OCR GCE Physics B G496 Coursework (Experiment)

HOW DO DIFFERENT FACTORS
AFFECT THE FUNDAMENTAL

FREQUENCY OF A WOUND NICKEL
WIRE?
By
Maurice Yap
Peter Symonds College
Experiment-based report for the qualification, OCR GCE Physics B (Advancing Physics)
November 2014
How do different factors affect the fundamental frequency of a wound nickel wire?
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Aims of the investigation .................................................................................................................................................. 1
2. Plan ...................................................................................................................... 1
2.1. Method .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
2.2. Variables ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1
2.3. Risk assesment and precautions .................................................................................................................................... 2
2.3.1. Electrical hazard ....................................................................................................................................................... 2
2.3.2. Heavy masses ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
2.3.3. Stretched wire .......................................................................................................................................................... 3
3. Preliminary test ................................................................................................... 3

3.1. Modifications to method due to preliminary experiment ............................................................................................ 4
3.1.1. Amendments to safety precautions ......................................................................................................................... 4
3.2. Findings of preliminary test ........................................................................................................................................... 4
4. Carrying out the experiment ................................................................................ 5

4.1. Uncertainties .................................................................................................................................................................... 5
4.2. Experiment 1 ................................................................................................................................................................... 5
4.3. Experiment 2 ....................................................................................................................................................................7
4.4. Experiment 3 ................................................................................................................................................................... 9
4.5. Experiment 4 .................................................................................................................................................................. 11
5. Overall conclusion and analysis .......................................................................... 13

5.1. Comparison with Mersennes laws ................................................................................................................................14
5.2. Errors and anomalies ..................................................................................................................................................... 15
5.3. Limitations of equipment .............................................................................................................................................. 15
6. Reference List..................................................................................................... 15
7. Appendices ......................................................................................................... 15
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Diagram of the setup of my initial method idea ........................................................................................................ 1
Figure 2: Force diagram of mass and pulley system ................................................................................................................ 2
Figure 3: Moments diagram for lever on sonometer ............................................................................................................... 3
Figure 4: Diagram of the setup of my initial method idea ...................................................................................................... 4
Figure 5: Scatter graph plotting frequency2 against tension for experiment 1 ...................................................................... 6
Figure 6: Scatter graph plotting frequency2 against tension for experiment 2 ..................................................................... 8
Figure 7: Scatter graph plotting frequency2 against tension for experiment 3.................................................................... 10
Figure 8: Scatter graph plotting frequency-1 against length for experiment 4 .....................................................................12
Figure 9: Maximum and minimum gradients of graph for experiment 1. ............................................................................16
Figure 10: Maximum and minimum gradients of graph for experiment 2. ..........................................................................16
Figure 11: Maximum and minimum gradients of graph for experiment 3. .......................................................................... 17
Figure 12: Maximum and minimum gradients of graph for experiment 4. .......................................................................... 17
ii
GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946
1.INTRODUCTION
1.1.AIMS OF THE INVESTIGATION
The objective is to explore how the factors of the tension and length of a wound nickel wire change the
fundamental frequency of it. It will be investigated through an experiment where a string will be plucked
and the frequency it produces will be recorded. The nature of the relationship between the frequency and
the two independent variables will then deduced from the results of the experiment.
2.PLAN
2.1.METHOD
I will attach the wire between two wooden blocks using a G-clamp and the desk. The wire will be used to
hang masses on hooks (for ease of adjustability) off the edge of the desk through a smooth pulley. The wire
will then be plucked. Using a microphone, held in place either by a microphone stand or using a boss and
clamps, that is connected to a laptop, the frequency of the sound produced will be recorded. Repeats of this
result will be taken and then the mass will be changed. A diagram of this setup is shown in figure 1.
XLR (sound) cable
Microphone stand
Laptop
Microphone
Universal
audio
interface
Wound nickel wire
Laptop
power
supply
cable
Wooden blocks
USB cable
Desk
Smooth
pulley
Masses
on a
hook
G-clamp
Padded deep
plastic tray
FIGURE 1: DIAGRAM OF THE SETUP OF MY INITIAL METHOD IDEA
2.2.VARIABLES
I have decided to change the two independent variables of tension on the wire and the length of the wire. I
will conduct up to five experiments, each using a different length of vibrating wire, where the tension is
changed by changing the mass hanging from the wire (the force diagram for this is shown in figure 2). As
well as this, I will conduct another where the tension on the wire remains constant, but the length that is
allowed to vibrate, changes. The dependent variable that will be recorded will be the frequency produced by
the pluck.
T1N
T1N
T1N
2 (): 1 = 0
1 =
m kg
mgN
FIGURE 2: FORCE DIAGRAM OF MASS AND PULLEY SYSTEM
Control variables will be the thickness of the wire and the elasticity of the wire (I will keep these two the
same by using the same wire and by not stretching it beyond its elastic limit). There will also be trivial
control variables like the temperature of the room. Provided that the force is a light one, the plucking force
applied to the wire does not need to be measured or controlled because it does not affect the frequency of
the sound produced.
2.3.RISK ASSESMENT AND PRECAUTIONS

