• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12
  13. 13
    13
  14. 14
    14
  15. 15
    15
  16. 16
    16
  17. 17
    17
  18. 18
    18

Damping of an mechanic oscillator.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Damping of an mechanic oscillator

Introduction

An object oscillates when it moves back and forth repeatedly, on either side of some fixed position (centre). If we stop it from oscillating, it returns to it original position. This sort object is called an oscillator. Vibrations exist in two types: free and forced. An object experiences forced oscillations when its frequency (number of vibrations per second) is not its natural frequency of vibrations. If its frequency of vibrations is its natural one, it will then experience free vibrations.

When the amplitude of oscillations of an object remains the same as it goes back and forth, the oscillations of that object are harmonic. And if the amplitude decreases instead, it is said that oscillations are damped and the phenomenon is called damping.

In this experiment, I will study what might affect damping and then measure it.

Study of some oscillators

  1. A mass-spring system

I set using a tall stand, springs, a hanger and three 50gram masses, a system that I got to oscillate. I hold and displaced slightly the masses vertically downwards making sure I don’t deform any of the springs and released it. As a let it oscillate for a few minutes, I noticed that the displacement (from the originial position) of the oscillations was deceasing for the system of masses tended to return back to its original position. The room in which I processed this experiment but I could hear a small sound caused by the conpression and extension of springs.

  1. A pendulum

I set a piece of string of about a metre long that I rolled and attached one end on a cork pad, and at the other end I fixed a small sphere mass. I pull the mass some distance sideways and let it go.

...read more.

Middle

image13.pngimage13.pngimage09.pngimage09.png

image24.pngimage19.pngimage02.pngimage17.pngimage01.png

         t1/2

image25.pngimage02.pngimage01.png

         t1/2image03.png

image26.pngimage01.png

         t1/2image04.png

Interpretation

We observed this and besides looking at the graph, we can clearly see that the gradient is large at the beginning and gets less steeper towards the end so the change in amplitude is fast at the beginning but slower towards the end. And this makes sense since the amplitude decreases with the amount of starting amplitude.

Modifications and improvement

  1. Reading of amplitude

The reading of the amplitude was generally bad since marks on the scale are too close together an the chances to read (human judgement) the wrong one were high. Using a graph paper stuck on the table (it would move if not), we can draw lines of fixed amplitudes. A maximum amplitude of 10.0cm to allow the steel blade to oscillate for a considerable time before we start recording measurements.

  1. Timing

I could not feel confident with the time since each signal was suddent, and so the reaction time of the timer high. We wanted reaction  to be as small as possible so that our experiment would be reliable. To do that, when I had to record the time, my partner would say to me <get ready>, <get ready>, <it’s near>, <it’s near>, <almost there>, <NOW!>. I would have had enough time to concentrate and focus on starting and reseting the stopclock and so my reaction time would be very small. I had to the same for my partner when she had the turn to measure the time. To estimate the reaction time, we did a very simple test using a ruler. I vertically hold the lower end of the ruler (assumed to be 0cm). My parner hold a stopclock. She said: <get ready>, <steady>, <NOW!

...read more.

Conclusion

:2.67px;">image08.png

To find the average half life, I summed them all then divided by 4.

t1/2(average) = (57.5s + 57.5s+ 60.0s + 57.5s)/4 = 58.1s

The relation relating half life and decay constant is t1/2(average) = 0.693/λ so

58.1= 0.693/λ and then λ = 0.693/58.1s = 0.0119s-1

Half life measured t1/2 (s)image10.png

t1/2 initial    t1/2 final       t1/2

Average half file

t1/2               (s)

Decay constant

λ    

(s-1)

17.5

75.0

57.5

58.1

0.0119

75.0

132.5

57.5

132.5

192.5

60.0

192.5

250.0

57.5

image28.pngimage11.pngimage06.pngimage12.pngimage06.pngimage12.png

                 10             55          102.5                    150               250

        45         45              47.5                50image08.pngimage07.pngimage08.pngimage07.pngimage08.pngimage07.pngimage07.pngimage08.png

t1/2(average) = (45.0s + 47.5s + 47.5s + 50.0s)/4 = 47.5s

λ = 0.693/47.5s = 0.0146s-1

Half life measured t1/2(s)

image10.png

t1/2 initial    t1/2 final       t1/2

Average half file

t1/2               (s)

Decay constant

λ

(s-1)

10.0

55.0

45.0

47.5

0.0146

55.0

102.5

47.5

102.5

150.0

47.5

150.0

200.0

50.0

image29.pngimage14.pngimage14.pngimage11.pngimage12.pngimage12.png

                7.5           42.5                75                 110            145                

        35s        32.5s        35s                   35simage07.pngimage07.pngimage07.pngimage08.pngimage08.pngimage07.pngimage08.pngimage08.png

