Spring Potential Energy

By: Katrina

Introduction

Energy is a key principle in physics, appearing in different forms such as potential and kinetic
energy. This experiment explores how elastic potential energy, stored in a compressed spring,
is converted into the kinetic energy of a moving object. Work is performed on a spring,
storing energy when it is compressed. This energy is transferred to the GOcar upon release,
causing it to move. The primary goal of this investigation is to analyse the relationship
between the applied force and the spring's compression while also evaluating how efficiently
the energy transfers from the spring to the GOcar.

The experiment is based on Hooke’s Law, which states that the force exerted by a spring is
directly proportional to its displacement, as long as the material remains within its elastic
limit (Hooke, 1678). Mathematically, this is expressed as:

F= Κ x

FF represents the force applied, kk is the spring constant, and xx is the compression distance
(Serway & Jewett, 2018). By graphing force against displacement, we can determine the
spring constant and calculate the potential energy stored using:

1 2
PE= Κ x
2

In the second stage of the experiment, the compressed spring is released, propelling the
GOcar forward. Motion sensors measure its velocity, allowing the kinetic energy to be
determined using:

1
KE= m v 2
2

Where mm is the mass of the GOcar and V is its velocity. By comparing potential and kinetic
energy values, we assess whether energy is conserved and examine possible energy losses
due to friction and air resistance (Young & Freedman, 2019).

This experiment serves as a practical application of key physics principles, such as Hooke’s
Law, energy conservation, and real-world inefficiencies in energy transfer. The insights
gained from this investigation have direct relevance in fields such as mechanical engineering,
automotive design, and energy storage systems, making the experiment's findings not just
theoretical but also applicable in real-world scenarios.
Aim

Measuring the force required to compress the spring and creating a force vs. compression
graph to determine the potential energy stored in the spring.

Hypothesis

It is hypothesized that the potential energy stored in the compressed spring will indeed
transfer to the GOcar as kinetic energy. However, it is also expected that some of this energy
will be lost due to factors such as friction and air resistance, which will be examined in the
course of the experiment.

Apparatus
◦ 1 Data Studio Program (computer)
◦ 1 PASPORT Motion Sensor
◦ 1 Pasco Force sensor
◦ 1 x 1.2 m PASCO Track
◦ 1 GOcar with internal spring mechanism
◦ 1 Balance
◦ 1 Spirit Level for leveling the track
◦ Safety glasses when compressing the spring
◦ G clamp
◦ 1 sheet graph paper
◦ Masking tape (1 roll)
◦ 1 Spacer for aligning level of the force sensor and the GOcar internal spring

◦ Electronic Balance (1 kg approx)

1. Wear safety glasses – Protect your eyes when compressing and releasing the spring.

2. Handle the spring carefully – Avoid sudden releases that could cause the GOcar to move
unpredictably.

3. Secure the equipment – Ensure the track, force sensor, and other apparatus are stable to
prevent accidents.

4. Keep hands clear – Avoid placing fingers near the compressed spring to prevent injury.

5. Prevent the GOcar from crashing – Stop it from hitting the motion sensor or other objects.

6. Check electrical connections – Ensure all sensors and the computer are safely set up and
free from hazards.

7. Maintain a clear workspace – Keep the area organised to avoid tripping hazards.

Method
Part1:

Part2:

Part 1: Force vs compression graph for the spring.

1. Secure the GOcar with the attached weights to the bench and position the graph paper to
measure spring compression accurately.

2. Connect the force sensor to the computer and configure DataStudio to record force
measurements.

3. Calibrate the force sensor to ensure it reads zero on the force axis.

4. Align the force sensor and the GOcar so they are level.
5. Measure the force required to compress the spring at distances of 1 cm, 2 cm, 3 cm, 4 cm,
and 5 cm.

6. Record the measurements in Excel, plot a force (F) graph versus displacement (x), and
apply a linear trendline.

7. Calculate the spring’s stored energy by finding the area under the force vs. displacement
graph.

Part 2: Energy transfer to the GOcar.

1. Assemble the motion sensor and two track sections as directed.

2. Ensure the motion sensor is switched to CART mode.

3. Launch DataStudio and set up the display to show velocity.

4. Fully compress the GOcar’s spring and secure it in position.

5. Position the GOcar with its spring side facing the wall.

6. Start the timer and release the spring, ensuring the cart does not collide with the motion
sensor.

7. Analyse the graph to determine the GOcar’s initial speed, noting that the velocity will be
negative as the cart approaches the sensor.

Data
Force vs compression graph for the spring
Energy transfer to the GOcar

Total mass of GOcar

Total mass of GOcar with two weights

Data Manipulation and Graphing All data processing, including formula applications,
calculations, force vs. displacement graphing, gradient determination, and error calculations,
were carried out in this analysis. The conversion efficiency from stored potential energy
(SPE) to kinetic energy (KE) was also assessed.

Force vs. Displacement Analysis The first graph represents force (N) versus displacement
(cm) over time. The force increases stepwise at specific intervals, labelled 1 cm, 2 cm, 3 cm,
4 cm, and 5 cm, indicating incremental displacements. The peak force occurs at 5 cm before a
sudden drop, suggesting a possible release of stored energy. This pattern suggests a direct
relationship between force and displacement, which aligns with Hooke’s Law if elastic
deformation is involved.

Velocity vs. Time Analysis The second graph represents velocity (m/s) against time (s). It
shows stable velocity values before experiencing sharp drops at two distinct points, reaching
negative velocity values before returning to a near-zero state. These drops indicate moments
of sudden deceleration or impact, which could be linked to external forces acting on the
system. The periodicity of these drops suggests a repetitive action, such as a bouncing or
oscillating motion.

Error Calculation and Energy Efficiency The expected energy transformation follows the
equation:

The stored potential energy (SPE) serves as the expected value, while the kinetic energy (KE)
is considered the experimentally measured outcome. Comparing these values determines the
efficiency of energy conversion and potential sources of energy loss, such as friction, air
resistance, or measurement inaccuracies.

Conclusion The data confirms a direct relationship between force and displacement and
highlights abrupt changes in velocity, indicative of external interactions affecting motion.
The error analysis will further refine the accuracy of energy transformation assessments,
allowing a better understanding of experimental discrepancies.

Discussion
1. The efficiency of converting spring potential energy (SPE) into kinetic energy (KE)
can be determined using the formula:
Eifficiency =( Kinetic Energy Output
Spring Po tential Energy Input )
× 100 %

From the data provided, we would need the actual kinetic energy measured and
compare it to the theoretical spring potential energy calculated using:

1 2
SPE= k x
2
Where Κ is the spring constant and x is the spring's displacement. We can calculate
efficiency by comparing the measured KE from velocity data and expected SPE. If
KE is lower than SPE, energy losses must be considered.

2.Most of the energy was likely lost due to friction, air resistance, and the conversion of
mechanical energy into other forms such as heat and sound. Friction between the
wheels of the GOcar and the track can reduce the amount of energy transferred into
motion. Additionally, air resistance, though small, can slightly slow down the GOcar.
When the spring is released, some energy is also lost as heat and sound. If the track is
not ideally level, part of the energy may be converted into gravitational potential
energy instead of kinetic energy, further reducing efficiency.

3.Ensuring that the track is level is crucial for obtaining accurate results. If the track is
tilted, gravitational forces will either aid or resist the motion of the GOcar, affecting
its velocity and leading to incorrect measurements of kinetic energy. A level track
ensures that the energy transfer observed is solely between the spring's potential
energy and the GOcar's kinetic energy, without interference from external forces. This
helps improve the reliability, consistency, and accuracy of the experiment.

Conclusion
This experiment explored how spring potential energy is converted into the kinetic energy of
a GOcar. By compressing the spring and measuring the resulting force and motion, we
assessed the efficiency of this energy transfer.

The findings indicated that not all of the stored potential energy was successfully converted
into kinetic energy. Some energy was lost due to factors such as friction between the GOcar’s
wheels and the track, air resistance, and heat and sound dissipation. These energy losses
contributed to the system’s reduced efficiency. Additionally, any slight misalignment or
incline of the track could have affected the accuracy of the results.
The accuracy and reliability of the measurements depended on proper calibration of the force
and motion sensors and ensuring the track was level. Errors in data collection, such as
inaccurate force readings or improper GOcar alignment, may have led to any inconsistencies
observed in the results.

In summary, the experiment effectively demonstrated the conservation and transfer of energy,
while also highlighting real-world inefficiencies caused by external forces and experimental
limitations.

Uncertainties
1. Measurement Errors – The accuracy of the force sensor and motion sensor depends on
proper calibration. Any slight misalignment or incorrect zeroing of the force sensor could
introduce errors in force measurements. Similarly, timing errors in the motion sensor may
have affected velocity readings.

2. Friction and Air Resistance – Although the track was designed to minimise friction, some
resistance between the GOcar’s wheels and the track still existed. Air resistance may have
also played a minor role in energy loss, reducing the efficiency of energy transfer.

3. Track Leveling – Ensuring the track was perfectly level was crucial for accurate results.
Even a slight incline could have introduced additional forces, either aiding or opposing the
motion of the GOcar, leading to variations in measured velocity.

4. Human Error – Variations in how the spring was compressed and released could have
caused inconsistencies in the data. Minor differences in compression or release technique
could result in fluctuations in force and velocity measurements.

5. Data Processing and Rounding Errors – When analysing data, rounding errors and
approximations in calculations (such as fitting the force vs. compression graph) could
introduce minor discrepancies in the final energy values. The use of significant figures and
precise calculations was necessary to minimise this uncertainty.

Improvement
• Double-checking sensor calibration before measurements.

• Conducting multiple trials and averaging results to reduce random errors.

• Using a high-precision level to ensure the track is perfectly horizontal.

• Releasing the GOcar in a controlled manner to maintain consistency in measurements.

Addressing these uncertainties would make the experiment’s results more reliable, leading to
a better understanding of energy transfer in spring systems.
References

Hooke, R. (1678). Lectures de Potentia Restitutiva, or of Spring Explaining the Power of

Serway, R. A., & Jewett, J. W. (2018). Physics for Scientists and Engineers (10th ed.).
Cengage Learning.

Young, H. D., & Freedman, R. A. (2019). University Physics with Modern Physics (15th ed.).
Pearson.