2.3.1.ELECTRICAL HAZARD
The laptop charger will remain plugged in during the experiment to ensure that my laptop does not run out
of battery, costing me time. I will therefore perform a visual check of its power supply cable for any visible
damage. If possible, I will plug it directly into a wall power socket as opposed to an extension lead to
prevent overload. I will ensure that the PAT test for my power supply is in date. I will make sure my hands
and the work surface are dry during the experiment and keep water bottles off the desk where I am
conduction the experiment, away from the laptop and charger. Cables could pose a tripping hazard, or could
break if accidentally forcefully pulled out, possibly leading to an electrical fire. To prevent this, I will warn
other around me of this danger and ensure that there is sufficient slack on the cables. I will also keep my
cables as tidy as possible.
2.3.2.HEAVY MASSES
The use of heavy masses dictates that I must wear suitable footwear in the classroom, as must others
around me (i.e. no open toes). I will use a cushion pad in a deep tray under the masses in case they fall, in
order to catch it. This protects the equipment as well as feet. I will check that the clamp is surely tightened
and correctly used to ensure stability. I will check condition of the mass hangers and ensure that they are
securely attached to the wire.
2.3.3.STRETCHED WIRE
The wire might snap if for some reason, it structurally deforms or an excessive force is applied accidentally.
A metal bridge over the wire will be placed to stop whipping action of free ends if it does snap violently. I
will keep my face well away to ensure that I do not suffer a facial injury.
3.PRELIMINARY TEST
A preliminary experiment to undertaken to evaluate the viability and suitability of my planned experiment.
I set up the apparatus as outlined in my plan. It was found that my pulley system is in fact not suitable for
my experiment. Kinetic energy from the vibrating string was very rapidly dissipated through the smooth
pulley, giving an audibly obvious fluctuating frequency. The amplitude of the sound was also very low,
inconvenient for measuring its frequency. Also, my idea of simply hanging a mass off the edge of the desk
was found to be unsuitable, because of the very heavy masses needed to generate a tension large enough to
produce a sufficiently high enough frequency to measure. The problem was emphasised when, using a 7.5
kg mass, the wires loop that was used for hooking masses, completely unwound; the mass fell into the
padded tray.
With the kind and extensive help of one of my colleges technicians, I was able to acquire a sonometer, a
specialist piece of equipment used for the same purpose as my experiment. This included two moveable
uprights to act as frets on a guitar, as well as a lever system that acted as a force multiplier, using moments,
shown in my diagram in figure 3. I used the equations I formed below this diagram to use different
combinations of masses and hooks to exert different tensions on the wire (force T). This was much more
convenient than my previous set up, as it eradicated the need for much of the equipment, including wooden
blocks, the clamp, the pulley and the wire (one is built into the sonometer).
T
D
Wire
Pivot
D
(arbitrary
length)
Ma g
Mb g
Mc g
Mdg
Meg
FIGURE 3: MOMENTS DIAGRAM FOR LEVER ON SONOMETER
(): + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = 0
+ 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 =
= ( + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 )
I also tried using an application on my mobile phone, originally designed for tuning musical instruments, to
measure the frequency of the sound produced by the string. It produced identical results to my microphone
and laptop setup, with the same degree of precision.
3.1.MODIFICATIONS TO METHOD DUE TO

PRELIMINARY EXPERIMENT
For convenience, I have opted to use my mobile phone as the instrument to measure my dependent variable
of frequency produced, as opposed to the rather more complex and bulky microphone and laptop setup. The
sonometer will also replace my other equipment, as shown in figure 4.
Wire built into
sonometer
Mobile phone
Force multiplier system
Sonometer
Padded deep plastic tray

Desk
Chair
Masses
on a
hook
FIGURE 4: DIAGRAM OF THE SETUP OF MY INITIAL METHOD IDEA
3.1.1.AMENDMENTS TO SAFETY PRECAUTIONS
A warning label on the sonometer advises that the masses be hung close to the floor. Because this
isnt practical with the equipment and furniture I have, I will instead put the padded deep tray on a
chair to reduce the distance the masses would fall and reduce their impact speed.
The hazard caused by the presence of electricity is greatly reduced because of the absence of the use
of mains electricity and the eradication of cables. My mobile phone is still nonetheless an electrical
device. I will therefore continue to make sure that my hands and my desk are dry and that water
bottles are not placed in the vicinity of the working space. This is to prevent electrocution of myself.
3.2.FINDINGS OF PRELIMINARY TEST

The ranges of suitable forces and lengths to measure were found to be as follows:
The tension exerted on the string will be between 10N and 55N.
o The lower bound is such that the sound by the plucked wire produced has a high enough
frequency to give a large enough amplitude to be detected by my mobile phones
microphone. It was also found that at these low frequencies, taking the frequency produced
at the wires second harmonic was effective (to increase to frequency and audibility of the
sound) and also accurate (dividing by two gave the same frequency as the first harmonic,
within the limits of tolerance and experimental error).
o The higher bound for tensile force of 55N is much lower than the recommended maximum
(85.75N, calculated from the 1.75kg marked on the safety sticker, multiplied by five to
account for the force multiplying lever) but was the limit recommended by the technicians.
Frequency, and therefore audibility to my mobile phones microphone, increases with an increase in
tension. The experiment where the effect of wire length will therefore be conducted with the tension
controlled at a higher value. I have arbitrarily elected for this to be 49N.
At 49N of tensile force, the shortest length of wire that produce a sound with a sufficiently large
enough amplitude was around 15cm. At about 65-70cm, roughly the physical limit of the sonometer,
the sound produced was still of a sufficient audibility.
4.CARRYING OUT THE EXPERIMENT

