical pendulum)

and the period is:

T=ω02π=2πmglrcmIS(physical pendulu
3.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

3.1 Flow Chart

Figure 3.1: General Flow Chart of The Experiment

We begin the experiment by taking a pendulum measurement. This is an important

step since we need the measurement to calculate the mass moment moment of inertia. The
pendulum is then hung on the vee support to begin collecting data. The pendulum is kept at
a 10 degree angle before being let go to oscillate owing to gravitational force. Finally, we watch
and record the oscillation.
 3.2 List of Apparatus

Table 3.1: List of Apparatus

Apparatus Definition

Wooden Pendulum The body of a wooden pendulum is suspended

from a fixed location, allowing it to swing back
and forth under the effect of gravity.

Vee and Cylinder Support The pendulum is supported by a vee and a

cylinder..

Ruler and Protector The ruler is used to measure the dimensions of

the wooden pendulum, while the protector is
used to calculate the angle of the pendulum
before release.
Stopwatch Stopwatch is used to record the time taken for
the pendulum to reach 10 oscillations.

Frame Frame is used to conduct the experiment

thoroughly.

3.3 Procedure

1. The dimensions (thickness, width, length and diameter) of the pendulum were
taken using a ruler for calculation purposes.
2. The pendulum was hung on one end to Vee and cylinder support.
3. The pendulum was then displaced to a 10-degree angle from its initial
position.
4. The wooden pendulum was then released to let it oscillate due to gravitational
force.
5. Using a stopwatch, the periodic time of 10 oscillations were recorded.
6. The average of the three periods was calculated for each suspension point.
4.0 RESULTS

4.1 Table Result

4.1.1 Point A

POINT ANGLE (°) OSCILLATION TIME (s)

1 10 10 14.19

2 10 10 14.25

3 10 10 14.44

4 10 10 14.31

5 10 10 14.32

6 10 10 14.44

4.1.2 Point B

POINT ANGLE (°) OSCILLATION TIME (s)

1 10 10 14.4
2 10 10 14.25
3 10 10 14.41
4 10 10 13.94
5 10 10 13.34
6 10 10 14.38
4.2 Sample Calculation

4.2.1 Oscillation at A

Left Right

𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = 14.33 s 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = 14.31 s

14.33 14.31
= =
10 10
= 1.433 s = 1.431 s

Table 3: Oscillation At A
4.2.2 Oscillation at B

Left Right

𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = 14.19 s 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = 14.25 s

14.19 14.23
= =
10 10
= 1.419 s = 1.425 s

Table 4: Oscillation At B

4.2.3 Length Point A

Left (1) Right (2)

𝐿 1,𝐴 𝐿 2,𝐴
1.433 = 2π√ 1.431 = 2π√
9.81 9.81
𝐿1,𝐴 = 0.5103 m 𝐿2,𝐴 = 0.5088 m

Table 5: Length Point A

4.2.4 Length Point B

Left (1) Right( 2)

𝐿 1,𝐵 𝐿 2,𝐵
1.419 = 2π√ 9.81 1.425 = 2π√ 9.81
𝐿1,𝐵 = 0.5435 m 𝐿2,𝐵 = 0.5046 m

Table 6: Length Point B

 4.2.5 Radius Point A

Left (1) Right (2)

𝑅1,𝐴 = 0.7 (0.5046 − 0.7)

𝑅2,𝐴 =
0.7 (0.5435 − 0.7) 0.5088 + 0.5046− 2(0.7)
0.5103 + 0.5435− 2(0.7) = 0.3538 m
= 0.3164 m

Table 7: Radius Point A

4.2.6 Radius Point B

Left (1) Right (2)

0.7 (0.5103 − 0.7) 0.7 (0.5088 − 0.7)
𝑅1,𝐵 = 𝑅2,𝐵 =
0.5103 + 0.5435− 2(0.7) 0.5088 + 0.5046− 2(0.7)
= 0.3836 m = 0.3462 m

Table 8: Radius Point B

4.2.7 Mass Moment Of Inertia, 𝐼𝑜

Point A Point B
Left Left
𝐼𝑜 𝐼𝑜
1.433 = 2π√(0.6)(9.81)(0.3164) 1.419 = 2π√(0.6)(9.81)(0.3836)
𝐼𝑜 = 0.0969 𝑘𝑔𝑚2 𝐼𝑜 = 0.1152 𝑘𝑔𝑚2

