Physics Investigation

The best method of measuring the focal lengths of both

converging and diverging lenses

Colin Robertson

Scottish Candidate Number: 990246858

Centre: Westhill Academy
Centre Number: 5232937
 Contents Page

Introduction 3

Experiment 1 5-7

Experiment 2 8-11

Experiment 3 12-15

Experiment 4 16-18

Experiment 5 19-21

Conclusion 22-23

Evaluation 24

References and Acknowledgements 25

2
 Introduction
The aim of my investigation was to find the best method of measuring the focal lengths of both converging and
diverging lenses.

The investigation includes five separate experiments. Three on the converging lens focal length and two on the
diverging lens focal length.

Experiments 1-3

• Experiment 1: a plane mirror. Using the theory, when a parallel beam of light passes through a
converging lens, the rays are focussed at the focal point. The distance between the centre of lens and
focus is the focal length.

• Experiment 2: the lens formula. Using the formula 1/f = 1/u + 1/v, Hence a graph of 1/v against 1/u
will cut the axes at a value of 1/f.

• Experiment 3: the lens displacement method using conjugate foci. Using the formula f = (D2 - d2)/4D
Hence a graph of D2 – d2 against 4D would have a gradient of f.

Results for first 3 experiments

Average focal length /cm Minimum Value /cm Maximum value /cm
Experiment 1 14.1 14.0 14.2
Experiment 2 14.1 13.9 14.3
Experiment 3 14.2 14.0 14.4

The rough value for the focal length obtained by focusing the lens on a sheet of paper was found to be
approximately 14.2cm. This was comparable to the value of 14cm provided in the suppliers catalogue (Griffin).

The three values of focal length obtained from the first experiment were the similar. This showed the three
different ways of finding the focal length were all of a similar accuracy. The results show the best method of
finding the focal length was experiment 1, Due to the uncertainty in the final values being the smallest.

Experiments 4-5

• Experiment 4: a converging lens and a screen. Using the formula 1/f = 1/ v2 + 1/ v1 – d where f is the
focal length of the diverging lens.

• Experiment 5: using a converging lens and a mirror.

Average focal length /cm Minimum Value /cm Maximum value /cm
Experiment 4 -18.4 -18.1 -18.7
Experiment 5 -20.0 -19.9 -20.1

A rough estimate could not be calculated for the diverging lens so I used the value in the suppliers catalogue as
my approximate value. This value was 20cm. No uncertainty was quoted.

Two differing values of focal length were obtained in these experiments. The most accurate value has been taken
as the one with the least uncertainty. This is the value obtained by the second experiment. The uncertainty was
very small in that experiment. It is also the value closed to the value advised by the supplier.

3
Experiments

4
 Experiment 1:
The focal length of a Converging Lens using a Plane Mirror
Aim: To find the focal length of a converging lens using a plane mirror.

Apparatus: Converging lens

Lens holder
Metre rule
Light source
Grid
Grid holder
Plane mirror

Diagram:

A B

2f
Theory:

When a parallel beam of light passes through a converging lens, the rays are focussed at the focal point. The
distance between the centre of lens and focus is the focal length.

Method:

1. A rough focal length was obtained by focusing the image of the grid on a sheet of paper. The focal length
was estimated to be 14.2cm.

2. The grid was placed at a distance roughly equal to the focal length, calculated in step 1, away from the
converging lens. The plane mirror was placed behind the lens.

3. The grid was adjusted until the image could be seen sharply, focused along side the grid.

4. The position of the grid on the metre rule was recorded. I called this position A.

5. The plane mirror and the grid were moved to the opposite side of the lens, making sure not to disturb the
position of the lens.

6. Steps 3 and 4 were repeated for this side of the lens. The new position was called B

7. The distance between Positions A and B was equal to twice the focal length.

8. This experiment was repeated 10 times for each of 3 different positions of the converging lens on the metre
rule.

5
Results Tables

Experiments repeated 3 times with different converging lens positions.

