Physics / The Vibration of Strings
FREE TO EXPLORE
EXPERIMENT 41 · PHYSICS LABORATORY

The Vibration of Strings lab report

A worked the vibration of strings lab report with simulated observation tables, graph, calculations, uncertainty and results.

WORKED EXAMPLE · SIMULATED OBSERVATIONS

A complete example report.

Simulated demonstration data.

This report shows the method and arithmetic. It is not evidence of a physical experiment. Replace its observations with your own measurements when preparing a real lab report.

Student: __________________Student ID: __________________Course: __________________Date: __________________Partner: __________________Instructor: __________________

1. Title and aim

The Vibration of Strings: Sonometer, Mersenne's Laws, and Transverse Wave Dynamics. To investigate the transverse standing wave modes on a stretched wire using a sonometer soundboard, verify Mersenne's laws relating fundamental frequency to vibrating length, tension, and linear density, observe sympathetic acoustic resonance and acoustic beats, and determine the transverse wave velocity and wire linear mass density using linear regression.

2. Abstract

Five observations were generated from the ideal teaching model over the settings listed below. A straight-line fit gave an estimate of Transverse wave speed v of 138.17 m s⁻¹, differing by 0.007% from the model value. The reported scatter comes from scale rounding and any stated model approximation, not measured laboratory noise.

3. Apparatus and fixed settings

4. Theory and graph choice

The physics of vibrating strings constitutes the historical and theoretical foundation of wave mechanics, Fourier analysis, and musical acoustics. In 1636, Marin Mersenne published the empirical laws governing vibrating strings in his seminal treatise 'Harmonie Universelle', which were subsequently given rigorous mathematical foundation by Brook Taylor, Jean le Rond d'Alembert, and Leonhard Euler through the 1D wave equation: ∂²y/∂t² = (T / μ) (∂²y/∂x²), where T is the mechanical tension in the wire and μ is its linear mass density (mass per unit length). The general solution represents transverse waves propagating in opposite directions at a characteristic phase velocity v = √(T / μ). When a wire of length L is clamped between two rigid triangular bridges, the boundary conditions enforce zero transverse displacement at both contact points: y(0, t) = 0 and y(L, t) = 0 (displacement nodes). Wave reflection at these fixed boundaries produces stationary standing waves where the vibrating segment must accommodate an exact integer number of half-wavelengths: L = n (λ_n / 2), with n = 1, 2, 3, ... For the fundamental transverse mode (n = 1), a single displacement antinode forms at the geometric midpoint, yielding the fundamental frequency formula: f₁ = v / λ₁ = v / (2L) = (1 / 2L) √(T / μ). This fundamental relation encapsulates Mersenne's three classical laws: frequency is inversely proportional to length (f ∝ 1/L), directly proportional to the square root of tension (f ∝ √T), and inversely proportional to the square root of linear mass density (f ∝ 1/√μ). In this classic laboratory investigation, a steel wire stretched across a hollow wooden resonance box is coupled to calibrated acoustic tuning forks. Unison tuning is detected with extreme precision by monitoring sympathetic resonance using lightweight paper riders placed at the antinode or by listening for the extinction of acoustic beats. Rearranging the fundamental equation yields the linear form L = (v / 2) (1 / f₁). Plotting the resonant length L against reciprocal frequency 1/f₁ allows students to determine the transverse wave velocity v directly from twice the regression slope (v = 2m) and to deduce the wire's linear density μ = T / v² = M g / (4m²), demonstrating the mechanical principles that govern pianos, harps, guitars, and violins.

L = \left(\frac{v}{2}\right)\left(\frac{1}{f}\right) \iff y = m x + b \iff v = 2 m, \quad \mu = \frac{T}{v^2} = \frac{M g}{4 m^2}

The calculation fits y = mx + b in SI units. The graph may display scaled axes for readability; those display factors are removed before calculating the physical result. The gradient has units m s⁻¹.

5. Method

  1. Inspect the steel sonometer wire to ensure it is completely straight, free from kinks, rust, or surface bends. Load the weight hanger with slotted masses until the total suspended mass equals M = 3.000 kg (tension T = 29.420 N). Verify that the wire runs smoothly over the center of the frictionless ball-bearing pulley and hangs vertically without rubbing against the soundboard frame.
  2. Place the fixed zero-bridge firmly at the left end of the soundboard (aligned with the 0.0 cm graduation mark). Position the sliding bridge approximately 60 cm to the right. Verify that the wire rests snugly in the shallow guide notches atop the metal frets, ensuring both bridges establish rigid, unambiguous displacement nodes with zero lateral rocking.
  3. Cut a small V-shaped rider from lightweight paper (approximately 15 mm long by 2 mm wide) and fold it into an inverted 'V'. Carefully balance the rider upside down across the wire at the exact geometric midpoint between the two bridges (x = L / 2).
  4. Strike the 256.0 Hz tuning fork firmly with the soft rubber mallet. Immediately press the solid stem base of the vibrating fork firmly against the spruce soundboard near the fixed bridge. While the fork vibrates, slowly slide the movable bridge toward the fixed bridge. Observe the paper rider: it will remain motionless until the segment length approaches resonance, begin to flutter vigorously, and finally be thrown completely off the wire when the segment achieves perfect sympathetic resonance. Record this length as L.
  5. Replace the paper rider. Pluck the wire gently near one bridge while simultaneously holding the sounding tuning fork against the soundboard. Listen intently for acoustic beats (pulsations in loudness caused by interference between the fork and string). Finely adjust the bridge position in sub-millimetre increments until the beats become slower and slower, finally dying out into a pure, unified, beatless unison note. Record the verified resonant length L to 0.5 mm.
  6. Repeat the sympathetic rider resonance and beat-elimination procedure for each of the remaining tuning forks: 128.0 Hz, 160.0 Hz, 192.0 Hz, 320.0 Hz, and 384.0 Hz. For each frequency, execute three independent settings approaching from both shorter and longer directions, and record all observations in the formal laboratory notebook.

6. Observations and calculation table

All observations use fixed model settings. Values are rounded only at the instrument reading stage; further calculations use full precision. Repeated physical trials are not claimed.

Table 1. Five simulated measurements; x and y are in SI units.
No.Tuning fork frequency f (Hz)Resonant string segment L (cm)x (SI)y (SI)Fitted y (SI)Residual (SI)
1128.053.970.007810.539700.53971-1.2121e-05
2160.043.180.006250.431800.431773.3333e-05
3192.035.980.005210.359800.35980-3.0303e-06
4256.026.980.003910.269800.26985-4.8485e-05
5320.021.590.003130.215900.215882.4242e-05
6384.017.990.002600.179900.179896.0606e-06

Download the sample observations (CSV) ↓

7. Worked calculation for one observation

Tuning fork frequency f = 128.0 Hz; reciprocal frequency 1/f = 0.007812 s; observed fundamental resonant segment length L = 53.97 cm = 0.5397 m; acoustic half-wavelength λ/2 = L = 0.5397 m; full wavelength λ = 2L = 1.0794 m. Single-trial wave velocity estimate v = f · λ = 138.16 m s⁻¹; linear density μ = T / v² = 1.541 g m⁻¹. Linear regression of L against 1/f across all six frequencies yields the reported velocity v and wire linear density μ.

8. Graph, gradient and final calculation

0.140.000.250.000.360.010.470.010.580.01Inverse frequency (1 / f)Resonant segment length L

Dots show the sample observations. The line is the ordinary least-squares fit.

x̄ = 0.00482; ȳ = 0.33282
Σ(x − x̄)² = 1.9769e-05
Σ(x − x̄)(y − ȳ) = 0.00137
m = Σ(x − x̄)(y − ȳ) / Σ(x − x̄)² = 69.08509091
b = ȳ − mx̄ = -1.5152e-05
Slope S = 69.0851 m s⁻¹; Transverse wave speed v = 2 × S = 2 × 69.0851 = 138.17 m s⁻¹; Tension T = M g = 29.42 N; Linear density μ = T / v² = 0.0015410 kg m⁻¹ (1.541 g m⁻¹); Intercept b = -1.5152e-05 m

9. Uncertainty and comparison

Percentage difference = |estimate − model value| / |model value| × 100 = 0.0074%. Percentage difference is not experimental uncertainty.

For n = 5 observations, Σresidual² = 4.2424e-09; s² = Σresidual²/(n − 2). Gradient standard error = √[s²/Σ(x − x̄)²] = 0.00732. Intercept standard error = √[s²(1/n + x̄²/Σ(x − x̄)²)] = 3.7710e-05.

Propagating only the relevant fit coefficient gives a fit-only standard error of 0.01465 m s⁻¹. This is a one-standard-error quantity under the regression assumptions. Deterministic rounded model data do not supply a complete physical uncertainty budget.

Paper rider sympathetic ejection threshold and auditory beat nulling resolution (±0.5 mm in bridge position), ball-bearing pulley frictional resistance and micro-sticking altering effective wire tension (±0.05 N), slotted weight mass calibration tolerance (±0.05 g), wire bending stiffness (finite Young modulus E producing slight inharmonicity B = π³ E d⁴ / 64 T L²), triangular bridge knife-edge indentation and soundboard compliance, and stamped tuning fork frequency tolerance (±0.1 Hz) govern the uncertainty envelope. Ordinary least-squares regression across multiple frequencies averages out random bridge setting errors, yielding robust slope-based wave velocity and linear density estimates.

10. Result and discussion

138.16 = 138.17 m s⁻¹
Model comparison value: 138.16 m s⁻¹

The observations follow the stated model relationship. Check whether the intercept and residual pattern suggest a systematic offset or a missing approximation. Agreement with the model does not independently verify its input constants.

11. Precautions and limitations

The teaching model assumes an ideally flexible, infinitely thin wire with zero bending stiffness, negligible damping, and perfectly rigid bridge knife-edges. In a physical laboratory, small wire flexural rigidity (stiffness inharmonicity) slightly elevates higher overtone frequencies, minor bridge compliance adds small effective length offsets, and auditory beat detection threshold introduces slight visual/auditory setting scatter. The sonometer experiment provides a definitive validation of Mersenne's acoustic laws for continuous 1D elastic media. By tuning the string segment between movable fret bridges to unison with calibrated tuning forks using sympathetic paper rider ejection and beat minimization, students confirm the half-wave relation L = (v/2)(1/f). Linear regression yields the transverse propagation speed v = 138.2 m s⁻¹ and wire linear density μ = 1.541 g m⁻¹ with exceptional precision, demonstrating the physical foundation of stringed musical instrument acoustics.

12. Conclusion

The worked example illustrates how to obtain Transverse wave speed v from measurements, graph variables and a fitted coefficient. The estimate is 138.17 m s⁻¹. A real experiment must additionally evaluate the apparatus-specific uncertainties and corrections described above.