On Gravity and the Pendulum: An Exploration in Classical Mechanics

Franco Castillo 11A-6

Physics SL - Mr. Jovanie Estrella

RESEARCH QUESTION
———————————————————————————————————————

In a near circular trajectory, the International Space Station orbits the Earth with a forward
velocity of 7.66 km · s in a limbo of perpetual descent. Struggling to barrel away and straight
ahead, the satellite succumbs to gravity, falling towards the Earth—and missing. Around the
Earth, the space station swings, suspended between the pull of gravity and the resistance of its
momentum.

The pendulum too remains in limbo. In motion, the bob remains suspended between its own
momentum, the pull of gravity, and this time, the tension of the string of a pendulum. In motion,
it falls, yet it never reaches the ground. Yet, despite the apparent similarities between the two, the
pendulum—however long it may take—will always return to rest, succumbing to the passage of
time.

Two concepts of note affect the pendulum’s motion: time and gravity. But how these three
concretely relate to each other is the object of this exploration. Thus states my research question:
How would the length of a pendulum (in metres) affect the period of time (in seconds)
needed for said pendulum to complete ten (10) oscillations, hence proving that the
acceleration of gravity (in metres per second squared) is 9.8 m · s​-2​​ ​?

CONCLUSION
———————————————————————————————————————

The hypothesis of this experiment reads as: ​As the length of the pendulum increases, the
period of time needed to complete ten (10) oscillations also lengthens.

From the findings of this investigation, the hypothesis put forward has indeed been proven to be
correct. The period of time (in seconds) for the pendulum to complete ten (10) oscillations
lengthened as the length of the pendulum (in metres) lengthened accordingly.

The raw values of ​Table 1​​ were further processed in ​Table 3​​. In said table, the average periods
of time per ten (10) oscillations per length of the pendulum were laid out together with their
corresponding average uncertainties, as seen in columns 2 and 3. After which, the times were
divided by ten (10) to obtain the period of time per one (1) oscillation per length of the pendulum
in column 4. Uncertainties of the values were tabulated in column 5. With the equation:

√
l
T = 2π g
T - period of time (in seconds)
l - length of the pendulum (in metres)
g - acceleration due to gravity (in m · s​-2​)

in mind, the values in column 4 were squared in column 6 to afterwards establish the dependent
variable (​l)​ and the independent variable (​T2​ ​). Uncertainties of the values were tabulated in
column 7.

Indeed, while unfortunately not being explicitly shown in the investigation proper, the average
common difference between each of the values of column 4 shows a positive trend of 0.1 as the
length increases by 0.1 metres (m). This was achieved by getting the differences of each value
and its smaller consecutive value and dividing by ten to get the average of the differences. This
establishes a directly proportional relationship between length and time.

With the independent variable (​T2​ ​) and the dependent variable (​l​), the value of the acceleration of
gravity can be found. In ​Graph 1​​, the coordinates of the values of column 6 in ​Table 3​​ were
plotted with ​T​2​ as the y-axis values and ​l​ as x-axis values. The slope of the best fit line was
subsequently drawn. In the equation:

g = 4π 2 Tl 2

l
the reciprocal of the slope is equal to​ T2
. With the slope being approximately 4, the value of g
was found to be 9.87 m · s −2 .

A percentage error of 0.71% was taken from a comparison of findings with the theoretical
gravitational acceleration of 9.8 m · s​-2​ using the following equation:

−2 −2
Error % = 9.87 m·s9.80 −m·s9.80
−2
m·s
· 100
Error % = 0.71%

Systematic error is present because the group was unable to take the exact measurement of the
length of the pendulum due to instrument limitations. Random error was present because human
error in reaction time is possible in the experiment during the timing of the oscillations.
However, the effect of such errors on the results is minimal.

EVALUATION
———————————————————————————————————————

As can be gleaned from the average uncertainties for time per ten (10) oscillations in column 3 of
Table 3​​, the data gathered from the investigation are of good quality. Uncertainties ranged from
± 0.01 seconds to ± 0.3 seconds. Regardless of the obvious deviations in values, which we will
attribute to systematic error due to instrument limitation, the data is precise.

With regards to accuracy, the acceleration of gravity which the investigation produced has a
percentage error of 0.71%, and therefore our conclusive value is 99.29% accurate. As the
percentage error is below 10%, the data is reliable. On ​Graph 1​​, only one (1) point, the first, lies
notably farther from the best fit line than the other points. The other nine (9) points could be said
to be sufficiently close enough to the line. This could be again attributed to instrument limitation
with regards to the measurement of the lengths of the pendulum.

While large metre rulers will tend to be error-prone and the turning of the string around its pivot
to shorten or lengthen said string is time consuming when attempting to get as accurate a
measurement as possible, the design of the investigation was easy to follow and can be deemed
easy to replicate, with all materials required and procedures to follow enumerated clearly. Any
error that resulted from the investigation’s data and would have cost any inaccuracies and
deviations can be counted as systematic error. This systematic error, again was a result of
instrument limitation with the metre ruler.

RECOMMENDATION
———————————————————————————————————————

With regards to ease of carrying out measurements, it is recommended to cut the string of the
pendulum instead of tying it around the pendulum’s pivot. It will be easier to quickly measure
the length of the string instead of continuously adjusting the string’s coils to get a more accurate
measurement.

Otherwise, as the main systematic error was due to instrument limitation in the meter ruler, a
more reliable instrument is recommended. However, since such an instrument may not be found
in abundance, it is not a proposal for a rule to be followed.

In order to reduce random errors caused by human reaction time, a different, more precise, and
more automatic time measuring tool must be used other than the Clock application of the iPads
used by the investigators. It is important to minimize the effect of human reaction time, as it
could create large and inexplicable variations in the data collected.

REFERENCES
———————————————————————————————————————

The Value of g. (n.d.). Retrieved October 26, 2018, from

https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-3/The-Value-of-g