Position A / cm Position B / cm
60.9 89.1
60.6 89.2
60.8 89.1
60.7 89.1
60.7 89.2
60.7 88.8
60.8 89.0
60.7 88.9
60.6 88.9
60.7 88.8
Mean 60.7 89.0
Uncertainty ±0.02 ±0.04

Position A / cm Position B / cm
78.8 50.7
78.8 50.7
78.9 50.6
78.9 50.6
78.8 50.6
78.9 50.5
78.9 50.7
78.9 50.7
78.8 50.8
78.9 50.6
Mean 78.9 50.7
Uncertainty ±0.02 ±0.03

Position A / cm Position B / cm
83.9 55.7
83.9 55.7
83.9 55.6
83.9 55.7
83.9 55.8
83.6 55.8
83.9 55.7
83.8 55.7
83.9 55.7
83.8 55.8
Mean 83.9 55.7
Uncertainty ±0.03 ±0.02

6
Table of Mean Values of Focal Length

Position A /cm Position B /cm Distance between A and B /cm Focal Length /cm
60.7 89.0 28.3 14.2
78.9 50.7 28.2 14.1
83.9 55.7 28.1 14.1

Mean focal length = Sum of reading

no.

= 14.2 + 14.1 + 14.1

3

14.1cm

Uncertainty of F.L = Max-Min

no.

= 14.2 – 14.1
3

= ±0.03cm
= ±0.1cm

The metre stick has an uncertainty of half the smallest division i.e. 0.05cm. Hence any calculations in the project
involving subtraction of metre stick reading will have an uncertainty of 0.1cm.

Conclusion

The values calculated from the experiment were: Mean focal length = 14.1cm
Uncertainty F.L = ±0.1cm

Evaluation

There was a large uncertainty when it came to deciding when the image of the grid was in focus. This is down to
human error and the accuracy would change with each reading. The image was sharp in a range of 0.4cm so the
actual uncertainty would be ±0.2cm.

Although the grid holder had a measurement line along the one side there was no way of guaranteeing that the
grid was lined up completely with the that line. This could be considered the same for the lens and the lens
holder. This problem was most probably cancelled out when the grid was moved to the other side where the
uncertainties would cancel out.

The lens and grid holders were loose when they sat on the metre stick. This meant that they could have rotated
slightly from the perpendicular. Because I was aware of this problem before experimenting I was able to make sure
they were both exactly perpendicular to the metre rule for each reading.

7
 Experiment 2
The focal length of a Converging Lens
using by Lens Formula
Aim: To find the focal length of a converging lens by using a lens formula.

Apparatus: Converging lens

Lens holder
Metre rule
Light source
Grid
Grid holder
Screen

Diagram:
B
A

F1 F2 C

u v
Theory:

1/f = 1/u + 1/v Hence a graph of 1/v against 1/u will cut the axes at a value of 1/f.

Method:

1. A rough focal length was obtained by focusing the image of the grid on a sheet of paper. This was estimated
to be 14.2cm.

2. The illuminated grid was placed A at a distance from the converging lens approximately equal to twice the
focal length. The lens was placed at Position B.

3. The screen was placed at the other side about the same distance away from of the converging lens. This
position was called C.

4. The position was located of the real image on the screen. The grid and the screen were moved until the image
of the grid was sharpest.

5. The distances u and v were measured.

6. The light bulb and the screen were moved to other positions both farther and nearer to the lens. New values
of u and v were recorded.

7. Step 6 was repeated 15 times.

8. A graph of 1/v against 1/u was plotted.

8
Results:

Position A / cm Position B / cm Position C / cm

94.0 76.5 5.2
94.0 76.0 8.5
94.0 75.5 19.5
94.0 75.0 16.8
94.0 74.5 23.7
94.0 74.0 26.1
94.0 73.5 28.6
94.0 73.0 30.6
94.0 72.5 31.1
94.0 72.0 32.7
94.0 71.5 33.2
94.0 71.0 34.8
94.0 70.5 35.3
94.0 69.0 36.3
94.0 67.0 37.4

v / cm u / cm 1/v /cm -1 1/u /cm -1 1/f /cm-1 f /cm

17.5 71.3 0.0571 0.0140 0.0712 14.1
18.0 67.5 0.0556 0.0148 0.0704 14.2
18.5 56.0 0.0541 0.0179 0.0719 13.9
19.0 58.2 0.0526 0.0172 0.0698 14.3
19.5 50.8 0.0513 0.0197 0.0710 14.1
20.0 47.9 0.0500 0.0209 0.0709 14.1
20.5 44.9 0.0488 0.0223 0.0711 14.1
21.0 42.4 0.0476 0.0236 0.0712 14.0
21.5 41.4 0.0465 0.0242 0.0707 14.1
22.0 39.3 0.0455 0.0255 0.0709 14.1
22.5 38.3 0.0444 0.0261 0.0706 14.2
23.0 36.3 0.0435 0.0276 0.0711 14.1
23.5 35.2 0.0426 0.0284 0.0710 14.1
25.0 32.7 0.0400 0.0306 0.0706 14.2
27.0 29.6 0.0370 0.0338 0.0708 14.1
Mean 14.1
Uncertainty 0.03
% Uncertainty 0.2%

From the graph, the line of best fit was extrapolated to cross the x and y-axes. Where the line crosses x-axis,
1/v = 0 therefore 1/f = 1/u. Similarly, where the line crosses the y-axis, 1/u = 0 therefore 1/f = 1/v.

