Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inshaa)
    was it supposed to be 1.91 x 10^10 ???
    I'm not too sure I got 1.99X10^8 and what was the shape of the force against extension graph ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luj99)
    I think I did and how did your force against extension graph look like ?
    Passed limit of proportionality at 5.9N and then started curving I think
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chapers64)
    Passed limit of proportionality at 5.9N and then started curving I think
    But they asked to draw a line of best fit so how can it curve?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luj99)
    But they asked to draw a line of best fit so how can it curve?
    A line of best fit goes through all the points.. So in this case it has to be a curve.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Got 1.97 x 10^10 for young modulus
    I used 5.5N and 0.008m


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chapers64)
    Uncertainty on metre rule is +/- 0.5mm, 0.5/60 = 0.83%
    You're wrong the uncertainty on a meter rule is +/- 1mm
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i think till 6N it obeyed Hookes law then it lost its elastic behaviour...plastic deformation began so mine was a a curve.. what about yours?
    (Original post by Luj99)
    I'm not too sure I got 1.99X10^8 and what was the shape of the force against extension graph ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    yeah mine too was a curve from 5.9-6.0 N
    (Original post by Chapers64)
    Passed limit of proportionality at 5.9N and then started curving I think
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inshaa)
    i think till 6N it obeyed Hookes law then it lost its elastic behaviour...plastic deformation began so mine was a a curve.. what about yours?
    I just drew a straight line of best fit
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mandax_25)
    You're wrong the uncertainty on a meter rule is +/- 1mm
    Was it okay to round it off to 2%


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mandax_25)
    You're wrong the uncertainty on a meter rule is +/- 1mm
    No that's the minimum division, the absolute uncertainty is half the minimum division, https://www.physicsforums.com/thread...e-rule.610200/ check for yourself
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    and what about your percentage uncertanity ? was it 1.7%
    (Original post by Luj99)
    I just drew a straight line of best fit
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    what about the one for the burns? Did we have to describe about the nodes, anti nodes and the change of phase?:confused::confused:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zenab_k)
    For the percentage uncertainty weren't we supposed to change 0.01mm into cm then divide it by 6 and multiply it by 100?
    If you used vernier calliper as your measuring tool, that's correct
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inshaa)
    what about the one for the burns? Did we have to describe about the nodes, anti nodes and the change of phase?:confused::confused:
    The burns occurred at the antinodes so distance between adjacent antinodes is half lamda. Therefore twice d is lamda.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i lost my 2 marks there... i talked about the wave being hit on a barrier so it traveled a distance L a the reflected wave travels back giving a total distance of 2L
    (Original post by Droneon)
    The burns occurred at the antinodes so distance between adjacent antinodes is half lamda. Therefore twice d is lamda.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chapers64)
    No that's the minimum division, the absolute uncertainty is half the minimum division, https://www.physicsforums.com/thread...e-rule.610200/ check for yourself
    Yeh I guess you're right... You can take the uncertainty as either +/- 0.5mm or 1mm.
    You'll get marks either way.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mandax_25)
    Yeh I guess you're right... You can take the uncertainty as either +/- 0.5mm or 1mm.
    You'll get marks either way.
    Is it okay if I rounded off the % uncertainty to 2% instead of 1.7%?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Droneon)
    Is it okay if I rounded off the % uncertainty to 2% instead of 1.7%?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Anyone??


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I kept my percentage uncertainty as 1.67% i didnt round it off to 1.7% i would still get the mark right?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.