Trebuchet Dynamics:

- Determining the Relationship Between Weight and Projectile Distance & Velocity By Amrit Murthy and Greg Schockelt
IB Physics II
Per. 3A

Table of Contents:
Background
Statement of Question
Statement of Problem
Review of Literature
Hypothesis
Materials and Method
Data #1 Weight vs. Distance
Data #2 Weight vs. Velocity
Data #3 Launch Projectile Trajectory
Discussion / Analysis
Bibliography
External Links
Return to Research
Background Information:
Trebuchets were first used in the middle ages as a powerful new form of mechanical artillery.
Invented by the Chinese around 400 B.C., Trebuchets would continue to be used for the next
twelve centuries, though they were never particularly prevalent. The main purpose of a trebuchet
was, of course, to destroy enemy fortifications from a relatively long range. The weapons
functionality originates from a sling catch which holds the projectile that is to be thrown; the
counter-weight is attached to the arm at its opposite end. Once the arm is set and then released
from the base, the counter-weight falls towards earth, using the kinetic energy generated to
propel the projectile forward. As a weapon that relied solely upon the energy generated by its
counterweight, it was one of the first instruments of war that did not directly operate on human
muscle-power. Indeed, this use of weight allowed the trebuchet to generate massive amounts of
torque that could launch objects several hundred meters in distance. Despite this impressive

performance, however, such siege warfare was greatly limited by accuracy and rate of fire, which
were both quite low. Nonetheless, the trebuchet proved to be an impressive and intimidating
technological achievement for its time.

Statement of Question:
What effect does an increased counter-weight have upon a trebuchet launch in distance, velocity
and trajectory?

Statement of Problem:
The purpose of this experiment is to understand how greater amounts of weight affect a
trebuchets launch in distance, initial velocity and projectile trajectory. We want to find out if
there is a consistent (or possibly erratic) rate of increase in range and speed as the counter-weight
increases. Additionally, if there is a point at which these variables stop increasing, or decrease,
we wish to understand this; launch trajectory will be recorded to observe effects resulting from
weight manipulation. Independent / Dependent Variables will be addressed in the hypothesis.

Review of Literature:
Everything from the size of the counter-weight to the point of rotation within the arm has an
effect on how a projectile will be launched by a trebuchet. However, in our assessment of the
counter-weight, we must place an emphasis on launch distance and the time in which the
projectile is airborne in order to process our data. This is because the formula for calculating
initial velocity requires the distance traveled, time of projectile being airborne, as well as the
force of gravity (9.8 m/s). The information found in books concerning medieval weapons states
that trebuchets use the torque created from the counter-weight to propel the projectile. Thus, one
can conclude that a greater weight will result in greater distance and a higher launch velocity.
However an important piece of data suggests that the sophisticated sling release mechanism
may lose significant power if the projectile is not released at the correct moment. This means
that certain factors may hold the potential to affect the launch release time, and therefore,

distance may be lost. Another important issue to address is that the energy stored to create the
power for the launch is dependant upon the angle to which the arm is set to be released. Thus, we
must insure that each test is set to the same initial launch point so that the data remains solely
dependent on the variable being manipulated (counter-weight).

Hypothesis:
We believe that the relationship well find between the counter-weight and the distance / velocity
traveled will form a bell-shaped curve when displayed on a graph. This means that there will
be an optimum weight at which the trebuchet will operate most effectively, but going above
that weight will likely reduce the resulting distance. There is some justification for such a
prediction. As was stated in the Review of Literature, the sling mechanism tends to be
unreliable if the launch does not execute correctly. We believe that with an overly heavy counterweight, there will be some turbulence / instability that could lead to such a reduction in launch
optimization. With lower weights there is greater control and thus higher reliability; at higher
weights, the potential energy may be greater, but the launch release point could be affected
negatively. We also think that the excessive weight amounts will force a higher launch angle, so
the ball might fly higher, but not further. Given an experiment such as this one, we must make
sure that we carefully define and control our variables. Certain aspects such as the weight of the
projectile, the starting angle of the arm, length of the arm etc. must all be kept constant. The
independent variable, which is solely the mass of the counter-weight, must be carefully
incremented and controlled; likewise, the three dependents (distance launched, velocity and
trajectory) should be measured as accurately and carefully as possible. Ultimately, this will help
to affirm, or refute, our expectation that there will be an ideal weight for best launch results.

