Pendulum Lab Report

Hamza Qureshi, Amrit Hansra, Vasnavan Jegatheeswaran

730373, 738696, 733258

Mr. Z. Patel

SPH4U0

February 21 2025

1
 Table of Contents

Title Page ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 1

Table of Contents​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 2

Abstract (Hamza)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 3

Theory (Vasnavan)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 4-5

Apparatus & Method (Amrit)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 6

Observations (Hamza)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 7-9

Calculations (Vasnavan)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 10-12

Discussion Questions (Hamza)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 13-30

Experimental Uncertainties (Amrit)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 30

Conclusion (Vasnavan)​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 31

References​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 32

2
Abstract (Hamza)

The purpose of this experiment was to analyse the relationship between the length and

frequency of a simple pendulum in motion. Through this pendulum lab, the aim was to

trial and facilitate whether the amplitude of a pendulum’s vibration has any effect on its

frequency, alongside also considering whether the mass of the string could be

disregarded. The largest question, however, was to ask the researchers if the period of the

pendulum is independent of its mass.

Using the materials provided (namely a weighted object or mass called the “bob,” a retort

stand, alongside string and tape), the researchers conducted an effective experiment and

obtained accurate results. With the use of the retort stand, the string was attached

alongside the bob, leading us to conduct the pendulum motion at approximately 20

degrees to the right of each trial. The results were recorded using a stopwatch and marked

down for each trial, with respect to the different masses tested. As a result of this

experiment, the idea that the materials and structured use of them were ideal for the

provided task was enforced.

3
Theory (Vaisu)

​ The pendulum is a simple system consisting of a mass called the bob, which is suspended

from a string or rod, that swings back and forth under the influence of gravity. The period of the

pendulum can be made longer by increasing the length of the string or rod. However, changing

the mass of the bob does not affect the period because the length is not affected. The period of a

pendulum is influenced by its position relative to the Earth, because the gravitational field is not

uniform everywhere around the world, a concept first explored by the Italian scientist Galileo in

1583. Galileo observed a swinging lamp in a pisa cathedral and noticed that its swings took

nearly the same amount of time. Using his pulse to measure time, he discovered that a

pendulum’s motion kept a consistent rhythm. In 1656 the Dutch mathematician and scientist

Christiaan Huygens invented the first clock controlled by the motion of a pendulum. The

pendulum clock was the first timekeeper to show significant improvement over earlier methods.

In physics, the simple pendulum is a clear example of periodic motion, the pendulum

demonstrates key concepts such as period ( time for one complete oscillation / cycle), frequency

(number of cycles per unit of time eg. second), and amplitude (maximum displacement from the

equilibrium). The period of a pendulum can be represented by the formula T = 2π √(L/g). Where

T is the period of the pendulum, L is the length of the pendulum, and g is the acceleration due to

gravity. A pendulum’s movement follows the rule of conservation of energy, showing how

4
potential energy turns into kinetic energy as it swings and vice versa. As the bob of the pendulum

swings from its highest point, all of its energy is potential. As it moves down to the lowest point,

that energy is then converted into kinetic energy, causing the pendulum to keep moving. The type

of potential energy in the system is called gravitational potential energy because the force of

gravity is the conservative force that provides the pendulum with its potential energy.

This lab explores how a simple pendulum moves by studying its length, mass and

frequency. Through this lab students learn how pendulums work and better understand it’s

periodic motion. Students learn how its swing is not affected by its mass and how length and

amplitude impacts its motion. This lab also highlights the pendulum’s historical importance in

scientific advancements.

5
Apparatus (Amrit)

Pendulum setup
-​ Retort stand to hoist the string with a rubber stopper
-​ A c-clamp to hold the pendulum support in place
-​ A string that is 100cm long attached the the pendulum
-​ A bob (a weight tied to the bottom of the string)
-​ A rubber stopper to tie to the string at at the top of the pendulum

Measuring tools
-​ A ruler to measure the length of the string
-​ A stopwatch to measure the period of oscillations.
-​ A protractor to measure the angle of the pendulum

Method
1.​ Place the pendulum base near an edge of a table, counter or desk.
2.​ Secure the pendulum with a c-clamp.
3.​ Using the string, tie the rubber stopper with the string and place it on the top of the
pendulum.
4.​ At rhe bottom of the string, tie a weight to the string, and ensure the distance between the
rubber stopper and weight is 100cm long.
5.​ Using a protractor, pull the weight at the bottom of the string to an angle of 20 degrees of
its resting position.
6.​ Let go of the string and use the stopwatch to time how long it takes for the pendulum to
complete 30 periods.
7.​ Once the 30 periods are completed, stop the stopwatch and record the time.
8.​ Repeat steps 5-7 and every time a trial has completed reduce the length of the string by
20cm until the final trial has 20cm of string left.

