PAG 10.

3-Comparison of static and dynamic methods of determining spring stiffness

Aim:

To compare the static and dynamic methods of determining spring stiffness

Risk Assessment:
 Wear goggles so that the spring doesn’t snap back and damage your eyes
 Put the weights on slowly and take them off carefully so that they don’t fall Equipment:
onto your feet
 Metre ruler
 Make sure to let the spring go vertically so it doesn’t bounce back in random
 Stopwatch
directions.
 Clamp stand
Sources of error and prevention:  Masses
 Spring
 To make sure that the timing of the dynamic method is accurate use 3 timings  Blu-Tack
and take an average time.  Boss-head clamp
 Use a set square to accurately measure the spring’s extension  Test tube clamp
 When the spring is pulled, little force was used so that the spring doesn’t
deform or bounce in random directions.
 Take the ruler off for the dynamic test after the static test so that friction is
reduced, and results are more accurate.
 Use a fiducial marker to accurately count the oscillations as the spring bounces
up and down.
 Make sure to have the metre ruler upright and straight using blue tack so that
reading would be more accurate

Method: Static Method

1. Measure the original length of the spring.
2. Set the equipment up by having the metre ruler clamped and the spring hanging off the test tube clamp.
3. Measure the new length of the spring and record this value.
4. Add a 100 g mass to the mass holder and measure the new length of the spring.
5. Repeat the above step until the total mass reaches 500g.
6. Repeat the entire procedure to get two values of length for each 100g of mass and calculate the mean length.
7. Finally plot the values on a graph with the mass on the x axis and the times on the y axis.

(1) (2)

3
Method: Dynamic Method
1. Attach the spring to the clamp stand and attach the mass holder to the spring.
2. Wait until the spring stops moving completely, then place the fiducial marker at the very bottom of the mass holder,
using the metre ruler to align it perfectly. This represents the centre of oscillations and will make it easier to count how
many oscillations the mass-spring system has undergone.
3. Pull the spring down slightly and let it go so that it is oscillating with a small amplitude and in a straight line.
4. As the bottom of the mass holder passes the fiducial marker, start the stopwatch, and count the time taken for it to
complete 10 full oscillations.
5. Take two more readings for the time period for 10 oscillations and calculate a mean.
6. Add a 100 g mass to the mass holder and repeat the last 3 steps of the procedure.
7. Repeat the last step until the total mass is 500g
8. Finally plot the values on a graph with the mass on the x axis and time on the y axis.
Conclusion:

For the constant of the static method I got 28.03N/m and for the dynamic method I got 19.11N/m and
the percentage difference would be: 28.03-19.11 X100
28.03
= 31.82%(2dp) difference

This means that I was quite far off my actual. However, since I used the gradient of my dynamic graph
there are a lot more errors that can occur in the dynamic method, than when doing the static method.