Right Right
𝐼𝑜 𝐼𝑜
1.431 = 2π√(0.6)(9.81)(0.3538) 1.425 = 2π√(0.6)(9.81)(0.3462)
𝐼𝑜 = 0.1080 𝑘𝑔𝑚2 𝐼𝑜 = 0.1048 𝑘𝑔𝑚2

Table 9: Mass Moment Of Inertia, 𝐼𝑜

 4.2.8 Mass Moment Of Inertia, 𝐼𝐺

Point A Point B
Left Left

𝐼𝐺 = (0.6 × 0.3164)(0.5103 − 0.3164) 𝐼𝐺 = (0.6 × 0.3836)(0.5435 − 0.3836)

𝐼𝐺 = 0.0368 𝑘𝑔𝑚 2 𝐼𝐺 = 0.0357 𝑘𝑔𝑚2

Right Right

𝐼𝐺 = (0.6 × 0.3538)(0.5088 − 0.3538) 𝐼𝐺 = (0.6 × 0.3562)(0.5046 − 0.3562)

𝐼𝐺 = 0.0329 𝑘𝑔𝑚 2 𝐼𝐺 = 0.0317 𝑘𝑔𝑚2

Table 10: Mass Moment Of Inertia, 𝐼𝐺

4.3 Theoretical Calculation

Figure 4.3.1 : All Component

4.3.1 Volume In Every Component, (𝑚3 )

Component 1 (𝑣1 ) Component 2 (𝑣2 ) Component 3 (𝑣2 )

ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑥 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑥 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ π𝑟 2 ℎ ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑥 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑥 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ

= π(0.0152 )(0.01)
= 0.8 𝑥 0.08 𝑥 0.01 = 7.07 𝑥 10−6 = 0.45 𝑥 0.01 𝑥 0.01
= 6.4 𝑥 10−4 = 4.95 𝑥 10−5

Table 11 : Volume In Every Component

 4.3.2 Density, 𝜌𝑇
𝑚
𝜌𝑇 = 𝑉 𝑇
𝑇
0.6
𝜌𝑇 =
(6.4 𝑥 10−4 − 7.07 𝑥 10−6 − 4.95 𝑥 10−5 )
𝜌𝑇 = 1028.40 𝑘𝑔𝑚3

4.3.3 Mass In Every Component, (kg)

Component 1 (𝑚1 ) Component 2 (𝑚2 ) Component 3 (𝑚2 )

𝑚1 = (1028.40 x 6.4 𝑥 10−4 ) 𝑚2 = (1028.40 x 7.07 𝑥 10−6 ) 𝑚3 = (1028.40 x 4.95 𝑥 10−5 )
= 0.658 kg = 7.271 𝑥 10−3 kg = 0.051 kg

Table 12 : Mass In Every Component, (kg)

4.3.4 Centroid A

Component A (𝑚2 ) 𝑦(𝑚 ) 𝑦 𝐴(𝑚3 )

1 = (0.8)(0.08) 0.4 = (0.064)(0.4)
= 0.064 = 0.0256
2 = π(0.0152 ) 0.78 = (7.068 𝑥 10−4 )(0.78)
= 7.068 𝑥 10−4 = 5.513 𝑥 10−4
3 = (0.45) (0.01) 0.555 = (4.5 𝑥 10−3 )(0.555)
= 4.5 𝑥 10−3 = 2.498 𝑥 10−3
𝛴 𝐴 = 0.0692068 𝛴 𝑦𝐴 = 0.0286493

Table 13 : Centroid A

4.3.5 Centroid B

Component A (𝑚2 ) 𝑦(𝑚 ) 𝑦𝐴(𝑚3 )

1 = (0.8)(0.08) 0.4 = (0.064)(0.4)

= 0.064 = 0.0256

2 = π(0.0152 ) 0.065 = (7.068 𝑥 10−4 )(0.065)

= 7.068 𝑥 10−4 = 4.594 𝑥 10−5

3 = (0.45) (0.01) 0.555 = (4.5 𝑥 10−3 )(0.555)