6
Observations (Hamza)

Mass 1:

Some of the qualitative data for mass 1 were that once the bob had been released, it moved in a

certain pattern, getting closer to and almost hitting the cupboard at times, especially when the

string length decreased. In combination with that, since the length of string being used was

minimized with each pass, the pendulum's curve decreased significantly, which decreased the

range of the pendulum and slowly altered the oscillations to appear more ecstatic and frantic.

Moreover, It appeared that upon decreasing the lengths the periods would be less controlled.

Some of the quantitative data observed for mass 1 included that as the string length decreased, so

did the duration of time taken for 30 cycles to occur, and it took an average of 45s per cycle to

occur for mass 1.

Mass 2:

Some of the qualitative results for mass 2 were that with each decrease in length of string, the

bob would move closer to one side upon release, just like mass 1. Additionally, with the string

being longer and of larger mass, it showed very much the same outcome as the first mass, in

which with each swing or cycle, the pendulum was level with even movement until it was out of

control or quicker with the decrease in length, becoming uneven at the end of each oscillation.

Just as in 1, there was a noticeable alteration in the air's motion during this trial but, which did

7
seem to leave the pendulum a bit more vulnerable to air resistance because the conductors of the

experiment were not as near the pendulum as at first, and therefore some very minute differences

in the swings of the pendulum were allowed. Some of the quantitative findings for mass 2 were

that as the length of the string decreased, time for 30 cycles to occur decreased also, yielding an

average of 42s per cycle.

Mass 3:

Some qualitative observations for mass 3 were that it had the highest tendency to sway towards

the desk, even hitting it on a few occasions, forcing multiple restarts of the test, and with the

heavier bob, it did seem as if the pendulum swung with more force, although it did still result in

closely similar values with the other two masses. The same patterns of controlled to erratic

motions depending on the length of the string were seen here and how the pendulum would get

quicker with each cycle as well. Some quantitative observations for mass 3 were the time taken

for 30 cycles to occur between the different string lengths took, on average, 44s. Furthermore,

the difference between the string length of 40 cm and 20 cm was very dramatic, going from

38.69 seconds to 20.48 seconds. Moreover, mass 3 tended to be affected by air resistance more

when compared to the other masses, starting off with a greater speed per cycle and then slowing

down a couple of cycles later, taking the longest time for one cycle towards the end of the

measured 30 cycles.

Overall error analysis

Through the production of the experiment, multiple things could have been changed to

achieve further accurate results. In order to attach each of the bobs together firmly, pieces of tape

8
were used, leading to additional unaccounted weight being added. This may have led to slightly

inaccurate data being collected. Additionally, the experiment was conducted in a classroom

environment with constant air ventilation alongside other disturbances, potentially influencing

the bob to act differently, such as through the movements of other students nearby. This may

have caused uncertain wind gusts to cause a small discrepancy in the data recorded. Furthermore,

during the conducting of the lab, it was noted that at certain points, the retort stands were not

fully locked in place (specifically speaking of the arm to which the string was attached to),

causing a variability that may have caused a disruption in the data collected by a marginal

amount as a result. For each trial, the stopwatch was operated by a human, causing minimal

discrepancies in recorded time due to the delay in judgement; thus creating inconsistencies in the

start and stop times of the pendulum cycle swings. Moreover, since the pendulum bob was

released from a hand, there is no way of determining if gravity was the only force acting on the

pendulum at the beginning, as letting go of the pendulum could have inflicted a small force on it.

Error percentage based using measured and calculated frequency of mass #1: 31%

9
Calculations (Vaisu)

10
11
12
Discussion Questions (Hamza)

Length (cm) Average Time for 30 Cycles (sec)

100 59.56

80 52.29

60 46.38

40 38.08

20 26.58

Throughout this graph, a negative correlation is displayed. As length decreases by 20

centimetres with each trial, the time also decreases. Alongside this, the data closely follows the

linear regression, with a strong correlation of -8.02x + 60.6. Furthermore, the correlation

13
coefficient indicates the linear relationship between two variables between x (length), and y

(time), having a correlation coefficient of 0.984, showcasing that there is a strong correlation

between length and time that shows that time decreases with shortening length, leading to the

conclusion that time and length and directly proportional.

Length (cm) Average Time for 30 Cycles (sec)

100 58.14

80 50.14

60 42.54

40 36.60

20 21.87

The findings indicated that the data with the different, heavier, mass, yielded similar data

results to the first mass. Alongside that, there is still a negative correlation between length and

time, where the decreased length with each trial brought lower times, giving a slope of -8.61x +

14
59.1. Furthermore, the correlation coefficient of 0.973 shows that there is a strong correlation

between the two, albeit less stronger than the previous mass due to an outlier at 40 cm.

Length (cm) Average Time for 30 Cycles (sec)

100 58.58

80 52.98

60 47.27

40 38.69

20 20.62

The data was similar to the other two masses, just that these results were tested with a

heavier mass. It shows that the different masses still yielded similar results. The negative

correlation showed the same thing that was occurring with the other two graphs. The negative

15
correlation for this graph was a little different, but still negative with a linear regression of -9.05x

+ 61.7. The correlation coefficient of 0.926 was a little less stronger than the others but still is

considered a strong correlation, even with the outlier being the same as the second mass, being

with the 40 cm length.

These results for the first mass of just Bob 1 show that with each decrease in length, there

is a gradual decrease that is almost equivalent to each drop. This means that there is almost an

equal linear regression as length increases.

16
 The average results of all 3 different masses show that they all followed a similar

pattern/correlation. It shows that mass doesn’t have an impact on the time or the number of

cycles or periods that can happen in that time with that specific length.

17
 100 cm length Mass and Times for 3 Masses

Mass (grams) Time (sec)

27.18 59.56

51.94 58.14

70.17 58.58

18
 60 cm length Mass and Times for 3 Masses

Mass (grams) Time (sec)

27.18 46.38

51.94 42.54

70.17 42.27

20 cm length Mass and Times for 3 Masses

Mass (grams) Time (sec)

27.18 26.58

51.94 21.87

70.17 20.62

The graphs here display time versus mass for each of the 3 different masses with 3

different lengths. These graphs show that time and period are independent of the mass. This is

because each of the graphs shows almost a straight line with weak correlation coefficients and

lines of regression that exhibit that even with the different masses, the times that were achieved

for that same length were the same.

19
 This graph shows how the time decreases by a similar amount each time with the

decreasing length. It can also demonstrate how with a decrease in length, the time for 30 cycles

to occur decreases.

20
 Length (cm) Frequency (Hz)

100 0.50

80 0.57

60 0.65

40 0.79

20 1.13

This graph shows a positive correlation. As length decreases, the frequency increases.

This data shows that length and frequency are inversely proportional to one another. The data

shows a strong correlation of 0.148x + 0.432. The correlation coefficient indicates an almost

linear relationship between the two variables, length and frequency. With a correlation

coefficient of 0.882, it demonstrates that there’s a strong correlation amongst length and

frequency that shows how they are both inversely proportional. The data with the slightly heavier

mass also shows a positive correlation. There is an outlier at 40 cm, however, it does not deter

21
the values from showing a strong correlation much.

Length (cm) Frequency (Hz)

100 0.52

80 0.60

60 0.71

40 0.82

20 1.37

The data still shows an inverse proportionality between length and frequency,

where as length decreases, frequency increases. The slope of this graph is 0.192x + 0.42.

The correlation coefficient of 0.816 shows a strong positive correlation, however, not

quite as strong as the data from mass one.

22
 Length (cm) Frequency (Hz)

100 0.51

80 0.57

60 0.63

40 0.78

20 1.46

The data that was collected from the third graph was similar to the data from the

first and second masses, however, the outlier at 40 cm is more negatively impacting this

graph than with the others. However, there is still an inverse proportionality amongst

length and frequency that show a positive correlation, with a slope of 0.211x + 0.368. The

correlation coefficient of 0.74 shows that the correlation is slightly less strong than the

other masses, but still strong enough to presume the proportionality between length and

frequency.