Four experiments were carried out over a two week period three where the length of the wire (l) was kept
constant and tension exerted on the wire (T) changed and one where tension was kept constant but length
changed. The frequency of the sound produced by the vibrating wire (f) was measured in all of them.
4.1.UNCERTAINTIES
The variable, l, was measured using a guide built in to the sonometer. This had increments of 1mm,
therefore, the uncertainty tolerance for l is, by my judgement, 1mm.
I used masses of 100g to exert tension on the wire. Measuring the mass of a large sample (in excess of 30) of
these found little variation, with a difference from 100g of 3g at the very most, though this was rare. I
judged to mean of variations to be around 1.5g either side. The uncertainty for t is therefore 1.5% of the
stated tension (1.5g / 100g = 0.015 = 1.5%, where mass is directly proportional to the force of the weight it
exerts), though statistically, this may be pessimistic as variations either side of the stated (correct) mass
will cancel each other out over the total of a large number of masses used.
f was measured using an application that has increments of 0.1Hz. Using multiple tuning forks to test the
devices calibration found no variation between given result and the expected result. The uncertainty is
therefore 0.05Hz.
Experimental uncertainties for the measured frequency were calculated using the following formulas:
=
2 =
1 =
( )2 ( )2
2
( )1 ( )1
2
4.2.EXPERIMENT 1
This was measuring f, where l was fixed at 0.6m and T was changed.
I carried out this experiment by setting the length of the vibrating wire to 0.6m using the sonometers
uprights, then exerting the required tension on the string for each test using the force multiplying pivot. I
then plucked the wire lightly and recorded the frequency shown by my mobile phones tuner application. I
repeated each test five times excluding anomalies in order to calculate the average frequency and the
uncertainty in the value.
7
Frequency2 (kHz2)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Tension (N)
FIGURE 5: SCATTER GRAPH PLOTTING FREQUENCY 2 AGAINST TENSION FOR EXPERIMENT 1
Tension (N)
Frequency
Frequency2
Tension (N)
1.5%
(Hz)
(kHz2)
1.5%
11.76
37.80.2*
1.430.02*
33.32
12.74
39.20.2*
1.540.02*
34.30
13.72
40.60.1*
1.650.008*
35.28
14.70
42.00.1*
1.760.008*
36.26
15.68
43.20.1*
1.860.009*
37.24
16.66
44.70.2*
1.990.02*
38.22
17.64
46.20.5*
2.130.04*
39.20
18.62
46.90.2*
2.200.02*
40.18
19.60
48.40.1*
2.350.01*
41.16
20.58
49.10.1*
2.410.01*
42.14
21.56
50.30.3*
2.530.03*
43.12
22.54
51.50.2*
2.660.02*
44.10
23.52
52.60.2*
2.770.02*
45.08
24.50
53.60.1*
2.870.01*
46.06
25.48
54.40.1*
2.960.01*
47.04
26.46
55.20.2*
3.040.02*
48.02
27.44
56.10.4
3.150.04
49.00
28.42
57.40.2
3.290.02
49.98
29.40
58.40.3
3.410.04
50.96
30.38
59.30.2
3.510.02
51.94
31.36
60.40.3
3.650.04
52.92
32.34
61.30.4
3.750.04
53.90
*These results were derived from readings taken at the first harmonic.
Frequency
(Hz)
62.60.3
63.60.5
64.20.3
64.90.3
65.70.3
66.30.3
67.00.3
68.30.5
68.80.1
69.70.3
70.40.1
71.20.3
72.00.3
72.70.3
73.60.3
74.40.5
74.90.3
75.70.3
76.20.4
77.30.2
77.60.2
78.80.2
Frequency2
(kHz2)
3.920.03
4.050.06
4.120.03
4.210.03
4.310.03
4.400.04
4.490.04
4.660.07
4.740.007
4.860.03
4.960.007
5.060.04
5.180.04
5.290.04
5.410.04
5.540.07
5.610.04
5.730.04
5.810.05
5.980.03
6.020.03
6.210.03
Although all values deduced from recorded results are quoted to three significant figures in the table above,
no rounding took place during calculation. A full table of raw results with calculations is in the appendix.
I have chosen to plot f2 against T on the scatter graph of figure 5 because this was the best manipulation of
the two variables of T and f that produced an apparent linear relationship. This has also been done in
figures 6 and 7. The mathematical manipulations compared to this were other polynomial relationships (y =
xa), an exponential relationship (y = abx), a linear relationship (y = a+bx), a logarithmic relationship (y =
a+blnx) and a power relationship (y = axb).
Figure 5 shows a straight line of best fit between the plotted variables. It also appears to almost go through
the origin, although an alternative line of best fit that intersects the origin could be formed using the error
bars for experimental uncertainty and equipment tolerance. Furthermore, it is a logical assumption that a
completely slack wire (zero tension, T = 0) would theoretically produce a frequency of 0 Hz. It can therefore
be deduced from these results that tension is directly proportional to frequency2.
The constant gradient of this line of best fit is 0.1130.002kHz2N-1 to three significant figures. The
uncertainty in this value was, derived using the maximum and minimum gradients of the line of best fit,
shown in the appendix (figure 9).
4.3.EXPERIMENT 2
I set the length of the vibrating wire to 0.5m using the sonometers uprights, then preceded in the same way
as the previous experiment.
10
Frequency2 (kHz2)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Tension (N)
Tension (N)
Frequency
Frequency2
Tension (N)
1.5%
(Hz)
(kHz2)
1.5%
11.76
45.60.1*
2.080.009*
33.32
12.74
47.60.1*
2.260.01*
34.30
13.72
49.00.1*
2.400.005*
35.28
14.70
50.60.1*
2.560.02*
36.26
15.68
52.30.4*
2.740.04*
37.24
16.66
53.40.1*
2.860.01*
38.22
17.64
54.90.3*
3.020.03*
39.20
18.62
56.60.1*
3.210.01*
40.18
19.60
58.40.3*
3.410.03*
41.16
20.58
59.10.1*
3.490.01*
42.14
21.56
60.00.2*
3.600.02*
43.12
22.54
61.20.4*
3.740.05*
44.10
23.52
62.60.4*
3.920.04*
45.08
24.50
64.20.4
4.130.06
46.06
25.48
65.20.1
4.250.01
47.04
26.46
66.10.2
4.360.03
48.02
27.44
67.10.2
4.510.03
49.00
28.42
67.80.2
4.600.03
49.98
29.40
68.90.1
4.750.02
50.96
30.38
70.10.1
4.920.02
51.94
31.36
71.30.5
5.080.06
52.92
32.34
72.60.4
5.270.06
53.90
Frequency
(Hz)
73.70.3
74.70.2
76.00.3
77.00.3
78.70.2
79.50.2
80.80.3
81.70.2
82.50.3
83.20.2
84.10.2
85.20.2
86.20.3
86.90.3
87.60.3
88.80.4
90.50.1
91.20.2
92.10.4
92.90.3
940.5
95.60.8
Frequency2
(kHz2)
5.430.04
5.580.03
5.780.04
5.920.04
6.200.02
6.330.03
6.540.05
6.680.03
6.810.05
6.930.03
7.070.03
7.260.03
7.420.04
7.560.04
7.680.06
7.890.07
8.190.02
8.320.04
8.480.07
8.630.05
8.840.08
9.140.1
A full table of raw results showing calculations is attached in the appendix.