= 4.5 𝑥 10−3 = 2.498 𝑥 10−3

𝛴 𝐴 = 0.0692068 𝛴 𝑦𝐴 = 0.0281439
Table 14 : Centroid B
 4.3.6 Moment of inertia in every component (Point A)

Component 1 Component 2 Component 3

1 2 1 1
𝐼 = (0.658)(0.8) + 𝐼 = (7.271 𝑥 10−3 )(0.015) 2
𝐼 = (0.051)(0.45) 2
+
12 12 12
2 −3 2
(0.658)(0.4140 - 0.4) + (7.271 𝑥 10 )(0.78 - (0.051)(0.4140 - 0.555)
0.4140) 2
𝐼 = 0.03522 𝑘𝑔𝑚2 𝐼 = 9.74130 𝑥 10−4 𝑘𝑔𝑚2 𝐼 = 1.8746 𝑥 10−3 𝑘𝑔𝑚2

Table 15 : Moment of inertia in every component (Point A)

4.3.6 Moment of inertia in every component (Point B)

Component 1 Component 2 Component 3

1 2 1 1
𝐼 = (0.658)(0.8) + 𝐼 = (7.271 𝑥 10−3 )(0.015) 2
𝐼 = (0.051)(0.45) 2
+
12 12 12
2 −3 2
(0.658)(0.4067 - 0.4) + (7.271 𝑥 10 )(0.065 - (0.051)(0.4067 - 0.555)
0.4067) 2
𝐼 = 0.03512 𝑘𝑔𝑚2 𝐼 = 8.4909 𝑥 10−4 𝑘𝑔𝑚2 𝐼 = 1.9823 𝑥 10−3 𝑘𝑔𝑚2

Table 16 : Moment of inertia in every component(Point B)

4.3.7 Total Moment Of Inertia

Point A Point B

𝐼𝐺,𝐴 = 𝐼1 − 𝐼2 − 𝐼3 𝐼𝐺,𝐵 = 𝐼1 − 𝐼2 − 𝐼3
𝐼0,𝐴 = 𝐼𝐺,𝐴 + 𝑚𝑑 2 𝐼0,𝐵 = 𝐼𝐺,𝐴 + 𝑚𝑑2
𝐼0,𝐴 = 0.1451 𝑘𝑔𝑚2 𝐼0,𝐵 = 0.1411 𝑘𝑔𝑚2

Table 17 : Total Moment Of Inertia

4.3.8 Percentage Error at Point A and B

 Experimental Percentage Error
2
Moment Of Inertia Theoretical value (𝑘𝑔𝑚 ) (%)
(𝑘𝑔𝑚2 ) (𝑘𝑔𝑚2 )
Left Right Left Right

𝐼𝑜,𝐴 0.1451 0.0969 0.108 49.74 34.35

𝐼𝐺,𝐴 0.0323 0.0368 0.0329 12.22 1.82

𝐼𝑜,𝐵 0.1411 0.1152 0.1048 22.65 34.63

𝐼𝐺,𝐵 0.03229 0.0357 0.0317 9.55 1.86

Table 18 : Percentage Error at Point A and B

DISCUSSION

NAME: MUHAMMAD ARIF IZUDDIN BIN SHAMSUL

STUDENT ID: 2023503205

Physical pendulum studies will be conducted to examine what determines the period
for a pendulum rotating about any axis. Particularly, this study looked at the center of
oscillation of the pendulum, and the effect of its circular cross-sectional
diameter. These parameters may be changed and monitored for changes in periodic
time of the swing to verify models that explain their mathematical linkages.

This research suggests, point A’s .03522 kgm2 moment of inertia, exceeds point
B’s.03512 kgm2 moment of inertia. The volume of Io is 0.1451 kg/m2 at A and 0.1411
kg/m2 at B. Io’s theoretical density is 0.1451 kg/m2 at A whilst Ig’s mass is From point
A to point B, there are values of 0.1411 kg/m2 (Io) and 0.03229 kg/m2 (Ig). These
conclusions are derived due to the fact that point A is located further away from the
centre of gravity to point B. With increases in the distance between the part’s centre
and that of its centre of gravity, moment of inertia also increase. Moments of inertia at
A and B points are not equal, though. The error is more than 10% stated in
percentage. The experimental mass moment of inertia value being close to the
expected mass moment of inertia value proves that the experimental mass moment of
inertia is acceptable. This experiment being carried out by a person will definitely see
some errors in the reading as well as the method.

