KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY
(KNUST)

COLLEGE OF SCIENCE
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS (KNUST – Kumasi)

FACULTY OF PHYSICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCES

EXPERIMENTAL DETERMINATION OF THE HOOKE’S LAW

BEHAVIOUR OF SPIRAL SPRINGS

AKURUGU ATEBO MILLICENT

4653318

BSC. PHYSICS

18TH DECEMBER, 2018

 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page Number

Abstract 2

Introduction 3

Diagram of Setup 4

Method/Procedure 5

Observation Table (Data) 6- 7

Graphs of observation table 8 – 11

Theory and Calculations 11 – 12

Results and Discussions 13

Error Analysis 14 – 16

Precautions 17

Conclusion 18

References 19

1
 ABSTRACT

The experiment was conducted to determine the Hooke’s law behaviour of spiral springs. The load
on the spiral spring was increased in steps of 10 grams using the weight holder and the slotted
weights. The corresponding increase in length ∆l of the spring recorded. The experimental
procedures were repeated with a second spring separately, and connected both in series and parallel
to the first spring. A graph of Force /N was plotted as a function of increase in length ∆l /m and
slopes determined for the first, second, third and fourth graphs respectively were 7.00 ± 0.07 N/m,
6.84 ± 0.07 N/m, 3.26 ± 0.13 𝑁/𝑚 and 8.09 ± 0.10 𝑁/𝑚.
The slope signifies the springs constant K which is 7.00 ± 0.07 𝑁/𝑚 for the first spring, 6.84 ±
0.07 𝑁/𝑚 for the second spring, 3.26 ± 0.13 𝑁/𝑚 for the springs connected in series and springs
connected in parallel had a spring constant of 8.09 ± 0.10 𝑁/𝑚. Considering the minimum error
recorded, the outcome of this experiment is acceptable and recommended for determining the
Hooke’s law behaviour of spiral springs.

2
 INTRODUCTION

When a spiral spring is stretched or compressed, it exerts forces on the agent causing the
deformation. From Newton’s third law, the external force acting at the ends of the spring are equal
in magnitude and oppositely directed to the deforming force. Over a limited range of stretching and
compressing, the force exerted by the spring is directly proportional to the distance stretched or
compressed. When this happens, then we say the spring obeys Hooke’s law. This study is
conducted to find out the behaviour of the spiral springs (spring constant) when an external force is
applied on it. Bathroom scales, hanging scales in the supermarkets and laboratory scales are made
with the knowledge of springs behaviour.

3
 DIAGRAM OF SETUP

The diagram below illustrates experimental setup in determining the Hooke’s law behaviour of
spiral springs.

4
METHOD/PROCEDURE

Apparatus required includes

1. Tripod base
2. barrel base
3. support rod
4. right angle clamp
5. weight holder and weights
6. helical Springs
7. silk thread
8. metre scale
9. holding pin.

a. The experiment to determine the spring constant is as shown in the diagram above.
b. To start with, the helical spring was submitted with no stress; the sliding pointer is set to the
lower end of the spring and its corresponding position 𝑋o on the measuring scale is
recorded.
c. The load on the helical spring was then increased in steps of 10 g, using the weight holder
and the slotted weights until a maximum load of 200 g was reached.
d. Noting the equilibrium position of the lower end of the helical spring 𝑋1, the corresponding
increase ∆l = 𝑋1 - 𝑋o of the spring was recorded.
e. The weight Fw which causes elongation was plotted as a function of elongation ∆l
f. The gradient was then determined of the straight
g. The procedures a – f was repeated with the second spring.
h. The spiral springs were connected in series and procedures a – f was repeated.
i. The spiral springs were connected in parallel and the procedures a – f repeated in this case.