23
24
 Period vs. Length for Mass 1

Length (cm) Period (sec)

100 1.99

80 1.74

60 1.55

40 1.27

20 0.89

Period vs. Length for Mass 2

Length (cm) Period (sec)

100 1.94

80 1.67

60 1.42

40 1.22

20 0.73

Period vs. Length for Mass 3

Length (cm) Period (sec)

100 1.95

80 1.77

60 1.58

40 1.29

20 0.69

25
 Over the same interval, period and the length of the string, it remains almost

constant, as can be seen with all values having similarity between them. As length

decreases, so does the period, causing the period to be directly proportional to the

square-root of its length (Khan Academy, 2018). The significance of period vs. length

showcases how they are both directly proportional to one another and remain similar

despite masses, while period vs mass showcases how the period is not dependent on the

mass of the ball, remaining constant throughout the experiment.

26
 Period Squared (T^2) vs. Length for Mass 1

Length (cm) T^2 (sec)

100 3.94

80 3.04

60 2.39

40 1.61

20 0.78

Period Squared (T^2) vs. Length for Mass 2

Length (cm) T^2 (sec)

100 3.76

80 2.79

60 2.01

40 1.49

20 0.53

Period Squared (T^2) vs. Length for Mass 3

Length (cm) T^2 (sec)

100 3.81

27
 80 3.12

60 2.48

40 1.66

20 0.47

Observing the graphs made comparing T squared and length, you can see that the

line created appears to be linear. Looking at the graphs, it is visible that the length is

directly proportional to period squared because as length increases, so does period. The

change in masses shows there is no correlation between different masses and the graph

for period squared and length.

Mass (grams) Period (sec)

27.18 1.49

51.94 1.40

70.17 1.45

28
 Throughout each mass tested, the period remained almost constant. This can lead

to the conclusion that the period of a pendulum does not depend on the mass of the ball.

The period is not dependent on mass as the graph shows a constant slope of 0.

Degrees (°) Frequency (Hz)

10 0.50

20 0.50

30 0.49

Within the tested ranges, frequency did not have an effect on the amplitude or degree that

the bob was let go from, at which height or amplitude it started to oscillate. If the

experiment were to have been tested over a longer interval or at a greater degree, the

results would have shown that amplitude and frequency are inversely proportional to one

29
another. The amplitude would decrease within the increased frequency. However, since

the data was tested in a small range, the results did not show this inverse proportionality

(Russel, 2018). There is no direct correlation between amplitude and degrees, however,

amplitude is measured in degrees as the motion of the pendulum is a circular motion,

travelling less than half a circle per cycle. The amplitude would come from the angle

between the equilibrium point and the maximum displacement of the pendulum.

Experimental Uncertainties (Amrit)

1.​ Length measurement: the length of the string varies and can have a total length
uncertainty of ± ~0.1cm. There can also be human error with the measurement of the
string length.
2.​ Time measurement. There can be human error in the measurement of time, the exact time
period of the completion of 40 periods cannot be precisely measured with the use of a
stopwatch.

30
 Conclusion (Vaisu)

This lab looked at how the length, mass, and amplitude of a pendulum affect its

frequency. Our results showed that the frequency is inversely proportional to the square root of

the pendulum’s length, meaning that as the pendulum’s length increased its frequency decreased,

and vice versa. The period of the pendulum is directly proportional to the square root of its

length. Changing the mass of the bob did not show any significant effect, proving that the

pendulum’s motion depends more on the length rather than the mass. While our model simplified

certain factors, like neglecting air resistance and the mass of the string, the consistency between

our findings and theoretical physics principles shows that the simple pendulum equation is a

reliable representation of its periodic motion. Overall, this lab helped demonstrate the key ideas

behind the pendulum’s motion and also showed why the simple pendulum model is a reliable

way to study the harmonic movement of a pendulum.

31
 References

Encyclopædia Britannica, inc. (2025, January 11). Pendulum. Encyclopædia Britannica.

[Link]

Energy transfer. Science Learning Hub. (n.d.).

[Link]

%20is%20a%20simple,energy%20of%20motion%20%E2%80%93%20kinetic%20energy.

The pendulum. (n.d.).

[Link]

Physics tutorial: Pendulum motion. The Physics Classroom. (n.d.).

[Link]

32