Inquiry-based methods can be more effective for understanding significant physics

behind rotating systems. This dynamics study is validated by comparing its results with
the experimental data and Lagrange’s equations. This basic technology leads further
investigation for detailed knowledge towards increasingly complex spinning entities in
scientific and engineering sectors.

NAME: MUHAMMAD AMMAR BIN AMRAN

STUDENT ID: 2023126741

As a consequence of my experiment, I discovered that there is a temporal difference

even when the oscillation and angle are both equal. This is due to an inaccuracy
caused by the error of setting the scale to 10 and the precision of counting the time
before the pendulum travels. Furthermore, in order to get the value of the moment of
inertia for IG and Io, we must first compute the average time for each location. The
oscillation values for points A and B are 1.433 s and 1.431 s, respectively.

After calculating, the length of point A is 0.5103m and 0.5088m, while the length of
point B is 0.5435 m and 0.5046 m. The length value will then be used to calculate the
radius for each point. The values discovered for point A are 0.3164 m and 0.3538 m,
while the values discovered for point B are 0.3836 m and 0.3462 m. Then we may
utilise the aforementioned number to calculate our aim, which is the moment of inertia
for IG and Io.

And after computing the Io, the values for points A and B are 0.0969 and 0.1080,
respectively. And the IG values for points A and B are 0.0368 and 0.0329, respectively.
We compared the experimental and theoretical results after obtaining the correct
value. And the findings revealed numerous percentage mistakes, as shown in table
18. This is likely to happen as a result of a number of mistakes, such as establishing
the angle, setting the stopwatch, calculating the oscillation, and so on. Looking at table
18, I discovered that the experimental value for Io (left) had a large percentage
inaccuracy of over 50%.This occurs because the protection has minimal damage and
is not in a vertical position.

And when the Io is computed, the values for points A and B are 0.0969 and 0.1080,
respectively. Points A and B had IG values of 0.0368 and 0.0329, respectively. After
determining the proper value, we compared the experimental and theoretical findings.
As indicated in table 18, the studies revealed significant percentage errors. This is
most likely due to a multitude of errors, such as determining the angle, starting the
stopwatch, calculating the oscillation, and so on. Looking at table 18, I realised that
the experimental value for Io (left) was off by more than 50%.

NAME: MUHAMMAD AMIR HAKIM BIN ABDULLAH

STUDENT ID: 2023503181

The outcomes of an experiment we performed to ascertain the moment of inertia of a

pendulum at two distinct locations. It seems that we have discovered that the moment
of inertia of point A is 0.03522 kgm^2, which is somewhat higher than the moment of
inertia of point B, which is 0.03512 kgm^2. The mass moment of inertia at the
suspension point, Io, has been determined to be 0.1451 kgm^2 at point A and 0.1411
kgm^2 at point B. We have noted that the moment of inertia increases as the gap
between the part’s center and its center of gravity widens.

It is worth mentioning that the moments of inertia at sites A and B have a minor
discrepancy. Additionally, the experimentally measured mass moment of inertia value
is reasonably accurate as it only slightly deviates from the expected value.
Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that the readings and technique of this experiment
may contain some inevitable mistakes due to the involvement of a human operator.
Parallax error is a common mistake that often occurs during experiments, causing the
stopwatch time to be inaccurate. The experiment’s setting could be compromised by
airflow, which could inadvertently slightly influence the results.

NAME: MUHAMMAD AKIL BIN AMBERIN

STUDENT ID: 2022917509
 From the experiment, theoretical and experimental approaches were employed
to derive two distinct locations of mass moment of inertia values at the suspension
points (IO) and center of gravity (IG) from the experiment. The experimental values of
IG and IO were computed by starting with the vee bar, which represents point A, and
utilizing the cylinder bar, which represents point B, in the same way. It took three
attempts at the experiment to find the average amount of time needed. There is
consensus that either approach could be used to achieve the experiment's goals. The
predicted mass moment of inertia at the center of gravity, IG at points A and B, is
0.0331, but the observed value is 0.0329 and 0.0314, respectively. The observed
mass moment of inertia at sites A and B is 0.107, while the anticipated mass moment
of inertia at the suspension point is 0.126.
Following that, the experimental and theoretical values obtained are compared
to determine the percentage error. Based on the available data, there was a little
variation between the theoretical and experimental values; the largest error
percentage was 22.2%. The experimenter's mistakes might be the cause of these
discrepancies. Think about the parallax mistake, when the scale and the eye are not
parallel. It is possible that human error occurred during the experiment and led to these
errors. The findings show that the theoretical method is valid since the values obtained
from the two separate approaches are almost similar.

NAME: MUHAMMAD ADIB HAIKAL BIN ISHAK

STUDENT ID: 2023367849

The experimental results reveal that the moment of inertia at point A is 0.03522 kgm²,
slightly larger than point B, which measures 0.03512 kgm². Moreover, the
experimental values for mass moment of inertia (Io) differ between the two points, with
Io at A recorded as 0.1451 kgm² and Io at B as 0.1411 kgm².

Comparing these experimental findings to the predicted values, noticeable

discrepancies arise. Specifically, the measured moment of inertia at point A (0.03522
kgm²) surpasses the predicted Io value (0.1451 kgm²), while at point B, the recorded
moment of inertia (0.03512 kgm²) is lower than the predicted Io value (0.1411 kgm²).
This variation stems from the fact that point A is located farther from the center of
gravity compared to point B.
The percentage difference between the experimental and predicted moments of inertia
at both locations exceeds 10%. Nevertheless, despite this variance, the experimentally
determined mass moment of inertia values are deemed acceptable, as they only
slightly deviate from the predicted values.

It's essential to recognize that experimental setups conducted by individuals may

introduce errors. Common sources of error include parallax errors, impacting the
accuracy of timing with a stopwatch, and external factors such as airflow, which could
marginally influence experimental outcomes. These considerations underscore the
importance of meticulous attention to experimental procedures to minimize potential
sources of error.

CONCLUSION

NAME: MUHAMMAD ARIF IZUDDIN BIN SHAMSUL

STUDENT ID: 2023503205

A physical pendulum was examined in this experiment to discover values related to

its motion, especially its centre of oscillation and the influence of circular cross-
sectional diameter on its period. The period of a pendulum might be calculated using
Lagrange's equation for rotating systems as a function of its shape and mass
distribution. This enabled calculations of the pendulum's oscillation centre along its
swing axis. Furthermore, the link between cross-section and period was seen by
testing pendulums of equal dimensions but varying diameters.

However, our result is marginally inconsistent with both the theory value and
experiment value because we encountered various mistakes incurred by
obstacles. The findings of this experiment can assist in determining the experimental
error and by using the pendulum’s dimensions; we use it to calculate the theoretical
error. This could have been due to reading of the scales wrongly prior to the release
of the pendulum. Before initiating our experiments we have to ensure that we correct
all the errors including parallax and human one. The error notwithstanding, the advice
helped in successfully conducting the experiment with the aim being achieved.

Discussion for physical pendulum

Physical pendulum studies will be conducted to examine what determines the period
for a pendulum rotating about any axis. Particularly, this study looked at the center of
oscillation of the pendulum, and the effect of its circular cross-sectional
diameter. These parameters may be changed and monitored for changes in periodic
time of the swing to verify models that explain their mathematical linkages.

This research suggests, point A’s .03522 kgm2 moment of inertia, exceeds point
B’s.03512 kgm2 moment of inertia. The volume of Io is 0.1451 kg/m2 at A and 0.1411
kg/m2 at B. Io’s theoretical density is 0.1451 kg/m2 at A whilst Ig’s mass is From point
A to point B, there are values of 0.1411 kg/m2 (Io) and 0.03229 kg/m2 (Ig). These
conclusions are derived due to the fact that point A is located further away from the
centre of gravity to point B. With increases in the distance between the part’s centre
and that of its centre of gravity, moment of inertia also increase. Moments of inertia at
A and B points are not equal, though. The error is more than 10% stated in
percentage. The experimental mass moment of inertia value being close to the
expected mass moment of inertia value proves that the experimental mass moment of
inertia is acceptable. This experiment being carried out by a person will definitely see
some errors in the reading as well as the method.

Inquiry-based methods can be more effective for understanding significant physics

behind rotating systems. This dynamics study is validated by comparing its results with
the experimental data and Lagrange’s equations. This basic technology leads further
investigation for detailed knowledge towards increasingly complex spinning entities in
scientific and engineering sectors.

