Scribd
Upload
433 views4 pages

Speed of Sound Lab Report

1) The aim was to determine the speed of sound using a lab quest microphone to measure intervals of a sound bouncing in a tube. 2) It was hypothesized the microphone would detect peaks as the sound bounced and weakened over time, accurately measuring the speed of sound. 3) However, the results calculated speeds significantly different than the accepted 343m/s value, with errors up to 2480m/s, indicating human error affected the experiment.

Uploaded by

Richard Veme
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
433 views4 pages

Speed of Sound Lab Report

1) The aim was to determine the speed of sound using a lab quest microphone to measure intervals of a sound bouncing in a tube. 2) It was hypothesized the microphone would detect peaks as the sound bounced and weakened over time, accurately measuring the speed of sound. 3) However, the results calculated speeds significantly different than the accepted 343m/s value, with errors up to 2480m/s, indicating human error affected the experiment.

Uploaded by

Richard Veme
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Title: Measuring Speed of Sound Lab Report

Aim: Determine the speed of sound with the lab quest microphone sound detecting
function and observe the bouncing off of the sound within the tube there and back whilst
measuring several intervals. Through this, the speed of sound will be calculated purely
based on our results. This value will be then compared to the pre-known speed of sound
value and determine whether our scientific approach was accurate enough.

Hypothesis: I expect to see a peak at the start of the interval once the initial sound starts off
from the metal rods chinned at the start of the tube right at the lab quest pad. This sound
initiates the recording after which I expect to see several peaks as the sound bounces back
and forth, peaking once it returns back to the beginning of the tube and lowers as it travels
further down the tube away from the lab quest. The sound intensity should weaken as
sound proceeds to travel along the tube multiple times, weakening due to interference and
traveling outside of the tube. Yet, the speed of sound should be accurately measured as the
first intervals should not be altered extensively and should serve reliably to calculate the
speed of sound as already known.

Pre-known Information
The speed of sound is 343m/s at rooms temperature and is calculated by distance/time.

Variables – non
Independent – length (distance)
Dependent – time
Adjusted – temperature, air pressure, humidity
Diagrams from the experiment:
Method: 1) Initially, we have set up a tube for sound to travel through using tube holders
adjusted with beaker setters.
2)After, a chair was put at one end of the tube for lab quest to record the sound
waves.
3)The lab quest microphone was put to a place where sound waves would be picked
up most optimally and accurately, meaning without any external interference.

4)The recording interval of the lab quest was started off directly after the first sound
wave reached the pad. Several interval were measured for highest accuracy.
.
Data Recorded:
Equipment used:
-two lab holders for the tube
-1x 2m plastic tube
-flexible meter
-lab quest pad
-2x metal rods for sound wave creation
-a plastic covering at one end of the tube

Conclusion: Obviosly, the speed of sound calculated from the data we have obtained greatly
differs from the expected value. The speed of sound is 340m/s yet the results we have
obtained sum up to 470m/s up to 509 m/s, in addition in trial 2 we ended up with 2480 m/s.
This obviosly is a result completely off the scale and human error must have been part of
the scientific method. Furthermore, in trial 2, 131m/s and 250m/s were found to be the
speeds of sound. Reflecting backwards, Trial 2 numbers are exponentially lower compared
to trial 1, this may have been due to different approach and peak analysis in trial 1 versus
trial 2. This caused the speed of sound to be slower relative to to Trial 1 were higher values
were recorded. Another factor affecting the reliability of our data mey be that sound wave
interference allowed the lab quest pad to initiate recording a bit later and the wrong sound
wave was picked up that started the recording.

Evaluation: The realibility and accuracy of our data Is questionable if anything. From the the
actual value of 340m/s all of our result differed signoificantly and must be taken as false.
Obviosly, we may blame human error as inaccuracy of seeting and conducting the
experiment. The sound could have been created with different less resontant materials, that
would create a single sound wave, a mechanic sound from a speaker for example. This
would prevent more waves from entering the tube and affecting the data. Also, other sound
interference could be eliminated such as external noises from other classrooms as well as
sounds interference from the team members, as breathing which may still alter the
results.Sound absobtion materiala may be placed on walls, such as triangle foams which
diminish the sound waves effectively.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy