You are on page 1of 5

Experimental determination of equivalent spring constant for a

series and parallel coupling of a spring-mass system


Anthony Paul Fox, Ace Santos, Joseph Isaiah Miralles*, Albert Yumol
National Institute of Physics, University of the Philippines-Diliman

Corresponding author: jpmiralles@up.edu.ph

Abstract
Three different mechanism were used to determine the equivalent spring
constants of both series and parallel spring-mass systems. The first method
involved the calculation of equivalent spring constants from the spring
constants of the given springs which yielded keq(s) = 11848.55 g/s2
and keq(p) = 47401.10 g/s2 . The relationship between frequency and
spring constant was used to determine the equivalent spring constants
given by keq(s) = 11292.46 3.51g/s2 and keq(p) = 46196.00 106.62g/s2 .
The method employed a cosine curve fitting on a force vs. time plot to
determine the angular frequency of the system and calculate the equivalent spring constants keq(s) = and keq(p) =. Consistency was observed
on the obtained values for keq) based on the calculation of percent differences among the experimental values which are virtually low (below 6%).
Keywords: simple harmonic motion, coupling, equivalent spring constant

1.

Introduction

Periodic motion is a phenomenon commomly observed when an object regularly repeats its state of
motion, i.e. it returns to its initial position after moving on a certain amount of time T on uniform
intervals just like the pendulum for an example. This type of motion can be exhibited by an object
acted upon by a force F that is proportional to the objects distance x from an equilibrium point and is
always pointing on the direction of its equilibrium point at any time t. Its equation of motion is basically
described by Hookes law.
F (y) = ky

(1)

For a spring-mass system shown in figure d, k is defined to be the spring constant which describes
the stiffness of the spring [1]. Furthermore,
mg = ky

(2)

where m is the mass of the object and g is the acceleration due to gravity equal to 9.81m/s2 .
A variation of this system involves addition of springs attached to the mass whether in a series or in
parallel coupling as shown in figure e. For a system of coupled springs in series, the equation of motion
using Newtons second law can be written as,
m0

d 2 y1
= k1 y1 k2 y1 m0 g + k2 y2
dt2

(3)

d 2 y2
= k2 y2 mg + k2 y1
(4)
dt2
where m0 is an assumed mass for the point of contact of the springs to account for its displacement
y1 . k1 and k2 are the spring constants, y2 is the displacement of mass m. Setting m0 = 0.
m

k1 y1 + k2 y1 = k2 y2

y1 =

(5)

k2
y2
k1 + k2

(6)

substitute equation (6) in equation (4)


d2 y2
m 2 = k2 y2 mg + k2
dt

k 2 y2
k1 + k2

Physics 192
University of the Philippines-Diliman
12 April 2016
1


(7)

d2 y2
k1 k2
=
y2 mg
2
dt
k1 + k2

1
1
d2 y2

y g
=
1 2
1
dt2
m
+
k1
k2
keq(s)
d 2 y2
=
y2 g
2
dt
m

(8)

(9)

(10)

where,
keq(s) =

1
1
1
+
k1
k2

(11)

For springs with parallel coupling, its equation of motion is given by,
m

d2 y
= k1 y1 k2 y1 mg
dt2

(12)

k1 + k2
d2 y
=
yg
2
dt
m

(13)

keq(p)
d2 y
=
yg
2
dt
m

(14)

keq(p) = k1 + k2

(15)

where,
It can be seen that equations (10) and (14) show that the coupled spring systems can be reduced to
a single spring-mass system equations with equivalent spring constants keq(s) and keq(p) , respectively.
Equations of motion described by (10) and (14) can be expressed as
d2 y
= 2 y g
dt2

(16)

where is the angular frequency describing the rate of occurence of oscillations given by
2 =

keq
m

(17)

Note that can also be described in terms of the frequency f . [2]


= 2f

(18)

keq = (2f )2 m

(19)

Combining equations (18) and (17)


This shows that the equivalent spring constant can be obtained by three ways which is the main
objective of this experiment. These methods were demonstrated and its consistency with each other was
verified.

2.

