Zeke Smith

Derek Venteicher

Yajaira Arizmendi

11/21/2019

Simple Pendulum Motion Lab - WO 2

Introduction:

A pendulum is a system that possesses a restoring force that displays an oscillation

when its disturbed from equilibrium, and has inertia that causes the system to ‘overshoot’ the

equilibrium position. Some obvious examples of a simple pendulum could be seen as a

grandfather clock, a playground swing, and a ball attached to a string. These system of

pendulums exhibit simple harmonic motion, the most fundamental periodic motion to analyze.

Within this experiment the theory for a simple pendulum is analyzed by altering length, mass

and amplitude and determining the effects they have on a pendulum’s time period. A pendulum

is mounted on a cross bar with a motion detector placed across the pendulum at a distance of

75cm to record the displacement as the pendulum swings. Additionally, we wanted to analyze

the influence of length on the period of a pendulum's motion by plotting a graph in which the

length of the pendulum is on the x-axis and the time period is on the y axis, resulting in the

slope allowing us to calculate the acceleration due to gravity. If energy is conserved the slope

will remain constant if not the slope will decrease due to loss of momentum by friction or wind

resistance. Overall it was found that the only factor affecting a pendulum's period is the length of

the pendulum and energy will be conserved for one oscillation, however it will not be conserved

over many, many oscillations due to an open experimental area with the inability to control for

wind resistance and friction.

In this lab we test the theory for a simple pendulum, Galileo’s Theory. This speculation predicts

that the period, the length of the pendulum, and the acceleration due to gravity are all related in

the formula T = 2π √L/g . By examining the length of the pendulum, mass of the bob, and the

amplitude of the swing, we will be able to test the validity of the model of simple pendulum

theory. We will have to vary lengths in the pendulum while examining the period. Subsequently,

how we will test whether our data validates Galileo’s Theory or not, we will plot the length of the

pendulum on the x-axis, and we will plot the time period of the pendulum squared on the y-axis.

Thus, the graph should be linear, and after we divide the slope by 4πr , it should be

approximately equal to the value of gravity (9.8 m/s​2​).

Methods:

In order to determine the period for each of the explorations, we averaged the time taken for the

mass to go through multiple cycles. This offers a more statistically reproducible and accurate

value than simply using one cycle to approximate the period for the mass. In order to determine

the amplitude, we made use of the relationship sin θ = x / L, where x is the horizontal distance of

displacement towards and away from the sonic ranger, and L is the length of the pendulum. We

have included a statistical analysis to show that this formula is valid by comparing the amplitude

calculated using that model with an amplitude which we crudely measured using a protractor.

This data analysis is located in the “setup” section below. Using Logger Pro we took the

difference between the maximum(peak) and minimum(trough) distances and divided by two to

find the distance the metal ball is away from the sonic ranger in equilibrium position.

Exploration 1: The influence of Amplitude

To analyze the effects of amplitude on time period of a simple pendulum swing we took

three different starting points, no more than 20 degrees to ensure at least 2% accuracy. We
used an eyeballed displacement at 10 degrees, 15 degrees and 20 degrees. For all three

measurements we had a fixed length of 91cm +/- 5cm and mass of ___kg. It is predicted that

the amplitude of the swing will have no significant difference in period.

Exploration 2: The Influence of Pendulum Length

To analyze the influence of pendulum length on the period, we took 5 different string
+
lengths (0.91m − .05m, 0.83m +− .05m , 0.73m +
− .05m , 0.59m +
− .05m , 0.56m +
− .05m) and

plotted the values on a Length vs. Period graph in which the length is on the x-axis and time

period is on the y-axis, the slope would result in the acceleration due to gravity. It is predicted

that the longer the length of the pendulum the greater the period will be, due to the force
−mg
equation ( F = L * x) . There should be a significant difference present inperiod for the 5

strings, however the acceleration due to gravity should have no significant difference present as
m
gravity remains consistent at 9.8 s2
.

Exploration 3: The influence of Mass

Using a pendulum of fixed length at 0.61m, we tested the influence of mass by switching

out the mass of a metal bob (.3645 kg +/- .005kg) to a wooden one (.0405kg +/- .005 kg). It is

predicted that there will be no significant difference in period.

Exploration 4: Conservation of Energy

To measure the conservation of energy, the pendulum was placed at the maximum

length to minimize the noise associated with the velocity calculated through Logger Pro. In order

to agree the maximum point of potential energy should match the maximum kinetic energy at

the lowest point of the pendulum swing. The following equations can be developed based on the

components expressed in Figure 1.

PE max = mg(L − Lcosθmax ) = mgL (1 − cosθmax )

K E max = 21 mv 2 max
Discussion of Results:

Setup:

T = 5.55 s / 3 cycles = 1.85 s

L​ 1 =
​ 0.910 +/- 0.005 m

x ​ max​ = 0.934 +/- 0.005 m

x ​ min​ = 0.732 +/- 0.005 m

x = (0.934 m - 0.732 m) / 2 = 0.101 +/- 0.005 m

A = arcsin (x / L​ 1 )​ = arcsin (0.101 m / 0.910 m) = 6.37 °

A ​measured ​= 10 +/- 3°

I 10° - 6.37° I / (3°) = 1.2 standard deviations

This analysis validates that our method for mathematically determining the amplitude using the

previously mentioned mathematical model is a statistically accurate method, as it was within a

small number of standard deviations from the value that we actually physically measured. From

this point on we will use the mathematical method for calculating the amplitude rather than using

a protractor to measure it, because the protractor method is rather crude, and is of little value

other than to prove the mathematical method is valid.

Exploration 1: The Influence of Amplitude

x​1​ = (1.044 m - 0.635 m) / 2 = 0.205 +/- 0.005 m

T = (8.2s - 2.4 s) / 3 = 1.93 +/- 0.05 s

A​1 ​= arcsin(0.205 m / 0.91 m) = 13.0°

T = (4.05s - 2.1 s) = 1.90 +/- 0.05 s

A​1 =
​ arcsin(0.217 m / 0.91 m) = 13.8°

x​3​ = (1.048 m - 0.670 m) / 2 = 0.189 +/- 0.005 m

T = (3.15s - 1.25 s) = 1.90 +/- 0.05 s

A​1 =
​ arcsin(0.189 m / 0.91 m) = 12.5°

When we were going through our procedure, we mistakenly did trials in which the amplitude

was much closer than we would have liked. Unfortunately it was too late to go back and retake

the data with more widespread amplitudes when we realized the mistake we had made. With

that said, our data still suffices to show that the period remains constant even when the

amplitude is modified, although the modification to the amplitude was not very significant, the

period for each individual trial was very similar. Below is a statistical comparison of the data

points for the different amplitudes. All of them are within a very small number of standard

deviations of one another.

I 1.93 s - 1.90 s I / (0.05 s + 0.05 s) = 0.30

I 1.90 s - 1.90 s I / (0.05 s + 0.05 s) = 0

Exploration 2: The Influence of Pendulum Length

pendulum would impact the pendulum’s period. In order to determine this, we found the period

of the pendulum at five different lengths. The data we collected for the periods of varying

pendulum lengths is located below.

L​1​ = 0.910 +/- 0.015 m

T​1​ = (8.2 s - 2.4 s) / 3 = 1.93 +/- 0.05 s

L​2​ = 0.820 +/- 0.015 m

T​2​ = (7.8 s - 2.3 s) / 3 = 1.82 +/- 0.05 s

L​3​ = 0.725 +/- 0.015 m

T​3​ = (7.3 s- 2.1 s) / 3 = 1.73 +/- 0.05 s

L​4​ = 0.600 +/- 0.015 m

T​4​ = (8.05 s - 3.45 s) / 3 = 1.53 +/- 0.05 s

L​5​ = 0.545 +/- 0.015 m

T​5​ = (6.35 s - 1.9 s) / 3 = 1.48 +/- 0.05 s

After determining that the period is in fact affected by the pendulum’s length, we graphed the

lengths versus their respective period’s squared. Seeing whether or not our data points adhered

to a straight line provided us with the benefit of being able to see whether or not our data points

validate the accepted model for the period of a pendulum. If our data did forma straight line,

then we know our experiment does indeed support the accepted mathematical model. The

slope of the graph we made also provided us with the acceleration due to gravity, which we

recognized based off of the mathematical model: T = 2π √L/g . This model can be rearranged to

be written as T 2 = 4π 2 L/g . Using this rewritten model, we see that graphing the L on the x-axis

and T 2 on the y-axis will provide us with g when we multiply the slope by 4π 2 . The graph is
below, and below that are our calculations to find our experimental value for g. We also

compared this value to the theoretical value of acceleration due to gravity.

y = m x + b → T 2 = 4π 2 L/g + 0

T 2 /L = 4π 2 /g

The value we obtained for the slope of our graph ( T 2 /L ) was 4.264 +/- 0.1735, so:

4.264 = 4π 2 /g

g = 4π 2 / 4.264

g = 9.259 m/s​2

9.259 / 4.264 = 2.171 (0.1735) = 0.378 m/s​2

I 9.8 m/s​2​ - 9.259 m/s​2​ I / (0.378 m/s​2​) = 1.431

Our experimental value for g was within two standard deviations of the theoretical value of

acceleration due to gravity. This shows that our experiment does validate the accepted model

for acceleration due to gravity as well as for the period of a pendulum.

Exploration 3: The Influence of Mass

For our third exploration, our goal was to find whether or not the mass influences the period of a

pendulum, so long as the length does not change. In order to do this simple experiment, we

calculated the period of two different masses executing periodic motion on a pendulum of the

same length. The results are below.

L = 0.600 +/- 0.015 m

M​1​= 0.3645 +/- 0.005 kg

T​1​ = (8.05 s - 3.45 s) / 3 = 1.53 +/- 0.05 s

M​2​= 0.0405 +/- 0.005 kg

T​2​ = (6.55 s - 1.90 s) / 3 = 1.55 +/- 0.05 s

I 1.53 s- 1.55 s I/(0.05 s + 0.05 s) = 0.20

same length were within only 0.2 standard deviations of one another, our experiment confirmed

that the period of a pendulum is entirely independent of the mass of the pendulum.

Exploration 4: Conservation of Energy

Our final experiment for this lab had a goal of determining whether or not energy is conserved

for the motion of a pendulum over the course of one oscillation. In order to determine this, we

had to find the maximum potential energy of the mass on the pendulum, which occurred when

the pendulum was it it’s highest point. We used the model below for potential energy to

calculate this. In order to determine the height of the object at its highest point, we used the

length of the pendulum, and subtracted The length multiplied by the cosine of its amplitude, or

it’s maximum angular displacement. This provides us with the difference in the vertical distance

between when the mass is at its point of highest velocity (the pendulum is straight down) and

when it’s at its point of highest potential energy (when its angular displacement is a maximum).

If energy is conserved for the oscillation, then the maximum kinetic energy and maximum

potential energy should be the same within a reasonable discrepancy. In order to obtain the

maximum velocity of the object through one oscillation, we used the logger pro feature to find

what the velocity was when the mass was moving the quickest. We included an uncertainty of

+/- 0.005 m/s for this value to account for the possibility that the sonic ranger didn’t quite capture

the velocity when it was exactly at its quickest pace.

L = 0.910 +/- 0.015 m

m = 0.3645 +/- 0.005 kg

v​max =
​ 0.651 +/- 0.005 m/s
x = (1.101 m - 0.712 m) / 2 = 0.195 m

θ​max​ = arcsin (x / L​ ​) = arcsin (0.195 m / 0.910 m) = 12.4°

KE​max​ = ½ m v​max​2

PE​max​ = mg(L - L cosθ​max​)

KE​max​ = ½ (0.3645 kg) (0.651 m/s) 2​​ = 0.0772 +/- 0.0070 J

Unc. KE / KE = unc. m / m + 2(unc. v / v )

Unc. KE = (0.005 kg / 0.3645 kg + 2(0.050 m/s / 0.651 m/s)) 0.0772 J

Unc. KE = 0.0070 J

PE​max​ = (0.3645 kg)(9.8 m/s​2​)(0.910 m - 0.910 m cos(12.4°)) = 0.0758 +/- 0.0023 J

Unc. PE / PE = unc. m / m + unc. L / L

Unc. PE = (0.005 kg / 0.3645 kg + 0.015 m / 0.910 m) 0.0758 J

Unc. PE = 0.0023 J

I 0.0772 J - 0.0758 J I / (0.0070 J + 0.0023 J) = 0.150

Based off of the extremely small discrepancy between the maximum kinetic and potential

energies of the pendulum, we can confirm that energy is confirmed for a singular oscillation of a

pendulum. Our experimental results showed that the discrepancy between the maximum kinetic

and potential energies were within a mere 0.150 standard deviations of one another, showing

that energy is most certainly conserved for a singular oscillation. This, however, would not apply

over a very long period of time after many oscillations, because forces such as friction and wind

resistance, even if negligible for one oscillation, would not be negligible over the course of many

oscillations, as they would eventually act to slow the mass, meaning energy would no longer be

conserved over a longer time period.