Like the first experiment, the constant gradient of the line of best fit for the graph of frequency2 against
tension in figure 6 suggests direct proportionality between these two variables. Again, the line of best fit
intersects the axes close to zero and a line of best fit that crosses the origin is within the limits of
experimental error, visually shown by error bars.
shown in the appendix (figure 10). This is greater than when l = 0.6.
4.4.EXPERIMENT 3
I set the length of the vibrating wire to 0.5m using the sonometers uprights, then preceded in the same way
as the previous experiment.
16
14
12
Frequency2 (kHz2)
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Tension (N)
10
Tension (N)
Frequency
Frequency2
Tension (N)
1.5%
(Hz)
(kHz2)
1.5%
11.76
58.00.7*
3.360.08*
33.32
12.74
58.80.4*
3.460.05*
34.30
13.72
60.70.5*
3.680.06*
35.28
14.70
62.40.8*
3.890.1*
36.26
15.68
64.70.5
4.190.06
37.24
16.66
66.60.4
4.430.06
38.22
17.64
67.80.4
4.600.05
39.20
18.62
70.40.4
4.960.06
40.18
19.60
72.30.4
5.220.06
41.16
20.58
73.40.5
5.390.07
42.14
21.56
74.90.4
5.610.06
43.12
22.54
77.30.6
5.980.09
44.10
23.52
78.90.2
6.230.03
45.08
24.50
80.80.3
6.530.04
46.06
25.48
83.30.3
6.940.04
47.04
26.46
84.30.3
7.110.05
48.02
27.44
86.10.1
7.410.03
49.00
28.42
87.00.1
7.570.03
49.98
29.40
88.60.7
7.860.1
50.96
30.38
90.00.6
8.110.1
51.94
31.36
91.10.4
8.300.07
52.92
32.34
91.90.2
8.440.04
53.90
Frequency
(Hz)
93.30.3
94.80.4
95.70.1
96.20.3
97.50.3
99.20.3
1000.2
1010.3
1030.5
1040.2
1050.4
1060.8
1080.3
1080.2
1090.4
1100.5
1120.4
1130.3
1140.3
1150.3
1170.3
1180.3
Frequency2
(kHz2)
8.700.06
8.990.07
9.160.02
9.250.05
9.510.05
9.840.07
10.00.04
10.30.06
10.50.1
10.80.04
10.90.07
11.30.2
11.60.05
11.80.04
12.00.08
12.20.1
12.50.1
12.80.06
13.00.06
13.20.07
13.60.07
14.00.06
A full table of raw results showing calculations is attached in the appendix.

Like the first two experiments, the constant gradient of the line of best fit for the graph of frequency2
against tension in figure 7 suggests direct proportionality between these two variables. Again, the line of
best fit intersects the axes close to zero and a line of best fit that crosses the origin is within the limits of
experimental error, visually shown by error bars.
shown in the appendix (figure 11). This is greater than when l = 0.6 and when l = 0.5. From this, it can be
deduced that as length decreases, the sensitivity of frequency2, and therefore frequency, to a change in
tension increases.
4.5. EXPERIMENT 4
This was measuring f, where T was fixed at 49N and T was changed.
This experiment was conducted by loading 49N of tensile force on using the force-multiplying lever. I then
plucked the string lightly and continued in the same way as the previous experiments, changing the length
of the wire using the sonometers uprights as necessary.
11
18
16
14
Frequency-1 (ms)
12
10
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Length (mm)
FIGURE 8: SCATTER GRAPH PLOTTING FREQUENCY -1 AGAINST LENGTH FOR EXPERIMENT 4
12
Length (mm)
Frequency
Frequency-1 Length (mm)
Frequency
Frequency-1
1mm
(Hz)
(ms)
1mm
(Hz)
(ms)
160
2820.4
3.550.005
440
1020.1
9.800.01
180
2500.3
4.010.006
460
97.70.1
10.20.02
200
2240.3
4.460.005
480
93.80.2
10.70.02
220
2040.1
4.900.004
500
90.60.1
11.00.01
240
1880.1
5.320.004
520
87.30.2
11.50.02
260
1730.2
5.790.005
540
84.20.4
11.90.06
280
1610.2
6.220.006
560
80.90.1
12.40.02
300
1500.2
6.660.01
580
78.20.1
12.80.02
320
1410.4
7.110.02
600
75.70.1
13.20.03
340
1320.2
7.570.01
620
73.40.1
13.60.03
360
1240.4
8.030.02
640
70.60.5
14.20.1
380
1180.3
8.500.02
660
68.70.1
14.60.02
400
1120.1
8.930.01
680
65.90.4
15.20.08
420
1070.3
9.370.02
700
62.70.4
15.90.1
Although all values deduced from recorded results are quoted to three significant figures in the table above,
no rounding took place during the calculation process itself. A full table of raw results showing calculations
is attached in the appendix.
I have chosen to plot frequency-1 against length on the scatter graph of figure 8 because this was the best
manipulation of the two variables of length and frequency that produced an apparent linear relationship.
Figure 8 shows a straight line of best fit between frequency-1 and length that intersects the origin. This is
consistent with my logical assumption that a theoretical wire of infinite length would produce a frequency
of zero and therefore conversely, a theoretical wire of zero length would produce a frequency that tends
towards infinity (this concurs with the extrapolated point (0, 0) on my graph, where the frequency would be
infinity (1 0 ) zero length).
It can therefore be deduced from these results that length is directly proportional to the time period
(equivalent to frequency-1).
The constant gradient of this line of best fit is 22.20.9smm-1 to three significant figures. The uncertainty
in this value was, derived using the maximum and minimum gradients of the line of best fit, shown in the
appendix (figure 12).
5.OVERALL CONCLUSION AND

ANALYSIS
Within the limits of experimental error, data from my practical instigations have produced the following
conclusions:
tension (T) and frequency2 (f2) are directly proportional
length (l) and time period or frequency-1 (f-1) are directly proportional
there is a negative correlation between length (l) and the sensitivity of the change in frequency to a
change in tension (f/T).
The first point gives the following mathematical relationship:
13
2
= 2
The second point gives this mathematical relationship:

1
=
=
Combining these to deduce a relationship between all the variables of length, frequency and tension:
= 2
=
=
=
I think that the constant, k, includes my control variables and therefore is related to factors including the
stiffness constant of the wire, the density of the string, the mass of the string or the diameter, volume or
cross sectional area of the string.
5.1.COMPARISON WITH MERSENNES LAWS

One of Mersennes laws (Jeans, 1969: 64-65) concerning the frequency of a stretched string presents the
following formula for the fundamental frequency of a string (Nave, 2001; Wikipedia, 2014):
=
2
(Where is the linear density (mass per unit length) of the string.)
This concurs with the relationships between T, f and l that I derived from my experimental results. Because
was a control variable across all four experiments and was therefore a constant throughout, it can be
accounted for in the unknown constant, k.
Letting
=
1
2
my derived formula for fundamental frequency is mathematically equivalent to that of Mersennes theory.
My prediction about the physical factors in k was partially correct. Linear density, and therefore mass,
volume and diameter are involved, however, the stiffness of the string is not included in Mersennes law.
Assuming this theory is correct, my prediction that stiffness is a factor is incorrect.
14
5.2.ERRORS AND ANOMALIES

I recorded a total of 11 anomalous results, all of which had been easily identified during the experiments,
and therefore, they have each been replaced by a re-test to ensure that there are five valid readings for each
result. There were two main reasons for this. The first was a plucking of the wire that was too violent or
strong, causing an initially musically sharp (erroneously higher frequency) sound. The second was the fact
that the mass hangers were not directly in the slots of the force multiplier, therefore producing an incorrect
turning moment about the force multipliers pivot and therefore an incorrect tension on the wire.
There were other possible systematic errors that could have reduced the accuracy of my results. The force
multipliers arm needed to be parallel with the wire in order to make the system work correctly. This was
judged by eye (I knelt down so that my eye level was consistent with the arm) and changed using a screw at
the other end of the sonometer. I checked this after every change in the independent variable. Furthermore,
I had only calibrated my tuning instrument (mobile phone) to frequencies in the range 330Hz to 660Hz
outside the range of my collected data. If the device was not calibrated in the range I recorded, there could
have been a recording error due to this. Also, the control equipment I used for calibration was a set of
low-quality guitar tuning forks, which may have been imprecise on inaccurate.
5.3.LIMITATIONS OF EQUIPMENT
The length of my sonometer dictated the maximum length of string I could use. Its force multiplying
mechanisms construction strength also dictated the maximum tension I could use. The sonometers lack of
acoustic holes meant that the amplitude of the sound produced was low. This made it more difficult to
collect results but had no effect on them. My phones microphone, for functionally practical reasons, had a
low frequency response to sounds below 60Hz and therefore made it difficult to record very low
frequencies. I got round this by producing the second harmonic frequency by lightly touching the string at
its midpoint.
6.REFERENCE LIST
JEANS, Sir J. H., 1969. Science and Music (New Edition), Mineola, NY: Dover Publications
NAVE, R., 2001. Standing Waves on a String [Online]. Available at: http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/string.html [Accessed 17 November 2014]
WIKIPEDIA, 2014. Vibrating string [Online]. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrating_string
[Accessed 17 November 2014]
7.APPENDICES
15
Frequency2 (kHz2)
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Tension (N)
FIGURE 9: MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM GRADIENTS OF GRAPH FOR EXPERIMENT 1.
Maximum gradient is 0.121kHz2N-1, minimum gradient is 0.118kHz2N-1.

10
9
8
Frequency2
(kHz2)
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Tension (N)
16
16
14
Frequency2 (kHz2)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Tension (N)

18
16
14
Frequency-1 (ms)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Length (mm)
Maximum gradient is 23.3smm-1, minimum gradient is 21.6smm-1.

17
Grey-filled spaced are calculated results derived by halving the second harmonic frequency. All averages are
means of valid recorded results. Raw results for experiment 1:
Frequency recorded (Hz)
Tension
(N)
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
Average
frequency (Hz)
Frequency uncertainty (Hz)
11.76
12.74
13.72
14.7
15.68
16.66
17.64
18.62
19.6
20.58
21.56
22.54
23.52
24.5
25.48
26.46
27.44
28.42
29.4
30.38
31.36
32.34
33.32
34.3
35.28
36.26
37.24
37.8
39.3
40.6
42.1
43.1
44.5
46.7
46.7
48.3
49.2
50
51.5
52.8
53.6
54.4
55.2
55.6
57.6
58.1
59.4
60.6
60.8
62.9
64
64.1
64.9
65.7
37.5
39.1
40.6
42
43.3
44.6
46
46.9
48.4
49
50.1
51.6
52.6
53.5
54.5
55.2
56.2
57.3
58.5
59.1
60.4
61.4
62.7
63.6
64.2
65
65.4
37.9
39.3
40.6
41.9
43.2
44.9
45.8
46.9
48.5
49.1
50.4
51.7
52.6
53.6
54.5
55.3
56.2
57.3
58.4
59.2
60.7
61.5
62.4
63.8
63.9
65.1
65.9
37.9
39.4
40.8
42
43.2
44.7
46.3
47
48.5
49.2
50.3
51.5
52.7
53.5
54.3
55.1
56.3
57.4
58.3
59.5
60.3
61.1
62.5
63.1
64.4
64.8
65.7
37.7
39
40.6
42
43.1
44.6
46.1
47.1
48.5
49.2
50.5
51.4
52.5
53.7
54.5
55
56.3
57.3
58.7
59.2
60.1
61.5
62.5
63.7
64.3
64.6
65.6
37.76
39.22
40.64
42
43.18
44.66
46.18
46.92
48.44
49.14
50.26
51.54
52.64
53.58
54.44
55.16
56.12
57.38
58.4
59.28
60.42
61.26
62.6
63.64
64.18
64.88
65.66
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.45
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.25
0.15
0.15
0.1
0.1
0.15
0.35
0.15
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.35
0.25
0.45
0.25
0.25
0.25
38.22
39.2
40.18
41.16
42.14
43.12
44.1
45.08
46.06
47.04
48.02
49
49.98
50.96
51.94
52.92
53.9
66.6
67.4
68.3
68.8
69.4
70.4
71
71.8
72.8
73.8
74.4
74.9
75.4
76.5
77.5
77.4
78.9
66
66.9
68.4
68.9
69.7
70.5
71.2
71.7
73
73.7
74.7
75.1
75.8
76.4
77.2
77.4
78.6
66.1
66.9
68.8
68.8
69.6
70.5
71.3
72.2
72.7
73.6
73.9
74.6
75.9
75.8
77.4
77.8
78.9
66.5
67
68
68.9
69.9
70.4
70.9
72.3
72.4
73.5
74.2
74.9
75.7
76.2
77.1
77.6
79
66.3
66.8
67.8
68.8
69.8
70.4
71.4
71.9
72.6
73.2
74.8
75
75.7
76.2
77.5
77.7
78.6
66.3
67
68.26
68.84
69.68
70.44
71.16
71.98
72.7
73.56
74.4
74.9
75.7
76.22
77.34
77.58
78.8
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.05
0.25
0.05
0.25
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.45
0.25
0.25
0.35
0.2
0.2
0.2
Anomalous results (Hz)
46.7
63.7
78
Raw results for experiment 2:
18
Tension
(N)
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
Average
frequency (Hz)
Frequency uncertainty (Hz)
11.76
12.74
13.72
14.7
15.68
16.66
17.64
45.5
47.7
49
50.5
52.8
53.5
55
45.6
47.5
49.1
50.8
52
53.5
54.6
45.6
47.5
49.1
50.6
52.1
53.5
54.9
45.7
47.6
49
50.5
52.3
53.4
55.1
45.5
47.5
49
50.7
52.4
53.3
55
45.58
47.56
49.04
50.62
52.32
53.44
54.92
0.1
0.1
0.05
0.15
0.4
0.1
0.25
18.62
19.6
20.58
21.56
22.54
23.52
24.5
25.48
26.46
27.44
28.42
29.4
30.38
31.36
32.34
33.32
34.3
35.28
36.26
37.24
38.22
56.6
58.5
59.2
59.9
60.8
62.6
64.3
65.1
65.9
66.9
67.6
68.8
70.1
71
72.9
73.9
74.5
76.1
77
78.6
79.3
56.5
58.3
59.1
59.8
60.8
62.5
64.2
65.2
66
67
68
69.1
70
70.8
72.5
73.5
74.9
76.2
77.2
78.7
79.7
56.6
58.4
59
60
61.3
62.7
64
65.3
66.1
67.1
67.9
69
70.1
71.4
72.1
73.6
74.7
75.9
77.1
78.8
79.6
56.7
58.7
59
60.1
61.6
62.3
64.8
65.2
66
67.3
67.7
68.8
70.3
71.7
72.6
73.4
74.6
75.7
76.7
78.9
79.6
56.7
58.2
59
60
61.4
63
63.9
65.2
66.3
67.3
68
68.8
70.1
71.4
72.8
73.9
74.9
76.1
76.8
78.6
79.5
56.62
58.42
59.06
59.96
61.18
62.62
64.24
65.2
66.06
67.12
67.84
68.9
70.12
71.26
72.58
73.66
74.72
76
76.96
78.72
79.54
0.1
0.25
0.1
0.15
0.4
0.35
0.45
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.15
0.15
0.45
0.4
0.25
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.15
0.2
39.2
40.18
41.16
42.14
43.12
44.1
45.08
46.06
47.04
48.02
49
49.98
50.96
51.94
52.92
53.9
81.2
81.9
82.2
83
83.9
85
86
87.1
87.5
89.2
90.4
91.4
91.7
92.6
93.6
96.5
80.7
81.5
82.4
83.2
84.1
85.2
86
86.9
87.4
88.4
90.5
91
92.2
92.9
94.2
96.2
80.6
81.8
82.6
83.4
84
85.2
86.1
87.1
87.5
88.7
90.6
91.3
92.1
93
93.6
95
80.9
81.7
82.8
83.3
84.2
85.1
86.5
86.6
88.1
88.8
90.4
91.2
92.5
92.8
94.2
95.2
80.8
81.7
82.6
83.3
84.3
85.4
86.2
86.9
87.7
89
90.5
91.1
91.8
93.1
94.5
95.1
80.84
81.72
82.52
83.24
84.1
85.18
86.16
86.92
87.64
88.82
90.48
91.2
92.06
92.88
94.02
95.6
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.35
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.25
0.45
0.75
69
71.7, 71.8