Materials and Method:

For this experiment, the materials remained relatively basic. We purchased a kit which was used
to build the trebuchet, and used classroom equipment for the counterweights. During the course
of the experiment, we also used a yard stick to find the distances the launched object traveled, as
well as a stopwatch which was used to measure airtime (needed in equation to find velocity).
Finally, we used a video camera during the experiment with the intent of finding the projectile
angle with LoggerPro. However, this strategy proved problematic as will be later addressed.

The experimental method was not particularly complex, but it required consistency and accuracy.
Our first dependent variable that we wished to investigate was launch distance. We conducted
our procedures with the idea that wed increase the counter-weight by increments of 50 from 0 to
1000 grams; after 1000, we increased by increments of 100 grams. Each weight that was used

was to be launched twice to ensure that no one test was a fluke, or unlikely result.
Measurements of each test distance, as well as the amount of counter-weight used, were then
recorded (we recorded in inches, but later converted this data to meters). Yet, an important aspect
to this experiment was that each the trebuchet was set to the same specifications every time. This
meant that we had to set the arm to the same starting angle consistently (by using a launch pin
which locked the arm in place), pull the sling-string taught and flat onto the base of the
trebuchet before launch (see picture above the string must be pulled tightly or launch distance
lags), etc. Such miniscule details were important, as launch distances might vary if all constants
were not kept in check.
The formula we used to find initial velocity required that we determine both time and distance
traveled. Thus, we needed to use the range data found earlier, but also combine that with
measurements of the airtime of the projectile. Our initial plan for determining the time was to
use a video camera that would record the projectile from launch until it hit the ground, using
LoggerPro software to find the exact airtime; this was assumed to be the most accurate method.
However, since it was hard to see the object clearly (or at all) when recorded on the camera, we
were soon forced to use a stopwatch instead, which is admittedly less accurate. Launch times
were recorded from 300 to 1300 grams by increments of 200 each time; each test was to be
repeated twice to ensure that there was no faulty information recorded. This formula was used to
find velocity:
[Where, X = Distance Traveled (meters), T = Time in Air (seconds), G = Gravity (9.8)]
Launch trajectory turned out to have the same problem as the previous dependent variable. We
had planned to find the angle of the object by using a video camera and then analyzing the
footage, but were unable to do so. Thus, trajectory was ultimately excluded from the results of
our experiment, though it certainly would have been interesting to investigate.

Data #1 Weight vs. Distance:

Weight
(Grams)
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950

Distance #1
(Inches)
-11
-1
7
25
41
79
94
116
133
162
182
213
217
234
264
268
276
300
314

Distance #2
(Inches)
-8
-2
9
24
43
68
95
121
132
158
182
210
214
232
252
263
271
300
312

Distance Avg.
(Inches)
-9.5
-1.5
8
24.5
42
73.5
94.5
118.5
132.5
160
182
211.5
215.5
233
258
265.5
273.5
300
313

Distance Avg.
(Meters)
-0.2413
-0.0381
0.2032
0.6223
1.0668
1.8669
2.4003
3.0099
3.3655
4.064
4.6228
5.3721
5.4737
5.9182
6.5532
6.7437
6.9469
7.62
7.9502

1000
1100
1200
1300

324
339
366
382

327
336
368
389

325.5
337.5
367
385.5

8.2677
8.5725
9.3218
9.7917

Data 1

Data #2 Weight vs. Velocity:

Weight
(Grams)
300
500
700
900
1100
1300

Data 2

Trial #1 (Seconds) Trial #2 (Seconds)

Trial Average
0.95
1.035
0.9925
1.41
1.355
1.3825
1.53
1.59
1.56
1.75
1.65
1.7
1.84
1.75
1.795
1.97
1.9
1.935

Calculated Velocity
(m/s)
5.214
7.384
8.534
9.454
10.009
10.747

Miles Per Hour

11.66338582
16.51753757
19.0900143
21.14799569
22.38949533
24.04035431

Data #3 Launch Projectile Trajectory*:

*Data could not be obtained as ball was hardly visible during recording. Picture above is sample of video taken,
showing how the slow camera frame rate (and high projectile velocity) made it difficult to accurately measure the
angle.