The values obtained for focal length were: crosses x–axis fl = 14.1cm
crosses y-axis fl = 14.2 cm

9
10
Uncertainties:

Mean 1/f = 0.0705 + 0.0710

2

= 0.07075

Mean fl = 14.1cm

Uncertainty f = Max-Min
2

= 14.3 – 13.9
2

= 0.2cm

Focal length = (14.1±0.2)cm

Conclusion:

The values calculated from the experiment were: Mean focal length = 14.1cm
Uncertainty F.L = ± 0.2cm
% Uncertainty = ± 1.4%

Evaluation:

The problems in this experiment are consistent with the rest of the experiments. For example the position for
which the image was sharp has a wide range. Also the loose grid and lens holders and the measurement line on
the holder.

One problem that was unique to this experiment is the fact that metre stick was not long enough. The focus which
was created at the far end of the metre stick,(small values of Position C), started to go of the end of the metre
stick. This caused me to have to stop experimenting, and restricted the amount of repetitions of the experiment
that could be done, giving a smaller range of the values for u than would be ideal. One way around this problem
would be to move the position of A, i.e. the position of the grid, and Position C would be automatically moved
upwards.

11
 Experiment 3:
The focal length of a Converging Lens by the lens
displacement method using conjugate foci
Aim: To find the focal length of a converging lens using the lens displacement method using
conjugate foci

Apparatus: Converging lens

Lens holder
Metre stick
Light source
Screen
Grid
Grid holder

Graph:

Y Z

W X

Theory:

f= D2 - d2 Hence a graph of D2 – d2 against 4D would have a

4D gradient of f.

Method:

1. The grid was placed at point W and the screen was placed in a fixed position a set distance away, position X.

2. The converging lens was placed between the two, but closer to the grid.

3. The lens was adjusted until the image on the screen was sharp.

4. This point was recorded as position Y.

5. The lens was moved towards the screen until there was another sharp image on the screen.

6. This point was recorded as position Z.

7. The experiment was repeated 8 more times, each time moving the screen closer to the light source.

12
Results:

Position W / cm Position X /cm Position Y /cm Position Z /cm

100.0 0.0 83.3 17.4
100.0 5.0 82.8 22.4
100.0 10.0 82.6 28.3
100.0 15.0 82.2 33.4
100.0 20.0 81.9 38.6
100.0 25.0 81.3 44.2
100.0 30.0 80.6 50.0
100.0 35.0 79.5 56.1
100.0 40.0 77.6 63.9

D /cm d /cm D2 - d2 /cm 4D /cm ((D2 - d2) / 4D) /cm

100.0 65.9 5655 400 14.1
95.0 60.4 5377 380 14.1
90.0 54.3 5154 360 14.3
85.0 48.8 4844 340 14.2
80.0 43.2 4531 320 14.2
75.0 37.2 4243 300 14.1
70.0 30.5 3967 280 14.2
65.0 23.4 3677 260 14.1
60.0 13.7 3413 240 14.2
Mean 14.2
Uncertainty 0.02
% Uncertainty 0.14%

Calculations:

From the graph D2 - d2 /4D =f, so the gradient of the graph was equal to f. f = 14.2cm

MAC = YC – YA
XC – XA

= 5650-3475
400-241
= 13.7

MBD = YD – YB
XD - XB

= 5700-3400
397-243
= 14.9

ΔM = MBD – MAC
2 √ (n – 2)

= 14.9-13.7
2 √ (9 – 2)

= ±0.23cm

= 1.6%

f = 14.2±0.23cm

13
14
Conclusion:

This experiment allows two methods of calculating the uncertainty.

• By averaging the results of the formula.

• By the gradient of the graph

The first method gives a value of 14.2cm ±0.02cm

The second method gives a focal length of 14.2cm ±0.23cm

Evaluation:

This experiment had the same problems that applied to the previous two, the loose grid and lens holders, and the
uncertainties in the sharpness of the grid image and the measurement line on the holder.