5
 OBSERVATION TABLE
Table 1: values for weight Fw /N and elongation ∆l of spiral spring 1

Initial length X0 of spring = 9.5 cm = 0.10 m

m/g m/kg F/N X1/cm X1/m X1 – X0 = ∆l/m
50 0.5 0.49 10.2 0.10 0.00
60 0.6 0.59 10.9 0.11 0.01
70 0.7 0.69 12.0 0.12 0.02
80 0.8 0.78 13.4 0.13 0.03
90 0.9 0.88 14.8 0.15 0.05
100 0.10 0.98 16.3 0.16 0.06
110 0.11 1.08 17.6 0.18 0.08
120 0.12 1.18 19.0 0.19 0.09
130 0.13 1.27 21.6 0.22 0.12
140 0.14 1.37 22.0 0.22 0.12
150 0.15 1.47 23.4 0.23 0.13
160 0.16 1.57 24.9 0.25 0.15
170 0.17 1.67 26.3 0.26 0.16
180 0.18 1.76 27.8 0.28 0.18
190 0.19 1.86 29.3 0.29 0.19
200 0.20 1.96 31.2 0.31 0.21

Table 2: values for weight Fw /N and elongation ∆l of spiral spring 2

Initial length X0 of spring = 0.10 m

m/g m/kg F/N X1/cm X1/m X1 – X0 = ∆l/m
50 0.5 0.49 10.2 0.10 0.00
60 0.6 0.59 10.9 0.11 0.01
70 0.7 0.69 12.0 0.12 0.02
80 0.8 0.78 13.4 0.13 0.03
90 0.9 0.88 14.8 0.15 0.05
100 0.10 0.98 16.3 0.16 0.06
110 0.11 1.08 17.6 0.18 0.08
120 0.12 1.18 19.0 0.19 0.09
130 0.13 1.27 21.6 0.22 0.12
140 0.14 1.37 22.0 0.22 0.12
150 0.15 1.47 23.4 0.23 0.13
160 0.16 1.57 24.9 0.25 0.15
170 0.17 1.67 26.3 0.26 0.16
180 0.18 1.76 27.8 0.28 0.18
190 0.19 1.86 29.3 0.29 0.19
200 0.20 1.96 31.2 0.31 0.21

6
Table 3: values for weight Fw /N and elongation ∆l of spiral springs connected in series

Initial length X0 of spring = 19.1 cm = 0.10 m

X1 – X 0 =
m/g m/kg F/N X1/cm X1/m
∆l/m
50 0.5 0.49 20.1 0.20 0.01
60 0.6 0.59 20.9 0.21 0.02
70 0.7 0.69 22.1 0.22 0.03
80 0.8 0.78 24.7 0.25 0.06
90 0.9 0.88 27.7 0.28 0.09
100 0.10 0.98 30.8 0.31 0.12
110 0.11 1.08 33.8 0.34 0.15
120 0.12 1.18 36.9 0.37 0.18
130 0.13 1.27 39.9 0.40 0.21
140 0.14 1.37 43.2 0.43 0.24
150 0.15 1.47 45.7 0.46 0.27
160 0.16 1.57 48.9 0.49 0.30
170 0.17 1.67 52.1 0.52 0.33
180 0.18 1.76 55.2 0.55 0.36
190 0.19 1.86 58.5 0.59 0.40
200 0.20 1.96 61.3 0.61 0.42

Table 4: values for weight Fw /N and elongation ∆l of spiral springs connected in parallel

X1 – X 0 =
m/g m/kg F/N X1/cm X1/m
∆l/m
50 0.5 0.49 10.0 0.10 0.00
60 0.6 0.59 10.5 0.11 0.01
70 0.7 0.69 11.4 0.11 0.01
80 0.8 0.78 12.6 0.13 0.03
90 0.9 0.88 13.8 0.14 0.04
100 0.10 0.98 15.1 0.15 0.05
110 0.11 1.08 16.2 0.16 0.06
120 0.12 1.18 17.4 0.17 0.07
130 0.13 1.27 19.8 0.20 0.10
140 0.14 1.37 20.0 0.20 0.10
150 0.15 1.47 21.2 0.21 0.11
160 0.16 1.57 22.5 0.23 0.13
170 0.17 1.67 23.7 0.24 0.14
180 0.18 1.76 25.0 0.25 0.15
190 0.19 1.86 26.3 0.26 0.16
200 0.20 1.96 28.0 0.28 0.18

7
GRAPHS OF OBSERVATION TABLE

2.5
Graph 1 A graph of Force Fw /N against extension ∆l /m for spring 1

1.5
Fw /N

0.5

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
∆l /m

8
2.5
Graph 2 A graph of Force Fw /N against extension ∆l /m for spring 2

1.5
Fw /N

0.5

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
∆l /m

9
 Graph 3: A graph of Force Fw /N against extension ∆l /m for springs in series
2.5

1.5
Fw /N

0.5

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45
∆l /m
10
 Graph 4: A graph of Force Fw /N against extension ∆l /m for springs in parallel
2.5

1.5
Fw /N

0.5

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

∆l /m
11
 THEORY AND CALCULATIONS
A helical spring mentioned above is a very simple example of an elastic body. In addition, if
deviations ∆l from the equilibrium position X0 of the helical spring are not very large, the restoring
force FR of the spring is found to be proportional to its elongation ∆l.

𝐹 R = - k∆l … (1)

This is Hooke’s law. The proportionality constant K, is called the spring constant in the case of a
helical spring. If an exterior force acts on the spring, such as the weight Fw = mg, a new stable
equilibrium is reached for the length for which the restoring force on the spring is equal to weight
of the mass; thus

FR = k∆l = mg … (2)

The elongation of the helical spring is therefore proportional to the forces Fw exerted by the
weights.
𝐹𝑤
∆l = … (3)
𝐾
Thus, forces required to cause a given elongation of the spring increase proportionally with the
spring constant. Using equation (3), the new equilibrium length l, is found to be;
𝑚𝑔
𝑙1 = 𝑙0 + … (4)
𝐾

∆F 1.86−0.88
Gradient of first graph = =
∆l 0.19 −0.05

0.98
= = 7.00 𝑁/𝑚
0.14

∆F 1.67−0.79
Gradient of second graph = =
∆l 0.16 −0.03

0.89
= = 6.84 𝑁/𝑚
0.13

∆F 1.57−0.69
Gradient of third graph = =
∆l 0.30 −0.03

0.88
= = 3.26 𝑁/𝑚
0.27

∆F 1.67−0.78
Gradient of fourth graph = =
∆l 0.14 −0.03

= 8.09 𝑁/𝑚
12
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The experiment was conducted to determine the behaviour of Hooke’s law using the spiral spring.

A graph of force /N was plotted against corresponding increase ∆l /m and the slope determined. The

slope represents the spring’s constant K. The spring constant for the first spring is 7.00 ± 0.07 N/m,

s the spring constant for the second spring is 6.84 ± 0.07 N/m. Springs constants for springs in

series and parallel are 3.26 ± 0.13 𝑁/𝑚 and 8.09 ± 0.10 𝑁/𝑚 respectively. It was observed that

the spring constant of the series connection of springs is smaller than that of the individual springs

whereas spring constant of the parallel connection is larger than that of individual springs. This

shows that force is directly proportional to ∆l.

13
 ERROR ANALYSIS
Error incurred for individual springs 1 and 2 is computed as follows;

𝑥 𝑥 - 𝑥̅ (𝑥 - 𝑥̅ )2
0.00 -0.1 0.01
0.01 -0.09 0.008
0.02 -0.08 0.006
0.03 -0.07 0.005
0.05 -0.05 0.003
0.06 -0.04 0.002
0.08 -0.02 0.0004
0.09 -0.01 0.0001
0.12 0.02 0.0004
0.12 0.02 0.0004
0.13 0.03 0.0009
0.15 0.05 0.003
0.16 0.06 0.004
0.18 0.08 0.006
0.19 0.09 0.008
0.21 0.11 0.012
∑(𝑥 − ̅̅̅
𝑥)2 =
∑ 𝑥 = 1.6
0.0692

1.6
𝑥̅ = = 0.01
16

0.0692
𝑆. 𝐷 = √
16

= 0.065

= ± 0.07

∴ 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = ± 0.07.