1/2(average) = (35.0s + 32.5s + 35.0s + 35.0s)/4 = 34.4s

λ = 0.693/34.4s = 0.0201s-1

Half life measured t1/2 (s)

image10.png

t1/2 initial   t1/2 final       t1/2

Average half file

t1/2               (s)

Decay constant

λ  

(s-1)

7.5

42.5

35.0

34.4

0.0201

42.5

75.0

32.5

75.0

110.0

35.0

110.0

145.0

35.0

image30.pngimage06.pngimage15.pngimage16.pngimage15.pngimage06.png

                 12.5                   50           87.5           124.5         162.5

                             37.5s               37.5s           37s            38simage08.pngimage07.pngimage07.pngimage07.pngimage07.pngimage08.pngimage08.pngimage08.png

t1/2(average) = (37.5s + 37.5s + 37.0s + 38.0s)/4 = 37.5s

λ = 0.693/37.5s = 0.0185s-1

Half life measured t1/2 (s)

image10.png

t1/2 initial    t1/2 final       t1/2

Average half file t1/2               (s)

Decay constant

λ    

(s-1)

12.5

50

37.5

37.5

0.0185

50

87.5

37.5

87.5

124.5

37

124.5

162.5

38

image31.pngimage15.pngimage12.pngimage06.pngimage18.pngimage18.png

                  5                 29                             53              76                    100

         24s              24s              23s         25s

t1/2(average) = (24.0s + 24.0s + 23.0s + 25.0s)/4 = 24.0s

λ = 0.693/24.0s = 0.0289s-1

Half life measured t1/2 (s)

t1/2 initial   t1/2 final       t1/2

Average half file t1/2               (s)

Decay constant  λ

(s-1)

5.0

29.0

24.0

24.0

0.0289

29.0

53.0

24.0

53.0

76.0

23.0

75.0

100.0

25.0

image33.png

               0               24              46                      68              94

                               24s            22s        22s                    26s

t1/2(average) = (24.0s + 22.0s + 22.0s + 26.0s)/4 = 23.5s

λ = 0.693/23.5s = 0.0295s-1

Half life measured t1/2 (s)

t1/2 initial   t1/2 final       t1/2

Average half file t1/2               (s)

Decay constant λ

(s-1)

0.0

24.0

24.0

23.5

0.0295

24.0

46.0

22.0

46.0

68.0

22.0

68.0

94.0

26.0

Theory

...read more.

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Waves & Cosmology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Waves & Cosmology essays

  1. Simple Harmonic Motion of a mass-spring system.

    During the oscillation, the following points were observed: a). motion of the mass was needed to be vertically upwards and then downwards b). the oscillation was needed to be at a steady rate 4. The experiment was repeated several times using different masses suspended at the end of the spring by attaching the weight hangers to the spring. 5.

  2. Determine the value of 'g', where 'g' is the acceleration due to gravity.

    = 8.20-9.38 = -1.18 Therefore the error in the value gravity is +1.56 and -1.18. As I have worked out the minimum and maximum values of the gradient, I will now need to work out the maximum and minimum intercepts along my original intercept.

  1. An investigation into the time period of a mass-spring oscillating system.

    We know this because the difference in the time periods decreased as we increased the weight, showing that the energy delivered to make the weights oscillate must increase. My hypothesis that the time periods would increase with more mass was proven correct by my first two graphs, but I did

  2. What factors affect the period of a Baby Bouncer?

    As the initial force applied is proportional to the extension, I realised a larger force needed to be applied. Therefore a 4cm force was applied, which gave an ample oscillation for times to be recorded from, hence this force being used in this investigation.

  1. Investigating the Vertical Oscillations of a Loaded Spring.

    3rd 7.45 0.3 average 7.47 0.75 0.56 0.4 1st 0.393 8.37 2nd 8.50 3rd 8.38 0.4 average 8.42 0.84 0.71 0.5 1st 0.491 9.34 2nd 9.43 3rd 9.25 0.5 average 9.34 0.93 0.87 Analysis: From the graph we can see that the gradient is equal to 0.5199 meaning that 4P2/K = 1.8104.

  2. Investigation into factors affecting the time period for oscillations in a mass-spring system.

    mass of 0.098kg meaning there is a percentage error of around 2% in the masses I am using in my experiment. Although this is a larger error than would be preferable, if the same masses are used in both the force - extension experiment and the mass - oscillation experiment the values for the spring constant should still be comparable.

  1. An Experiment To Examine the Effect of Springs In Parallel

    in parallel the 1/Ex is 77cm, then when the number of springs are doubled to 4 springs in parallel the extension is 159cm. 77cm is about half of 156cm. There is a difference of 1cm. This concludes that my prediction was correct - when the number of springs is doubled, the extension, is halved.

  2. The Stiffness Of Springs

    Spring III (mm) 1 175 2 206 3 241 4 272 5 305 6 337 Mass No. Spring IV (mm) 1 182 2 217 3 252 4 286 5 321 6 355 Springs in Series Mass No.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work