The line of best fit goes through the origin as is predicted. This shows that there were no systematic uncertainties
in the results.

The uncertainty in the sharpness of the image varied depending on which focus it was at, the Y or Z focus. The Y
image was a very small image making it very difficult to judge the sharpness of the image. The uncertainty for this
front image was ±0.5cm. The Z image was very large making it easier to find the focus therefore the uncertainty
was decreased to ±0.2cm. This suggests that the second method of finding the uncertainty i.e. by the gradient of
the graph, is probably a truer representation of the value of the focal length.

Due to the large distance between the grid and the screen the intensity of the light faded. This allowed excess
light to become a factor. I countered the possible uncertainty that could have come from this problem by making
sure that the rest of the light was cut out, stopping them from affecting the results in any way.

I did not want to increase the intensity of the light source by using a higher wattage bulb in case that altered the
results of the experiments. However, if I was to repeat the experiment I would start with a brighter light and work in
darker conditions.

15
 Experiment 4:
The focal length of a Diverging Lens by using a
converging lens and a screen
Aim: To find the focal length of a diverging lens by using a converging lens and a screen

Apparatus: Diverging lens and holder

Converging lens and holder
Light source
Gird and holder
Screen
Metre rule

Diagram:

I1

I2

d v2

Theory: 1/f = 1/ v2 + 1/ v1 – d

f was the focal length of the diverging lens.

16
Method:

1. The converging lens was placed at a fixed position from the grid.

2. The screen was moved until a sharply focused image was produced.

3. The distance between the lens and the screen was measured as v 1.

4. The diverging lens was put between the converging lens and the screen, but closer to the screen.

5. The screen was moved farther away until image I2, was again sharply focused on the screen.

6. This distance between the converging lens and the diverging lens was measured and called d.

7. The distance between the diverging lens and the screen was called v2.

Reading and calculations:

v1 (cm) v2 (cm) d (cm) (v1-d) (cm) 1/f = 1/v2 - 1/(v1-d) f (cm)

29.3 52.2 15.0 14.3 -0.1 -19.6
29.3 46.3 16.0 13.3 -0.1 -18.6
29.3 33.1 17.0 12.3 -0.1 -19.5
29.3 27.7 18.0 11.3 -0.1 -18.9
29.3 22.3 19.0 10.3 -0.1 -19.0
29.3 19.0 20.0 9.3 -0.1 -18.0
29.3 15.2 21.0 8.3 -0.1 -18.0
29.3 11.9 22.0 7.3 -0.1 -18.5
29.3 9.6 23.0 6.3 -0.1 -17.8
29.3 7.7 24.0 5.3 -0.1 -16.5

Mean focal length = sum of the readings

number of readings

= 184.3
10

= -18.4cm

Uncertainty = Max – Min

Number

= 19.6 – 16.5
10

= ±0.3cm

% uncertainty = ±1.7%

17
Conclusion:

The focal length obtained from this experiment for the diverging lens was:

Focal length = -18.4cm ± 1.7%

Evaluation:

This experiment had the same problems that applied to the previous three, the loose grid and lens holders, and
the uncertainties in the sharpness of the grid image and the measurement line on the holder.

Some of the uncertainties unique to this experiment are the small image of the grid that is produced when the
light and therefore image of the grid has been refracted through two lens. This made finding the point where the
image of the grid was sharp more difficult to recognise. A way around this problem would be to use a large grid to
start of with. This would therefore make the final grid bigger.

Also, when the lenses are closer together the slightly squint position of the lenses in the holder becomes a factor.
This may possibly be a reason why it is difficult to get a focused sharp image of the grid. The only way around this
problem would be to make sure the lens was truly vertical at the start of the experiment.

In this experiment I believe there was a slight systematic error that was causing the calculated value of focal length
to be less than expected. The value of the focal length decreases as v2 decreases. I am not sure where this error
was but I do believe that it was not to do with the equipment. This probably means it was something to do with my
reading of the metre rule or my movement of the diverging lens. If I had had time I would have repeated this
experiment.

18
 Experiment 5:
The focal length of a Diverging Lens by using
a converging lens and a mirror

Aim: To find the focal length of a diverging lens using a converging lens and a mirror.