14
Error incurred for springs in series was computed as follows;

𝑥 𝑥 - 𝑥̅ (𝑥 - 𝑥̅ )2
0.01 -0.189 0.036
0.02 -0.179 0.032
0.03 -0.169 0.029
0.06 -.0139 0.019
0.09 -0.109 0.012
0.12 -0.079 0.006
0.15 -0.049 0.002
0.18 -0.019 0.0004
0.21 0.011 0.0001
0.24 0.041 0.002
0.27 0.071 0.005
0.30 0.101 0.010
0.33 0.131 0.017
0.36 0.161 0.026
0.40 0.201 0.040
0.42 0.221 0.049
∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ )2 =
∑ 𝑥 = 3.19
0.2855

3.19
𝑥̅ = = 0.199
16

0.2855
𝑆. 𝐷 = √
16
= 0.134

= ± 0.13

∴ 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = ± 0.13.

15
Error incurred for springs in parallel was computed as follows;

𝑥 𝑥 - 𝑥̅ (𝑥 - 𝑥̅ )2
0.00 -0.08 0.006
0.01 -0.07 0.005
0.01 -0.07 0.005
0.03 -0.05 0.003
0.04 -0.04 0.002
0.05 -0.03 0.0009
0.06 -0.02 0.0004
0.07 -0.01 0.0001
0.10 0.02 0.0004
0.10 0.02 0.0009
0.11 0.03 0.003
0.13 0.05 0.004
0.14 0.06 0.004
0.15 0.09 0.008
0.16 0.08 0.006
0.18 0.10 0.01
∑(𝑥 − 𝑥̅ )2 =
∑ 𝑥 = 1.34
0.1811

1.34
𝑥̅ = = 0.08
16

0.1811
𝑆. 𝐷 = √
16
= 0.10

= ± 0.10

∴ 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = ± 0.13.

The error was as a result of human or measurement errors.

16
 PRECAUTIONS

1. It was ensured that the helical springs were submitted to no stress before the sliding pointer
was set to the lower end of the spring.

2. It was ensured that readings taken were done at eye level when the lower end of the helical
spring was stable in order to prevent error during readings.

3. It was ensured that the mass on the mass hanger was not oscillating when readings were
taken to ensure near perfect accuracy in measurements.

17
 CONCLUSION

The spring constant of the spiral spring was determined to observe the behaviour of Hooke’s law

with springs. The spring constant for the first spring was 7.00 ± 0.07 N/m whiles that of the second

spring was 6.84 ± 0.07 N/m. That of springs in series was 3.26 ± 0.13 𝑁/m whiles that of springs

in parallel was 𝑚 and 8.09 ± 0.10 𝑁/𝑚. The experiment was not without errors as it recorded ±

0.07 error for the first and second spring, ±0.13 error for springs in series and ±0.10 error for

springs in parallel. The outcome of the experiment is however acceptable considering the minimal

error recorded. The use of spiral spring to determine Hooke’s law behaviour is thus recommended

using experimental procedures.

18
 REFERENCES:

1. Halliday D; Resnick R. and Walker J. (2010) Fundamentals of Physics (6th Ed.), John Wiley
and sons Inc, pp 117 – 130.

2. Raymond A. Serway and John W. Jewelt (2004), Physics for Scientists and Engineers (6th
Ed.) Thompson Brooks/Cole pp 190 – 194

3. Douglas C. Giancoli (2005), Physics principles with Applications (6th Edition), Pearson
Education Inc, pp 144 – 147.

19