Using a Pendulum to determine Gravity due to acceleration

(G)
Aim:
To observe and calculate the rate of acceleration due to gravity by investigating
the gravitational effects on the oscillatory motion of an average pendulum.
Background:
When a pendulum swings with a small angle, the mass on the end performs a
good approximation of the back-&forth motion (simple harmonic motion the
period of the pendulum is the time taken to complete one single back and forth
motion. This depends on !ust two variables length of the string and the rate of
acceleration due to gravity. The mass has a very minute or no affect at all. The
formula to find a period is"
Where T- is period (s i.e. time for # oscillation
l - is length (m of the pendulum
g - is acceleration (m$s
%
due to gravity
Apparatus:
&etort 'tand
(lamp
)oss *ead
'tring #- meter
+ass (arrier
+ass ,-g
+etre &ule
'topwatch
.arge /rotractor
Variables:
0ndependent 1 the length of the string
2ependent 1 the time it takes the pendulum to oscillate
(ontrolled 1 the mass of the pendulum, angle of string from the vertical
(plumb line, amount of friction (air resistance kept the same, retort stand
kept in the same place on the bench to preserve reliability.
a!ety risks:
2o not use an excessive amount of weights as it could strain muscles and
cause in!ury to students
3eep swinging pendulum clear of other people
"et#od:
$% 'et up the apparatus as shown in the diagram below.
&% (ollect a mass and tie it strongly to a string.
'% /ick up the mass carries by the string and have another member of the group
carefully measure # metre of the string starting from the base of the mass
carrier.
(% &ecord the length of the pendulum. 4ttach the string to the clamp really
tightly and ensure that you still have # meter from the top to the bottom of the
string.
)% 5nsure that the vicinity is free of any obstructions to the swinging pendulum.
*% 0f necessary place a g-clamp or excess weight on the retort stand to stop the
retort stand from absorbing the motion energy of the pendulum by vibrating.
+% &eset all stop watches and gently move the
pendulum from e6uilibrium to a measured
distance of #-7 or less using a large protractor.
5nsure the angle of deviation from the vertical
is measured properly and is kept the same
throughout all trials.
,% (arefully release the mass from the deviated
angle and allow it to swing for %-8 swings and
lose some of the vibrations that may have been
transferred.
-% 4ctivating the stopwatch as the string oscillation
commences a new period.
$.% (ontinue timing the pendulum until it has moved through #- complete
oscillations (periods and record the times.
'tring
(ounter Weight
(lamp
&etort 'tand
+ass
/ote: 9 :#-7 to avoid angular displacement.
*ori;ontal support

9
+ass
.ength
$$% &epeat steps 8 through < a total of = more times. *owever before each new set
shorten the string by %- cm of its length. 5nsure that the deviation angle is
controlled for constancy through all trials
0esults:
&esults attained form different lengths and = trials
Length: 0.6m
Trial Time for 10
oscillations
(s)
Period
(s)
Average
Period
2

(S
2
)
1 17.81 1.781 3.154
2 17.75 1.775
17.72 1.772
Length: 0.8m
Trial Time for 10
oscillations
(s)
Period
(s)
Average
Period
2

(S
2
)
1 15.50 1.550 2.362
2 15.8 1.58
15.22 1.522
Length: 0.4m
Trial Time for 10
oscillations
(s)
Period
(s)
Average
Period
2

(S
2
)
1 12.5! 1.25! 1.555
2 12.8 1.28
12."7 1.2"7
Analysis:
1etermining G
g 2 (3
&
l4T
&
g 2 (3
&
($4'%-'*)
g 2 $.%.'..,)++
T
%
> 8.<8?
. > #.- meter
1etermining G
To 5ind g:
T 2 &36(l4g) T4&3 2 6(l4g)
T
&
4(3
&
2 l4g
gT
&
4(3
&
2 l
g 2 (3
&
l4T
&
g 2 (3
&
l4T
&
g 2 (3
&
(.%,4'%$)()
g 2 $.%.$')(-$+
T
%
> 8.#,=
. > -.@ meter
1etermining G
g 2 (3
&
l4T
&
g 2 (3
&
(.%*4&%'*&)
g 2 $.%.&,',+&
T
%
>%.8?%
. > -.? meter
1etermining G
g 2 (3
&
l4T
&
g 2 (3
&
(.%(4$%))))
g 2 $.%$))&$--*
T
%
> #.,,,
. > -.= meter
5inal Average o! G:
g
$
7 g
&
7 g
'
7 g
(
2 88%
$.%.'..,)++ 7
$.%.$')(-$+ 7
$.%.&,',+& 7
$.%$))&$--*
2 $.%.)*,$.)'
2 $.%.* m4s
&
(& dec%pl%)
Aravitational acceleration was found to be approximately #-.-? m$s
%
from the result
calculations and <.<, m$s
%
from graphical solution. These values were approximately
#.,B and %.?B respectively off the accepted value of <.@m$s
%
.
Through observation of the graphical results and the line of best fit, the results were
found to be very accurate and precise. The line of best fit passes through each point
and is only !ust off the origin. These are the desired results for such an experiment.
9onclusion:
)y observing and calculating the rate of acceleration due to gravity by investigation
the effects of gravity on an average pendulum, it was found that the calculated
gravitational acceleration was about #-.--, m$s
%
. This value was not far off of the
accepted value of <.@ m$s
%
.
1iscussion:
The independent variable in this investigation was the length of the string and,
therefore, the length of the pendulum this is only if the dimensions of the mass are
kept constant which in this case were. The reason for starting the experiment from #
m with -.% m in between was to increase the accuracy of measurements and in turn
minimise error. Csing shorter lengths was not a good idea because shorter pendulums
have shorter periods. 'ince measurements of period were taken with a stopwatch by a
timekeeper, the shorter the periods would have been more difficult for the timekeeper
to make accurate !udgments o when to start and stop. Csing the longest strings is very
practicable and means that this source of error was reduced in this investigation.
The second dependent variable in this investigation was period of oscillation. Dor a
pendulum in simple harmonic motion with a small deviation angle, period of
oscillation depends only upon the pendulum length and the acceleration due to
.ength (m
&un
&un
&ise
T
%
(s
%

Dinding g using the graph

'ub m into e6n" g > =E
%
x #$m
m > rise$run
Aravity as determined form the graph
m > (8.<?8 1 #.,,, $ (# - -.=
m > 8.<?@888F
g > =E
%
x #$m
g > =E
%
x #$8.<?@888
g > <.<=@8?%%G
g > <.<, m$s
%
(% dec.pl.
gravity. The reason for timing #- oscillations, rather than !ust one, was to eliminate
the errors in !udgment associated with panic and mad scrambles during short time
frames. /rolonging the oscillations meant that the timekeeper was able to better
anticipate the point of closure and, hence, take a more accurate reading of time. 4
possible source of error in this procedure, however, lies in the division of each
recorded time by #-. This was done on the assumption that period of oscillation
remains constant for #- full oscillations, when, in reality, it would decrease over time
(since the pendulum would lose momentum through interactions with forces retarding
its motion, including air resistance.
The value for gravitational acceleration calculated in this experiment differed slightly
from the theoretical value of <.@-ms
-%
published in each of the below texts. Hne
possible reason for this deviation lies in the levels of accuracy of the measuring
instruments used. The limits of reading of the instruments, and of the rule and
stopwatch, in particular, were a limitation in this investigation, and a barrier to
achieving results of utmost exactness and, hence, a conclusion of utmost reliability.
'ubstitution of measuring apparatus of higher levels of accuracy would have
improved the validity of the conclusion through minimising absolute errors in both
collected and calculated data.
Aravitational acceleration was both a calculated, and a controlled variable in this
investigation. The formula above works on the assumption that acceleration due to
gravity is a constant. *owever, it is known that gravitation acceleration changes with
such factors as altitude, crustal density and position on the 5arthIs surface. 4lthough
this was known, when the length of the string was measure, the distance between the
mass and the ground changed. To improve results, no change in string length should
have been made without ad!usting the boss head and clamp so as to keep the distance
between the mass and the ground constant for all trials.
4nother reason for the discrepancy between the true and experimental values for
gravitational acceleration could have been the failure of the investigation to
ade6uately account for the error ranges of measuring instruments in both calculations
and the graphical representation. To eliminate this error source, these ranges could
have been factored into calculations involving T, T
%
and l, giving more exact values of
g and bringing greater validity to drawn conclusions. 4lso, instead of simply taking
the average of the = values of g as the definitive value, an allowance for error could
have been made by determining the greatest residual from the arithmetic mean and
expressing the final value as a range, rather than a definite figure. This would have
had the added advantage of showing clearly the level of accuracy of the investigation
and, hence, giving a truer indication of the reliability of the conclusion.
4 possible source of error, and a possible cause for the difference between the value
of g calculated in this experiment and the theoretical value, lies in the variations in
gravitational acceleration that relate to geographical position. 2epending on the
thickness and density of the 5arthIs crust, proximity to the 5arthIs poles and the
magnitude of centrifuge forces at any one point on the 5arthIs surface, the value for g
calculated in this experiment could have deviated by as much as -.-8%ms
-%
due to
factors beyond direct control.
4lso contributing to the stated discrepancy could have been inherent faults in the
apparatus used, including weak and$or worn components of the boss head, clamp,
mass and$or retort stand, as well as frailty of the string, or even a weakening of an
otherwise strong string through repeated use. 'olutions to this source of error include
replacing the string with a fresh length before each new trial and carefully examining
and replacing other apparatus where, and when, necessary.
4nother reason the validity of conclusions may have suffered could have been the
intervention of humans in both the data collection, and the data analysis process. )oth
systematic and accidental errors, including those related to parallax, arising from
human involvement would have had a negative impact on the reliability of gathered
data, the accurate analysis of that data, and the validity of the drawn conclusion.
&eplacing humans with artificial intelligence in the form of robots and$or computers
in the areas of data collection and analysis would have rectified this error source and
improved the reliability of the investigation as a whole.
5ach time the pendulum is brought from e6uilibrium back to its extreme of motion
before release, it is critical that no, or, at the very least, little tension is lost from the
string. )y supplying flexion to the string, the mass carrier is given additional potential
energy on top of the weight force already being exerted. This means that, on release,
the pendulum will have additional and unwanted forces acting on it, resulting in
further reaction forces, impulses through the string and the disturbance of harmony
motion. This could lead to inaccurate results and an unreliable conclusion.
The experiment was reasonably reliable as tests for each length were conducted
multiple times. To increase this reliability, many groups executed the same
investigation, all retrieving similar results. The experiment was also very valid as
there were many variables being controlled, but could have been more valid by
improving such variables including the distance between the ground and the string.
While conducting the experiment, it was observed that as the string completed the
first few oscillations, it began to spin in an anti-clockwise circular motion. 0t performs
these motions due to the spinning of the earth. The pendulum follows the path of the
5arth and its gravitational force.