NAME: MUHAMMAD AMMAR BIN AMRAN

STUDENT ID: 2023126741

As a consequence of this experiment, I discovered that the moment of inertia for IO

(Point A) is 0.1451 and 0.1411 for point b. Aside from that, the IG value for point A is
0.0323 and 0.03229 for point B. The magnitude of this number, however, is dependent
on the accuracy with which we measure the pendulum and take time readings. Certain
errors were committed during the experiment's execution that had an effect on the
outcome. We may lessen the parallax error by holding the book parallel to our eyes.
To establish the average time taken, the readings should be properly recorded more
than twice or three times in rhythm with the time taken and the instant the pendulum
was released. Finally, the experiment accomplished its purpose of determining the
mass moment of inertia at the suspension point and the gravity centre.

NAME: MUHAMMAD AMIR HAKIM BIN ABDULLAH

STUDENT ID: 2023503181

Our experiment indicates that the moment of inertia at position A is bigger than at point
B. We have observed a minimal disparity in the moments of inertia at points A and B.
Additionally, the experimentally obtained mass moment of inertia value is deemed
satisfactory since it only exhibits a little deviation from the anticipated mass moment
of inertia value. Nevertheless, we have observed that there may inevitably be certain
mistakes in the measurements and methodology due to the fact that this experiment
is being carried out by an individual. A common mistake that often occurs throughout
the experiment is the parallax error, which disrupts the accuracy of the stopwatch's
timing.
Parallax error is a form of systematic error that may arise during the process of
making measurements. It is caused by the observer’s eye not being directly in line with
the measurement scale, which can cause the measurement to appear to be different
from its true value [3]. Parallax error may result in imprecise measurements and can
impact the accuracy of an instrument. Using an erroneous angle to observe the
markings repeatedly will result in measurements that are consistently

NAME: MUHAMMAD AKIL BIN AMBERIN

STUDENT ID: 2022917509

In conclusion, we were able to ascertain the mass moment of inertia at the

center of gravity as well as the suspension point. The effects of the separation between
the oscillation's center of gravity and suspension point on its period have been
determined. Based on the calculation, we can compare the theoretical and
experimental values of the mass moment of inertia at the suspension point and the
center of gravity.
 The obstacles caused several mistakes, which is why we got a result that is
marginally different from the theoretical value and the experiment value. The
theoretical error may be calculated using the pendulum's dimension, whereas the
experimental error can be determined using the experiment's findings. It might be the
result of an inaccurate scale reading prior to the pendulum being released. Prior to
beginning the experiment, errors such as parallax and human error must be eliminated
in order to reduce the number of mistakes. The experiment's goal was accomplished
despite a mistake, and it was executed well with the help of the guidance provided.

NAME: MUHAMMAD ADIB HAIKAL BIN ISHAK

STUDENT ID: 2023367849

In conclusion, the investigation into the behavior of the physical pendulum has
yielded valuable insights into the dynamics of oscillatory motion and rotational
equilibrium.
The experiment revealed variations in the moment of inertia at different points of
the physical pendulum. Analyzing the differences in moment of inertia contributes to a
deeper understanding of how mass distribution affects the pendulum's rotational
characteristics.
The experimental outcomes emphasized the impact of the distance from the center
of gravity on the moment of inertia. As expected, points located further from the center
of gravity exhibited larger moments of inertia, validating the fundamental principle that
the distribution of mass influences the rotational behavior of a physical pendulum.
 REFERENCE

[[1] Wikipedia contributors. (2023, October 21). Pendulum. Wikipedia. Retrieved December 10, 2023,
from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum

[2] 15.5: Pendulums (By NICE CXone Expert). (2022, September 12). Physics LibreTexts. Retrieved
December 12, 2023, from
https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/Book%3A_University_Physics_%
28OpenStax%29/Book%3A_University_Physics_I_-
_Mechanics_Sound_Oscillations_and_Waves_%28OpenStax%29/15%3A_Oscillations/15.0
5%3A_Pendulums

[3] Physics, M. (2020, January 28). Parallax error, zero error, accuracy & precision. Mini Physics.
Retrieved December 12, 2023, from
https://www.miniphysics.com/parallax-error-and-zero-error.html

[4] Forced Vibration - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics