Scribd
Upload
11 views11 pages

Investigation on Springs in Parallel and Series

The investigation aims to determine the spring constant and examine the behavior of springs in parallel and series configurations. It confirms Hooke's Law, showing that springs in series experience greater total extension while those in parallel have reduced extension due to shared force. The results align with theoretical predictions, highlighting the effective spring constants in different arrangements.

Uploaded by

ayolurvsvibez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
11 views11 pages

Investigation on Springs in Parallel and Series

The investigation aims to determine the spring constant and examine the behavior of springs in parallel and series configurations. It confirms Hooke's Law, showing that springs in series experience greater total extension while those in parallel have reduced extension due to shared force. The results align with theoretical predictions, highlighting the effective spring constants in different arrangements.

Uploaded by

ayolurvsvibez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 11

Investigation on Springs in Parallel and

Series

Aim

 To determine the spring constant by measuring the extension of a


spring under different loads.

 To investigate how springs behave when arranged in parallel,


showing that their extension is reduced and the force is shared
between them.

 To examine how springs behave in series, demonstrating that the


total extension increases while the force remains the same.

Theory

Hooke’s Law states that the extension of a spring (x) is directly


proportional to the force applied (F), as long as the elastic limit
isn’t exceeded. This relationship is given by:
F=kx

where k is the spring constant (N/m).

When springs are in parallel, the load is shared between them,


leading to a reduced extension. Conversely, when springs are
in series, the total extension increases because each spring
experiences the same force but stretches individually.
Hypothesis

Parallel Configuration: The extension will be half that of a single


spring under the same load because the force is shared
between the springs.

Series Configuration: The extension will be double that of a


single spring under the same load since each spring
experiences the full force and stretches independently.

Expected Results from Hooke’s Law:

Parallel Configuration: The effective spring constant increases


as more springs are added, reducing extension which shows
that the extension is halved compared to a single spring.

Series Configuration: The effective spring constant decreases,


leading to greater extension which shows that the extension is
doubled compared to a single spring.

A spring, if you don’t stretch it too much, should obey Hooke’s


Law. i.e. the force F stretching it is proportional to the extension
𝑥 produced, or:

𝐹=𝑘𝑥
Where:
F and 𝑥 are directly proportional, so a graph of 𝐹 vs 𝑥 will be a
straight line through the origin.

𝐹 is calculated from the formula:

𝐹 =𝑚(kg)×𝑔

𝑥 is calculated from:
𝑥=extended position−original position

Variables

 Independent Variable: The force applied (weight added),


(g=9.81m/s^2) changed by adding or removing 100g
masses.

 Dependent Variable: The extension of the spring,


measured using a metre ruler.

 Controlled Variables:

o Type of springs used (same throughout the


experiment).
o Initial length of springs (measured before applying
any load).

o Consistent method of measuring extension to reduce


errors.

Equipment

Springs (x6)

mass (100g each)

Metre ruler

Clamp stand with boss and clamps

Additional stands (for support)

Method

 Series Spring Experiment


o Attach a single spring to the stand and measure its
natural length.

o Add a 100g mass and record the new length, then


calculate the extension.

o Repeat this process by adding more masses, recording


the extension each time.

o Repeat the experiment using two springs in series,


measuring the extension of one spring.

o Continue adding more springs in series (up to five),


recording the new extensions.

o Plot a graph of the number of springs (N) against the


extension (x).

 Parallel Spring Experiment

o Attach two identical springs in parallel to a stand.

o Add a 500g mass and measure the extension.

o Record the extension and compare it to the single


spring’s extension.
o Increase the number of parallel springs to three, then
measure and record the new extension.

o Continue increasing the number of springs up to six and


record each extension.

o Plot a graph of the number of springs (N) against the


extension (x).

Diagrams
o Each measurement was taken three times to improve
accuracy and minimize anomalies.
o An indent on the bar that held the springs kept the springs
in place so it didn’t move marked the position of the
spring, reducing parallax error.
o A fiducial marker to mark the starting position of the
springs
o The masses were carefully added using a clamp to
prevent sudden impacts that could cause excessive
stretching.
Results Table

Series Configuration

Number of Springs (N) Extension (m)


1 0.035
2 0.110
3 0.180
4 0.270

Parallel Configuration

Number of Springs (N) Extension (m)


2 0.14
3 0.11
4 0.081
5 0.068
6 0.058
Graph

Quantitative Evaluation

Systematic Errors:

 The weights used may have slight inaccuracies in mass,


affecting force calculations.

 The metre ruler’s zero mark may not be perfectly aligned,


leading to small offsets in measurements.

Identified from Graphs:


 The y-intercept of the series configuration graph was
around 0.1N, indicating a slight systematic error.

 The y-intercept of the parallel configuration graph was


about 0.5N, likely due to initial tension in the springs.

Qualitative Evaluation

 One key issue was parallax error—where the


measurement of the spring’s extension could vary
depending on the angle of view. This could lead to slightly
inconsistent results. To reduce this:

 The ruler should be placed as close to the spring as


possible.

 The observer’s eye level should be aligned with the


measurement markings when recording values.

Evaluation & Improvements

 Using a digital displacement sensor instead of a ruler


would improve precision.

 Ensuring weights are accurately calibrated would minimize


systematic errors.
 Increasing the number of repeated trials would provide
more reliable averages.
Conclusion

The experiment confirmed Hooke’s Law and demonstrated the


expected behaviour of springs in series and parallel:

 Springs in series had a greater total extension because


each spring stretched individually under the same force.

 Springs in parallel had a reduced extension because the


force was shared between them.

The results closely matched the theoretical predictions,


reinforcing the concepts of effective spring constants in
different configurations.

You might also like