Methodology

The first part of the experiment was the determination of the spring constants k1 and k2 of two distinct
springs that were used in the setup of coupled springs. This was done individually by first setting up a
simple spring-mass system shown in figure 1. The spring with spring constant k1 was first attached to a
stable metal bar and its length was measured. This was labeled as the equilibrium length of the spring
y01 . A 100.35-g was hung on its lower end and the spring length was also measured and labeled y1 . The
displacement of the mass was calculated and used to determine k1 according to equation (2). The same
procedure was done for the spring with spring constant k2 .
The second part of the experiment was the acquisition of the equivalent spring constants keq(s) and
keq(p) for series and parallel coupling of springs, respectively. The first method was the actual calculation
of keq(s) and keq(p) using equations (11) and (15) and the results of the first part of the experiment. The
Physics 192
University of the Philippines-Diliman
12 April 2016
2

second method employs the construction of serially connected springs hanging on a bar and with a mass
of 308.55 g attached on its lower end. It was made to oscillate by giving it an upward tap below its mass
then the time it took to make twenty oscillations was recorded for five trials. This was also done for a
system of two parallel springs supporting the same mass. These time readings were used to calculate
the systems frequency and thus, keq(s) and keq(p) from equation (19). The third method involved the
utilization of angular frequency obtained from a curve-fitting application of a Vernier LabQuest with a
dual-range force sensor connected to it. This was done for both series and parallel spring systems where
a spring system was mounted on the force sensor and was set to oscillate as shown in figure w. An F vs.
t graph was generated where the cosine curve-fitting was done to obtain an angular frequency and hence
keq(s) and keq(p) using equation (17).

3.

Results and Discussion

The determination of the spring constants was first done by calculating it from the individual spring
contants k1 and k2 . Using equations (11) and (15), the equivalent spring constants were found to be
keq(s) = 11848.55 g/s2 and keq(p) = 47401.10 g/s2 . The frequencies obtained from the second method
were used to obtain keq(s) = 11292.46 3.51g/s2 and keq(p) = 46196.00 106.62g/s2 from equation (19).
The last method considered the expression of force that can be derived from the equation of motion in
(16). By applying the change of variable
u = y + g
(20)
the differential equation will take the form
d2 u
= 2 u
dt2

(21)

u = A cos(t )

(22)

which admits the solution,


where A is the amplitude and is the phase difference that both depend on the initial conditions of the
system [3]. Taking the second derivative of the position with respect to time will yield a cosine function.
Multiplying this with mass m gives the force which is a cosine function which is the basis of using a
cosine fit for the F vs. t plot. This method utilized the angular frequency from the cosine fit as shown
in figure s. Equation (17) was used to determine the keq(s) = and keq(p) =.
The obtained values for keq(s) and keq(p) consistently shows that keq(p) > keq(s) which means that a
parallel combination of springs is equivalent to a much stiffer spring compared to the individual springs
and relative to series combination of springs which is actually apparent in equations (11) and (15).
In addition, the frequencies measured from parallel spring system is also greater than those in series
spring system which, according to equation (19), implies that a spring having a high spring constant
will exhibit high frequency oscillations and vice-versa; an easily observable circumstance happening in
common springs stretched below their elastic limit.
Differences in the acquired keq(s) and keq(p) for the three methods can be accounted to uncertainties
of the instruments being used. The stability of the setup can also be a factor specially on the third
method where a dual-range force sensor was used to monitor the force as time elapses.

4.

Conclusion

The equivalent spring constants for both series and parallel spring system were obtained using three
different ways. The first was the calculation of keq(s) and keq(p) from individual spring constants. The
second method involved the measurement of the systems frequency to obtain the equivalent spring
constants. A cosine fit was used on the third setup to determine the angular frequency of the systems of
springs and hence calculate the equivalent spring constant from equation (17). The values obtained from
three different setups can be considered consistent with each other based on their low percent differences
with each other. It was experimentally shown that a coupling springs in parallel simulates a stiffer spring
compared to the given springs. Serially connected springs are equivalent to a more flexible spring.

References
[1] R. Serway, C. Vuille, College physics 9th edition, Chapter 5, Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning Asia
Pte Ltd., Singapore, 2013.
[2] R. Serway, J. Jewett, Physics for scientists and engineers 6th edition, Chapter 15, Brooks/Cole
Thomson Learning, Belmont, 2004.
Physics 192
University of the Philippines-Diliman
12 April 2016
3

[3] Haber, H. E. (2009). Solving the simple harmonic oscillator. Retrieved April 9, 2016, from
http://scipp.ucsc.edu/ haber/ph5B/sho09.pdf

Physics 192
University of the Philippines-Diliman
12 April 2016
4

5. Appendix
5..1 Figures

Physics 192
University of the Philippines-Diliman
12 April 2016
5

You might also like