Vector Addition

Aim: To investigate the addition of vectors through experimentation.

Equipment:
o 3 spring balances o 3 strings
o 2 retort stands o 50g mass carrier
o 2 boss heads o Protractor

Method:
1) Set up experiment according to Diagram 1:
a) Place two retort stands a sufficient distance apart so that there is enough tension to
hold the spring balances together.
b) Secure boss heads to retort stands at different levels; one higher than the other.
c) Calibrate each spring balance, and attach two to each boss head.
d) Tie a string to each end of the spring balances (F1 and F2), and then tie these strings
together
e) Tie the last string to the top of the third spring balance (W), then attach it to the other
strings
f) Hook a mass carrier onto W
2) Record the reading on each spring balance.
3) Measure the angles θ1 and θ2 using a protractor and record measurements.

Results:
F1: 0.7N θ1: 118°
F2: 0.9N θ2: 132°
W: 0.4N
Working graphically from Diagram 3, the resultant vector (in red) equals to 0.54, and it’s
direction is 6° to the vertical.

Class Results:
GROUP NET FORCE (N) DIRECTION (° TO THE
VERTICAL)
Group 1 0.54 6.0
Group 2 0.523 10
Group 3 0.66 4.5
Group 4 0.45 8.5
Group 5 0.34 8.0
Discussion
There were several errors introduced, most of which were systematic errors, and to a lesser
degree, random error (wind perhaps disturbing equilibrium). The main form of systematic
error present was parallax error, as all measurements were done by hand and the naked
eye. It is unlikely that when measuring the angles, the reading on the protractor was
observed at the same, or even the correct level for each measurement. The background
would also make it difficult to see the exact degrees, and while we did place white paper
behind the protractor and take pictures to try and get the measurements as precise as
possible, the former precaution was not taken for all measurements. The parallax error also
applies to the readings taken from the spring balances.
Another systematic error that could have affected the experiment relating to the spring
balances is offset error, as even though we made sure to calibrate the spring balances
before the experiment, we cannot definitively say that they were calibrated properly.
In terms of the experiment’s reliability, there was relative consistency within the
measurements, with the exception of the direction of the net force recorded by Group 2. The
reason for this may be for those explained above. However, if this outlier is excluded, the
results are consistent, and therefore reliable.
To improve the overall accuracy and reliability of the experiment, perhaps better equipment,
like spring balances with more increments, and also more care in taking measurements, like
we attempted to do by taking a picture and using a blank piece of paper.

Conclusion
As seen in the evaluation in the discussion, the experiment was overall valid, as it was
relatively accurate and reliable. It demonstrated the principle of vector addition well, however
the design of the experiment can be improved to make the experiment more accurate and
reliable.