Tension
(N)
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
Average
frequency (Hz)
Frequency
uncertainty (Hz)
11.76
12.74
13.72
14.7
15.68
16.66
17.64
18.62
19.6
20.58
21.56
22.54
23.52
24.5
25.48
26.46
27.44
28.42
29.4
30.38
57.8
58.2
60.2
61.3
64.1
66.5
67.7
70
72.3
73.2
74.5
77.3
78.8
81
83.6
84.4
86.1
86.9
89.4
90.4
58.1
59
61.2
62.4
64.8
67
68.3
70.2
72.2
73.9
74.7
78
79
80.7
83.6
84.4
86.2
87
88.4
90.2
58.6
59.1
60.7
62.7
64.7
66.9
67.6
70.8
72.8
73.8
75.1
77.2
78.7
80.9
83.1
83.9
86.2
86.9
88.6
89.2
57.3
58.9
60.8
62.7
65
66.1
67.6
70.4
72.1
73
74.9
76.8
79
80.5
83.2
84.5
86.1
87.2
88.1
90.5
58
58.8
60.4
62.9
65.1
66.4
68
70.6
72
73.1
75.3
77.2
79.1
80.9
83.1
84.5
85.9
87.1
88.7
89.9
57.96
58.8
60.66
62.4
64.74
66.58
67.84
70.4
72.28
73.4
74.9
77.3
78.92
80.8
83.32
84.34
86.1
87.02
88.64
90.04
0.65
0.45
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.35
0.4
0.4
0.45
0.4
0.6
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.3
0.15
0.15
0.65
0.65
19
31.36
32.34
33.32
34.3
35.28
36.26
37.24
90.8
92
93
94.7
95.7
96.2
97.6
91
91.9
93.1
95.2
95.8
96.5
97.2
91.5
92
93.6
94.5
95.6
96
97.5
90.7
91.6
93.5
95
95.7
96
97.7
91.4
91.8
93.1
94.8
95.8
96.1
97.7
91.08
91.86
93.26
94.84
95.72
96.16
97.54
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.35
0.1
0.25
0.25
38.22
39.2
40.18
41.16
42.14
43.12
44.1
45.08
46.06
47.04
48.02
49
49.98
50.96
51.94
52.92
53.9
99.3
99.9
101.2
102.8
104
104.3
106.7
107.6
108.3
109.7
109.7
112.3
113.1
114
114.9
116.8
118.2
99.2
100.1
101.2
102.9
103.9
104.6
106.8
107.4
108.4
109.8
110.5
112
113.4
114.2
115.5
117
118
99.6
100.3
101.1
102.6
103.6
104.2
106.8
107.8
108.6
109.5
110.4
111.8
113.2
113.8
115
116.7
118
98.9
100
101.7
102.7
103.7
104.9
106.2
107.3
108.2
109.1
110.8
111.4
112.9
113.7
115
116.4
118.5
99.1
100.2
101.4
101.9
103.8
104.8
105.2
107.6
108.5
109.2
110.6
112.3
113
113.9
114.9
116.5
118
99.22
100.1
101.32
102.58
103.8
104.56
106.34
107.54
108.4
109.46
110.4
111.96
113.12
113.92
115.06
116.68
118.14
0.35
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.2
0.35
0.8
0.25
0.2
0.35
0.55
0.45
0.25
0.25
0.3
0.3
0.25
111.7
20
Length
(m)
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
Average frequency
(Hz)
Frequency uncertainty
(Hz)
Anomalous results
(Hz)
0.16
0.18
0.2
0.22
0.24
0.26
0.28
0.3
0.32
0.34
0.36
0.38
0.4
0.42
0.44
0.46
0.48
0.5
0.52
0.54
0.56
0.58
0.6
0.62
0.64
0.66
0.68
281.2
249.5
224.1
203.8
188
172.8
161
150.4
140.7
132
124.8
117.9
112
106.8
102
97.7
93.8
90.7
87.2
84.3
80.8
78.1
75.7
73.6
70.4
68.7
65.5
282
250
224.2
204
188
172.9
160.7
150
140.9
132.3
124.6
117.5
111.8
106.7
102.1
97.8
94
90.6
87.3
84.1
80.9
78.3
75.6
73.4
70.7
68.8
66
281.5
249.5
224.5
204.1
188
173
160.8
149.8
140.2
132.1
124.3
117.4
112
106.5
102.2
97.5
93.7
90.7
87.1
83.9
80.9
78.2
75.5
73.5
71.2
68.7
66.2
281.4
249.7
224
204
188.1
172.7
160.9
150.3
140.7
131.9
124.1
117.3
111.8
107
101.9
97.6
93.6
90.6
87.4
84.8
80.9
78.3
75.8
73.3
70.2
68.7
66
281.7
249.3
224.1
203.9
187.8
172.8
160.7
150.4
141
132.1
124.6
117.8
112.1
106.7
102.1
97.8
93.9
90.5
87.3
84
81
78
75.7
73.4
70.5
68.6
65.8
281.56
249.6
224.18
203.96
187.98
172.84
160.82
150.18
140.7
132.08
124.48
117.58
111.94
106.74
102.06
97.68
93.8
90.62
87.26
84.22
80.9
78.18
75.66
73.44
70.6
68.7
65.9
0.4
0.35
0.25
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.35
0.3
0.15
0.25
0.15
0.15
0.2
0.1
0.15
0.45
0.1
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.5
0.1
0.35
292
257.8, 258.9
0.7
62.4
62.8
62.6
63.3
62.5
62.72
0.45
212.2

