Professional Documents
Culture Documents
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
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
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
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,
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.
Conclusion
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
enhance the effectiveness of the purpose of this experiment and also the productivity of
the performers.