Apparatus: Diverging lens and holder

Converging lens and holder
Light source
Plane mirror
Grid and holder
Metre ruler
Screen

Diagram:

I1

B
I1

I2

A f

19
Method:

1. The converging lens was placed between the light bulb and the screen.

2. The screen was moved until there was a sharp image of the grid on it.

3. The position of the screen on the metre rule was marked as Position B.

4. The screen was replaced by a mirror.

5. The diverging lens was placed between the converging lens and the mirror, but closer to the mirror.

6. The mirror was moved away from the diverging lens until there is a sharp image on the grid.

7. The position for the diverging lens on the metre rule was marked as Position C.

8. The distance between the B and C was equal to the focal length of the diverging lens.

9. This procedure was repeated for different positions of the converging lens, Position A.

Results and calculations:

Position of converging Position of first image from Position of diverging Distance between first image and
lens (Position A) (cm) converging lens (Position B) (cm) lens (Position C) (cm) diverging lens (focal length of diverging lens) (cm)
79.0 12.6 32.6 -19.9
78.0 20.9 40.7 -19.8
77.0 27.3 48.5 -21.3
76.0 31.9 51.9 -20.0
75.0 35.2 55.1 -19.9
74.0 37.5 56.9 -19.4
73.0 38.7 58.8 -20.1
72.0 39.2 59.5 -20.3
71.0 40.0 60.1 -20.2
70.0 40.4 60.3 -19.9
69.0 40.9 60.5 -19.6
68.0 41.1 60.2 -19.1
67.0 40.3 60.4 -20.1
66.0 40.2 60.2 -20.0
65.0 39.8 59.7 -19.9
64.0 39.4 59.4 -20.0

20
Mean focal length = sum of the readings
number of readings

= -319.3
16

= -20.0cm

Uncertainty = Max – Min

Number

= -21.3 – -19.0
16

= ±0.1cm

% uncertainty = ±0.7%

Conclusion:

The focal length of the diverging lens obtained from this experiment was:

Focal length = -20.0cm ± 0.7%

Evaluation:

This experiment had the same problems that applied to the previous four, the loose grid and lens holders, and the
uncertainties in the sharpness of the grid image and the measurement line on the holder.

The distance between values for the first focus point for the converging lens began to level off the closer the grid
was to the lens. This may be because the light rays did not have the space to spread out before they hit the lens.
One way around this problem would be to change the values of the grid position. This would allow the gap to stop
from getting too close to the lens.

This experiment in particular made it extremely difficult to find a sharp image of the grid after it had been reflected
off the mirror and the image was projected onto the grid. This created a very small image which was very difficult
to focus and see any sharp image at all. If I was to do this experiment again I would have used a more intense
light source.

21
 Conclusion
The results for the first three experiments are as follows:

14.5
14.4
14.3
Focal Length /cm

14.2
Minimum Value /cm
14.1
Average focal length /cm
14.0
Maximum value /cm
13.9
13.8
13.7
13.6
Experiment Experiment Experiment
1 2 3

The manufactures value for the focal length of the converging lens was 14cm. From the graph this value lies
between the minimum and maximum values for each experiment. The average values for each experiment are all
above this set value this may prove that the manufactures value is slightly out.

From my experiments the best method of calculating the focal length has been proved to be the first way. This was
the best as the value has the least uncertainty, it is also the value closest to the manufactures value. This was also
the easiest way to find the focal length. It only involved one measurement but it did require moving the source of
light.

22
The results for the last two experiments are as follows:

20.5

20
Focal Length /cm

19.5

19 Minimum Value /cm

Average focal length /cm
18.5
Maximum value /cm
18

17.5

17
Experiment 4 Experiment 5

The manufactures value for the focal length of the diverging lens in this case was -20cm. This would mean the
second experiment is the best way of calculating the focal length. This is because the value is equal to the
manufactures value. The first experiment is not accurate because the range of values does not come close to the -
20cm advised by the manufactures.

If I had had more time I would have definitely repeated the first of these two experiments as I believe it would
allow me to check whether the large error was down to my reading of the metre stick or if it was a systematic error
in the experiment.

Overall Conclusion
The best methods of calculating the focal lengths of converging and diverging lenses were experiments 1 and 5
respectively. The values were very close to the manufactures advised values.

The best value for the converging lens is 14.1cm ± 0.1cm. This compares to the value of 14cm given by the
manufactures. This was also the easiest way of measuring the focal length of a converging lens.

The best value for the diverging lens is -20.0cm ± 0.1cm. This value is equal to the manufactures advised value.
This was the only way that could really be considered as the uncertainty in the other value was too large and there
was a problem with the experiment. This problem was written about in the experiment 5 evaluation.

23