OCR GCE Physics B G496 Coursework (Experiment)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

OCR GCE Physics B G496 Coursework (Experiment)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

HOW DO DIFFERENT FACTORS

AFFECT THE FUNDAMENTAL

3. Preliminary test ................................................................................................... 3

4. Carrying out the experiment ................................................................................ 5

5. Overall conclusion and analysis .......................................................................... 13

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

XLR (sound) cable

FIGURE 1: DIAGRAM OF THE SETUP OF MY INITIAL METHOD IDEA

2.3.RISK ASSESMENT AND PRECAUTIONS

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

FIGURE 3: MOMENTS DIAGRAM FOR LEVER ON SONOMETER

3.1.MODIFICATIONS TO METHOD DUE TO

Force multiplier system

Padded deep plastic tray

FIGURE 4: DIAGRAM OF THE SETUP OF MY INITIAL METHOD IDEA

3.1.1.AMENDMENTS TO SAFETY PRECAUTIONS

3.2.FINDINGS OF PRELIMINARY TEST

4.CARRYING OUT THE EXPERIMENT

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

FIGURE 5: SCATTER GRAPH PLOTTING FREQUENCY 2 AGAINST TENSION FOR EXPERIMENT 1

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

FIGURE 6: SCATTER GRAPH PLOTTING FREQUENCY 2 AGAINST TENSION FOR EXPERIMENT 2

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

A full table of raw results showing calculations is attached in the appendix.

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

FIGURE 7: SCATTER GRAPH PLOTTING FREQUENCY 2 AGAINST TENSION FOR EXPERIMENT 3

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

A full table of raw results showing calculations is attached in the appendix.

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

FIGURE 8: SCATTER GRAPH PLOTTING FREQUENCY -1 AGAINST LENGTH FOR EXPERIMENT 4

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

5.OVERALL CONCLUSION AND

The second point gives this mathematical relationship:

5.1.COMPARISON WITH MERSENNES LAWS

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

5.2.ERRORS AND ANOMALIES

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

Maximum gradient is 0.121kHz2N-1, minimum gradient is 0.118kHz2N-1.

Maximum gradient is 0.185kHz2N-1, minimum gradient is 0.157kHz2N-1.

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

Maximum gradient is 0.267kHz2N-1, minimum gradient is 0.231kHz2N-1.

Maximum gradient is 23.3smm-1, minimum gradient is 21.6smm-1.

Frequency uncertainty (Hz)

Anomalous results (Hz)

Raw results for experiment 2:

Frequency recorded (Hz)

Frequency uncertainty (Hz)

Anomalous results (Hz)

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

Raw results for experiment 3:

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

Anomalous results (Hz)

Raw results for experiment 4:

Frequency recorded (Hz)

GCE Physics G496 Researching Physics | Maurice Yap 6946

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen