Jared Nye, Ziyuan Guo.

and Patrick Lyon

Phys1501-023L
Manish Roy
Deriving Frequency of a Wave on a String though Experimentation
Abstract
The goal of this experiment was to compare frequencies of waves with
varying resonant harmonic numbers to a mathematically derived model. The result
of this experiment was the experimentally derived frequencies fit within ten percent
uncertainty of the derived mathematical model. The confidence in the data and
model is of high degree because the data fit so well within the uncertainty ranges in
the model.
Introduction
The goal of this experiment was to compare experimentally obtained
frequencies of waves of varying resonant harmonic numbers. To calculate these
values experimentally, the hanging mass was varied as well as the length of the
string used and the variable n of the harmonic frequency. The theoretical model
used was:

Fn =

n
mg/
2L

To derive this model, one starts with:

( k )= F /
t

2 f
=Ft/
1
2

()

f =(

Ft
)/

Using the fact that:

=2 L/n
One is able to derive:

f =n(

mg
/ 2 L)

Limitations of this of this model are using the gravitational constant g and
neglecting the friction in the pulley connecting the hanging mass to the system. If
the wavelength of a string is doubled, based on the above equations, the phase
velocity would increase, the wavenumber would decrease, the period would
increase and the amplitude would stay the same because the amplitude does not
depend on the wavelength of the string.

Figure 1-Depiction of the four harmonic numbers used during this experiment

Procedure
While varying the hanging mass of this experiment to test different
frequencies, a constant length of the string was chosen to be .8 meters. The
harmonic number of the wave was one to simplify this part of the experiment. The
hanging masses chosen in this experiment were .5 kg, 1 kg and 1.5 kg because .5
kg and 1 kg weights were easily accessible. Using the Pasco device, one finds a
frequency where the harmonic motion is only in the vertical axis, not in the
horizontal. Then to find the uncertainty in the frequency, one adjusts the frequency
by .1 Hz rather than 1.0 Hz until the harmonic motion is no longer only vertical, but
is also in the horizontal plane. This method of calculating uncertainty was used for
all three parts of this lab. Three trials for this first experiment to be sure the data
was valid and to have multiple data points to check are within the error ranges of
the mathematical model. For experiment two, the hanging mass was held constant
at 1 kg, and the length of the string was varied to .4, .6, .8 and .9 meters because
these lengths were all easy to measure with the meter stick from the point of the
nodes. Four trials were done for this experiment for the same reason as the first, to
have validity and higher confidence in the data fitting the model. Uncertainty was
not calculated using standard deviation, so that did not factor in to the decision for
the amount of trials of each experiment. For the third and final part of the

experiment, the hanging mass and length of string were kept constant. The
harmonic number of the wave of the string was varied at values 1, 2, 3 and 4. Four
trials were chosen for the four different harmonic numbers again to have a higher
degree of confidence than one would have with just one measurement of just one
harmonic number. Independent design decisions in this experiment were the
hanging masses used and the length of the string used in the first and second parts
of the experiments. As mentioned above, these were chosen because the weights
available were .5 kg and 1 kg and a meter stick was used to measure the length of
the string. The range of length of the string used was chosen because in this
experiment a meter stick was used to measure the length of the string, so a length
greater than a meter could not be used. The experiment was also to be performed
on a table with a length just under a meter, so the max length of the string one
could use is about .9 meters. The weight of the hanging mass was the independent
variable of the first part of the experiment and was chosen because of the readily
available .5 kg and 1 kg masses to use as the hanging mass.
When we graphed the experiments we made sure to use
for our first experiment and

1
L

vs Frecunecy

vs Frequency, to keep both graphs linear.

Data

Values used to calculate theoretical model for first part of experiment:

Mass (kg)

Length

Model

X-axis

0.5

.8

0.000276498

.8

0.000276498

0.7071
07
1

1.5

.8

0.000276498

72.168
02
102.06
1
124.99
87

1.2247
45

Upper
Bound
75.77641
821
107.1640
383
131.2486
064

Lower
Bound
68.5596
16
96.9579
39
118.748
73

Values used to calculate theoretical model for second part of experiment:

Length

0.000276
498
0.000276
498
0.000276
498
0.000276
498

0.4
0.6
0.8

Mass
(kg)
1

Model

1/L

235.4500
345
156.9666
897
117.7250
173

2.5

1
1

1.666
667
1.25

Upper
Bound
0

Lower
Bound
0

247.2225
362
164.8150
242
123.6112
681

223.6775
328
149.1183
552
111.8387
664

Values used to calculate theoretical model for the third and final part of experiment:
n

Length

Mass

Model

Upper
Bound

Lower
Bound

0.8

0.000276
498

117.72
5

123.6112
681

111.8387
664

0.8

0.000276
498

235.45

247.2225
362

223.6775
328

0.8

0.000276
498

353.17
51

370.8338
044

335.5162
992

0.8

0.000276
498

470.90
01

494.4450
725

447.3550
656

1
0.5

Experime
ntal
104
73

Uncertainty (YError)
1.4
1.7

(XError)
0.005
0.005

1.5

129

1.1

Sqrt
Mass
1
0.7071
07
1.2247
45

Experiment 1 results:
Mass

0.005

Experiment 2 results:
Length
0.8

Experime
ntal
117

Uncertaint
y (y)
1.3

X-error
Bars
0.000312
5

1/L
1.25

0.6

160

1.6

0.4
0.9

235
105

1.6
1.3

0.000555
556
0.00125
0.000246
914

1.6666
67
2.5
1.1111
11

Experiment 3 results:
N

Experime
ntal

1
2
3
4

117
238
350
467

YUncertain
ty
1.3
1.3
0.6
0.9
Analysis:

During this experiment we had three different graphs all with different forms
of error analysis. For all three experiments the model was graphed using a tolerance
zone of 5%, in which all of our data including the error bars fit in. Y-error bars were
determined experimentally through the Pasco software. First, we found the correct
frequency for what we were testing and then slowly increased the frequency by 1
hertz until the motion of the wave changed drastically. This range of values was
considered to be the uncertainty in y. For the first experiment, for the data points
we used the error of mass to be
the equation

. For the second trial x-error bars we used

|a|La1L (derived from equation 4.5 in the lab manual). Finally,

for the last experiment since n is a given constant there is no uncertainty in the xaxis. We are confidence in our results as the data with its error bars all fell within
5% of the calculated model. We believe our data is of high quality as it is quite
accurate with the model which can be considered to be of high quality as it is
derived from the basic concepts of physics. This implies that our experiment is very
repeatable and will be very consistent with other results.

Conclusion:
The goal of this experiment was to derive and determine the Frequency of a
wave based on different changing variables. The quality of our data was high as it
was quite accurate with the theoretical model. We are confident in our results that
they are correct and precise. This experiment could be improved by doing this
experiment in a frictionless surface where the string can pass over the pulley
without causing torque. We could have used more trials within our experiments to
improve the results of our experiment by increasing the amount of data we found.

We believe that the third experiment was the most reliable as it eliminates
uncertainty in the x-axis, thus increasing repeatability and accuracy. With a guitar
we can see that by changing the length of the string we can change the frequency
and thus the pitch, unlike in a brass instrument which simply increase the distance
the air must travel to change the pitch. With a drum it is simply reliant on the force
of the hit on the surface tension.