Discussion / Analysis:
The results of our data show conclusively that there is a consistent positive correlation between
weight, distance, and velocity. In contrast to what we had initially predicted, it does not seem like
theres any sort of launch release problem that arises from larger weights. Rather, the launch
angle seems like it is relatively stable, as the constant increase in distance (as well as velocity)
suggests that if there is any trajectory change, it is small and not detrimental to the launch. In
fact, from the data points we received (certainly more could have been done), it initially seems as
though the trebuchet launch velocity and distance would increase indefinitely in correspondence
to the increase of the counter-weight. This would tend to agree with what general physics
equations might suggest. Yet, it is still possible that the bell-curve phenomenon we had
hypothesized of earlier is true, but for different reasons than what was previously discussed. For
example, if the counter-weight was increased to a far higher degree than what we did, would the
slower momentum / inertia be enough to detract from launch distance? Given the relatively small
range of motion of the trebuchet, it seems like a large weight might not guarantee a distance /
velocity increase because it wouldnt gain enough speed to propel the projectile as far. Of course,
such considerations are completely theoretical, but it is a possibility to consider for further

experimentation. It seems as though the answers received from this experiment only open the
doors to new questions.
One thing we noticed was that the distance data remained relatively consistent throughout, while
velocity data did not. To clarify, when looking at the graphs provided above, the Weight vs.
Distance line seems to be quite flat and predictable; however, when looking at the Weight vs.
Velocity chart, the rate of increase is greater initially than it is at the end of the graph. We found
this interesting, because our initial expectations were that greater distance requires a proportional
increase in velocity. Indeed, our results suggest that velocity and distance are positively
correlating, but do not exactly correspond in terms of data. This can be seen on the graphs. From
the 0 to 400 gram range, the projectile velocity is required to increase significantly while theres
a relatively slow rate of increase in distance; in the 1200 to 1400 range, though, the velocity
increase rate is smaller while the distance data continues to climb consistently. It is hard to
explain such a phenomenon, since it tends to disagree with general physics pr<Background
Information:; it is certainly possible that there was some unseen error in testing that skewed the
numbers. However, assuming the data is correct, were guessing that at higher rates of speed,
every increment of change creates greater displacement than it would at a lower rate of speed,
since the projectile is already moving faster. Thus, at lower velocities, rate increases would have
a smaller effect than they would at higher velocities. Nonetheless, the data found suggests that
distance is a consistently increasing variable. While we believe that velocity also continues to
increase, it seems as though its rate of increase would get smaller with time.
Given the surprisingly consistent and flat rate of distance increase, we decided to find the
formula for a line of best fit to represent our data. Such data can also help to summarize the
proportions at work within our trebuchet (ratio of weight vs. distance). To find this data, we
divided the total range traveled by the total weight used; this would ultimately relate the inches
of displacement to one gram of counter-weight increase. By dividing 394.5 (inches) by 1250
(grams), we found the result to be .3156. This number tells us that for every gram of weight, the
trebuchet will launch the projectile about .3156 inches further. Also, in a line of regression, the
formula would be Y = .3156X.
One final issue needing to be addressed for this experiment is the uncertainties or possible errors
that took place. The trebuchet tended to act very erratically based on small details that were hard
to regulate. The irregular shape of the clay ball being launched (irregular because it had hit the
ground so many times) affected the distance to some degree: the ball would often fall out of the
sling or go off course if not placed the same way each time. Furthermore, the sling itself had to
be set a certain way or the launch would be affected; it was difficult to do so, and thus, there
were probably some inaccuracies in the distance results. Furthermore, the velocity results will
almost certainly have some falsehood due to the stopwatch timing strategy used to find airtime.
Human reflex errors are unavoidable, though multiple trials were done. Ultimately, though, the
results seem good, and the data allowed for many conclusions and inferences to be made.

Bibliography:
Chevedden, John. The Trebuchet, Scientific American, 66-71, 1995.
Creveld, Martin V. Technology and War. New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing, Inc., 1989.
Harding, David. Weapons: An International Encyclopedia. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press,
Inc., 1990.
Needham, Joseph. Science and Civilization in China. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Powell, John. Weapons & Warfare: Ancient and Medieval (to 1500). Pasadena, CA: Salem Press,
Inc., 2002.

External Links:
trebuchet.com - Provides the opportunity to purchase your own trebuchet to replicate given experiment.
medieval.stormthecastle.com - Provides one with information about the history of the trebuchet and other Medieval
Weapons.
middle-ages.org - Provides 'interesting facts' about trebuchet making, maintenance, warfare ect.
io.com (Dan Becker's Trebuchet Page!) - Provides information and theories about the design and accuracy of
trebuchet warfare.
pbs.org - Provides link to NOVA television series which attempted to replicate and launch genuine trebuchet.