“The extension is directly proportional to the load”

Equipment List:

-springs

-weights hanger

-Newton weights

-stand

-clamp

-boss

-meter ruler

Please look at the equipment list and set up as shown in the diagram.

I would measure the extension of each spring in series and individually. I would record my results in a table. I will measure each extension three times.

I will change the weights and the place of the ruler to stop myself assuming results and to keep them correct and accurate. I will change the amount of springs from one to two in series.

I will measure the extension accurately. I will keep the weight on the springs equal, and make sure each spring, in length and diameter the same. I will use the same springs each time and equipment to make it a fair test.

To keep everyone safe around me, we will wear safety glasses. I will make sure all obstacles are under the table and that all chairs are pushed in. I will also check that the apparatus is away from the edge of the desk.

From the evidence, I have noticed the series springs extend more than a single spring. The series springs extend about twice the length of the single spring.

The graph shows clearly that with every Newton added the spring extended accordingly. The extension each time is noticeably approximately the same as the previous point. The series springs extension compared to the single is extended approximately twice the single spring. This supports Hooke’s Law that:

“The extension is directly proportional to the load”

Please refer to graph 2.

If one springs extension is x, I have noticed that springs in series are 2x. Therefore 2x equals the double extension for series compared to x. My results conclude that the extension is directly proportional to the load this confirms Hooke’s Law. This concludes that every Newton extends the spring by Xmm each time and the series extends by 2Xmm each time. This supports my previous prediction.

I feel the reliability of the evidence is good as the test was fair. There was a few things I could of changed that would of helped make my evidence more reliable, like I could of weighted the Newton weights to make sure they were exactly one Newton each. I could have used a straight hanger, as mine was slightly bent and this could have given me more accurate results. I feel the results were in sync with each other as I didn’t change my hanger; therefore they were under the same conditions. All my results mainly support my conclusion although there were a few anomalies to deal with. There was one anomaly that stood out that was the extension of the series spring when the load was four Newton. I think I can account for it by feeling I misread the new length.

If I was to repeat this experiment I would make sure all the Newtons were one Newton exact. That all my equipment was in pristine condition and able to be used to give accurate results, so I could support Hooke’s Law sufficiently.

Diane Smith

Triple

Yr 11