F5 Physics Experiment List

Hoo Sze Yen Form 5 Experiments Physics SPM 2008
Chapter 6: Waves Page 1 of 27
CHAPTER 6:
WAVES
6.1 WATER WAVE REFLECTION
Hypothesis:
The angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence
Aim of the experiment:
To study the relationship between the angle of incidence and angle of reflection
Variables:
Manipulated: Angle of incidence, i
Responding: Angle of reflection, r
Constant: Reflector used
Apparatus/Materials: Ripple tank, reflector, stroboscope
Setup:
(a) (b)
Procedure:
1. A ripple tank is set up.
2. A plane reflector is placed in the middle of the tank so that it is parallel with the
incident wavefronts, as shown in the diagram (a) above. The reflected waves are
observed through a stroboscope.
3. The reflector is then adjusted so that the incident waves approach the reflector at
incident angles of 20˚, 40˚, 60˚ and 80˚ as shown in diagram (b). For each situation,
the reflected angle is observed.
4. The wavelength of the incident and reflected waves are observed and compared.

Results:
(a) Incident angle = 0, Reflected angle = 0 (b) Incident angle, i = Reflected angle, r
Incident angle (˚) Reflected angle (˚)
0
20
40
60
80
Conclusion:
The angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection.
6.2 WATER WAVE REFRACTION
Hypothesis:
When water waves propagate from deep to shallow areas, the wavelength decreases
To study wave refraction
Variables:
Manipulated: Water depth
Responding: Wavelength
Constant: Wavelength, frequency, and speed of incident waves
Apparatus/Materials: Ripple tank, Perspex block, stroboscope
Procedure:
2. A Perspex block is submerged in the middle of the ripple tank to create a shallow
region. It is aligned so that one of its sides is parallel with the incident wavefronts.
The wavelengths in both regions are observed.
3. The Perspex block is then rotated so that the incident angle of the incident waves is
not zero. The wavelengths and the direction of the refracted waves are observed.

Results:
Conclusion:
The wavelength is shorter in a shallow area.
6.3 WATER WAVE DIFFRACTION
Hypothesis:
When water waves propagate through an aperture, the smaller the aperture, the
more obvious the diffraction pattern
To study the phenomenon of wave diffraction
Variables:
Manipulated: Aperture size
Responding: Diffraction pattern
Constant: Wavelength, frequency, and speed of incident waves
Apparatus/Materials: Ripple tank, reflector, stroboscope
Setup:
Procedure:
2. Two barriers are placed so that they form a small aperture in the middle of the tank,
as shown in the diagram above.
3. The motor is started to generate incident water waves. The shape and wavelength of
the diffracted waves are observed through a stroboscope.
4. The experiment is repeated by changing the aperture size.

Results:
Narrow aperture, more obvious diffraction Wider aperture, less obvious diffraction
Conclusion:
When the size of the aperture is smaller, the diffraction pattern is more obvious.
6.4 WATER WAVE INTERFERENCE
Experiment 1: The smaller the λ, the smaller the x
Hypothesis:
The smaller the wavelength, λ, the smaller the distance between two consecutive
antinodal or nodal lines, x
To observe the change in x when λ is changed if D is constant
Variables:
Manipulated: Wavelength, λ
Responding: Distance between two consecutive antinodal or nodal lines, x
Constant: Distance between the two wave sources, a; Distance between the source
and where x is measured, D
Apparatus/Materials: Ripple tank, stroboscope, ruler
Procedure:
1. A ripple tank is set up. Two spherical dippers are placed 5 cm apart and adjusted so
that they touch the water surface at the same level.
2. The motor is started.
3. The interference pattern is observed using a stroboscope.
4. The value of x is observed for different values of λ (which is modified by the
rheostat).

Results:
Conclusion:
The smaller the wavelength, λ, the smaller the distance between two consecutive
antinodal or nodal lines, x.
Experiment 2: The smaller the a, the bigger the x
Hypothesis:
The smaller the distance between the two wave sources, a, the bigger the distance
between two consecutive antinodal or nodal lines, x
To observe the change in x when a is changed if D is constant
Variables:
Manipulated: Distance between the two wave sources, a
Responding: Distance between two consecutive antinodal or nodal lines, x
Constant: Wavelength, λ; Distance between the source and where x is measured, D
Apparatus/Materials: Ripple tank, stroboscope, ruler
Procedure:
1. A ripple tank is set up. Two spherical dippers are placed 5 cm apart and adjusted so
that they touch the water surface at the same level.
2. The motor is started.
3. The interference pattern is observed using a stroboscope.
4. The experiment is repeated by changing the distance between the two dippers to 3
cm.

Results:
Conclusion:
The smaller the distance between the two wave sources, a, the bigger the distance
between two consecutive antinodal or nodal lines, x.
6.5 SOUND WAVES
Experiment 1: Amplitude and loudness
Hypothesis:
When the amplitude of the sound wave increases, its loudness increases
To study the relationship between the amplitude and the loudness of a sound wave
Variables:
Manipulated: Sound wave amplitude
Responding: Sound wave loudness
Constant: Frequency of the signal generator, scale on CRO screen
Apparatus/Materials: Signal generator, speaker, cathode ray oscilloscope, connecting
wires
Setup:

Procedure:
1. A signal generator is connected to a speaker and to a CRO as shown in the diagram.
2. The frequency of the generator is fixed at 200 Hz. The strength of the current of the
signal generator is increased slowly so that the wave amplitude shown on the CRO
screen increases.
3. The loudness of the note emitted by the speaker is listened to carefully.
Results:
When the signal strength is increased, the wave amplitude increases, and the loudness
increases.
Conclusion:
When the amplitude of the sound wave increases, its loudness increases.
Experiment 2: Frequency and pitch
Hypothesis:
When the frequency of a sound wave increases, its pitch increases
To study the relationship between the frequency and the pitch of a sound wave
Variables:
Manipulated: Sound wave frequency
Responding: Sound wave pitch
Constant: Amplitude of the signal generator, scale on CRO screen
Apparatus/Materials: Signal generator, speaker, cathode ray oscilloscope, connecting
wires
Setup:
Procedure:
1. A signal generator is connected to a speaker and to a CRO as shown in the diagram.
2. The frequency of the signal generator is started at 20 Hz. The frequency is increased
slowly to 20 kHz.
3. The pitch of the note emitted from the speaker is listened to carefully.
4. The changes in the wave forms on the CRO screen are observed.

Results:
The higher the frequency, the higher the pitch of the note.
Conclusion:
When the frequency of the sound wave increases, its pitch increases.
6.6 SOUND WAVE REFLECTION
Hypothesis:
The incident angle of a sound wave is equal to its reflected angle off a hard and
smooth surface
To study the relationship between the incident and reflected angles of a sound wave
Variables:
Manipulated: Angle of incidence, i
Responding: Angle of reflection, r
Constant: Smooth wall used
Apparatus/Materials: Stopwatch, two long cardboard tubes, smooth wall, soft board,
protractor
Setup:
Procedure:
1. A stopwatch is placed inside cardboard tube P at its closed end. The apparatus is set
up as shown in the diagram with incident angle of 20˚.
2. Cardboard tube Q is adjusted until the ticking of the stopwatch is heard most clearly.
3. The incident angle and the reflected angles are measured with a protractor and are
recorded.
4. The experiment is repeated with incident angles 40˚, 60˚ and 80˚.

Results:
Incident angle (˚) Reflected angle (˚)
20
40
60
80
Conclusion:
The angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection.
6.7 SOUND WAVE REFRACTION
Hypothesis:
Sound waves will refract when passing through gases of different densities
To study sound wave refraction
Variables:
Manipulated: Gas density (within balloon)
Responding: Wave amplitude on CRO screen
Constant: Wave frequency
Apparatus/Materials: Signal generator, big balloon filled with carbon dioxide, big
balloon filled with helium, microphone, speaker, cathode ray oscilloscope
Setup:
(a)
(b)

Procedure:
1. A loudspeaker connected to a signal generator, and a microphone connected to a
CRO, are set up at suitable distances as shown in the diagram (a) above. The pattern
of the wave on the CRO screen is observed.
2. The balloon filled with carbon dioxide is placed between the speaker and the
microphone. The position of the balloon is adjusted until the shape of the wave shown
on the CRO screen has the largest amplitude. The amplitude of the waves is
compared to the waves observed in Step 1.
3. Step 2 is repeated with the balloon filled with helium.
Results:
• It is observed that when the balloon filled with carbon dioxide is placed between the
speaker and the microphone, the amplitude of the waves shown on the CRO is bigger.
• It is observed that when the balloon filled with helium is placed between the speaker
and the microphone, the amplitude of the waves shown on the CRO is smaller.
Conclusion:
The sound waves refract when traveling through gases of differing densities.
6.8 SOUND WAVE DIFFRACTION
Hypothesis:
Sound waves can be heard even though the source is blocked by a barrier
To study the phenomenon of sound wave diffraction
Variables:
Manipulated: Position of the sound source
Responding: Barrier used
Constant: Position of the observer
Apparatus/Materials: Radio
Setup:

Procedure:
1. A radio playing music is placed at the side of the laboratory wall around a corner as
shown in the diagram from the student.
2. The student is told to listen for the sounds from the radio.
Results:
Even though the radio is blocked from view by the corner, the student is still able to hear
sounds from the radio. This is because sound waves is able to diffract around a corner of
a barrier due its large wavelengths.
Conclusion:
Sound waves can be diffracted around a barrier.
6.9 SOUND WAVE INTERFERENCE
Hypothesis:
Alternating loud and soft sounds can be heard at a distance in front of two
loudspeakers playing the same sound
To study the phenomenon of sound wave interference
Variables:
Manipulated: Distance of observer from the loudspeakers
Responding: Distance between consecutive loud and soft sounds
Constant: Distance between speakers, frequency of signal used
Apparatus/Materials: Audio signal generator, cathode ray oscilloscope, two
loudspeakers, microphone, metre rule, connecting wires
Setup:
Procedure:
1. Two loudspeakers are connected to an audio signal generator and the apparatus is set
up as shown in the diagram above.

2. The signal generator is started and adjusted to emit loud sounds at a suitable
frequency.
3. A student is told to close one ear and to walk in front of both speakers at a distance a
few metres from the speakers to detect any difference to the loudness of the sound
heard.
Results:
When the student walks in front of the speakers, alternating loud and soft sounds are
heard.
Conclusion:
Alternating loud and soft sounds can be heard at a distance in front of two loudspeakers
playing the same sound
6.10 LIGHT WAVE DIFFRACTION
To study the phenomenon of light wave diffraction
Variables:
Manipulated: Slit size on slide
Responding: Diffraction pattern
Constant: Light source, distance from slide to screen
Apparatus/Materials: Laser pen, single-slit slides, screen
Setup:
Procedure:
1. A single narrow slit is made on a glass slide coated with aquaduk. The apparatus is
set up as per the diagram.
2. The laser light is shone through the slit in the glass slide and the pattern on the screen
is observed.
3. The experiment is repeated with a wider slit on the glass slide.

Results:
Narrow slit Wider slit
Discussion:
• The fringe pattern observed on the screen is a result of light wave diffraction
• The light used must be monochromatic
• The slit used must be narrow enough compared to the light wave
Conclusion:
Light wave can be diffracted.
6.11 LIGHT WAVE INTERFERENCE
To study the phenomenon of light wave interference
Variables:
Manipulated: Distance between the screen and the Young double-slit
Responding: Interference pattern
Constant: Light source used, size of the slits, distance between the slits
Apparatus/Materials: Monochromatic light source, Young double-slit, screen
Setup:
Procedure:
1. Apparatus is set up as shown in the diagram.

2. The light source is switched on and shone at the Young double-slit. The screen is
adjusted until a clear interference pattern is observed. The pattern is drawn.
Results:
Discussion:
• The fringe pattern observed on the screen is a result of light wave interference
• The light used must be monochromatic
• The slits used must be narrow enough compared to the light wave
• The distance between the slits must be as close as possible for the light waves to
overlap
Conclusion:
A pattern of alternating bright and dark fringes of approximately the same size is formed.
Interference can occur in light waves.

Chapter 7: Electricity Page 15 of 27
CHAPTER 7:
ELECTRICITY & ELECTROMAGNETISM
7.1 CURRENT AND POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE
Experiment 1: Ohmic Conductors
Hypothesis:
The higher the current flowing through a conductor, the higher the potential
difference
To determine the relationship between current and potential difference of a circuit
Variables:
Manipulated: Current, I
Responding: Potential difference, V
Constant: Length of conductor
Apparatus/Materials: Two 1.5 V dry cells, battery holder, ammeter, voltmeter, eureka
wire, rheostat, press-switch, connecting wire
Setup:
Procedure:
5. A circuit as shown in the diagram is set up.
6. A eureka wire of 10.0 cm length is connected across terminals X and Y.
7. The switch is pressed and the rheostat is adjusted until the ammeter reading, I, is 0.2
A. The voltage across the eureka wire, V is measured using the voltmeter.
8. The rheostat is adjusted to increase the value of current I and the corresponding
voltmeter reading, V is recorded.
9. The values of I and V are tabulated and a graph of V against I is plotted.
10. The experiment is repeated with ammeter readings 0.3 A, 0.4 A, and 0.5 A.

Results:
Current, I (A) Potential difference, V (V)
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Analysis:
A graph of V against I is plotted.
Discussion:
• The current used must not be too high to prevent the circuit from overheating. This is
to maintain the temperature of the eureka wire so that the resistance does not increase.
• The slope of the V-I graph represents the resistance of the eureka wire.
Conclusion:
The potential difference is directly proportional to the current in an ohmic conductor.
Experiment 2: Non-ohmic Conductors
Hypothesis:
When the current flowing through a light bulb increases, its resistance increases
To determine the relationship between current and potential difference of a non-
ohmic circuit
Variables:
Responding: Potential difference, V
Constant: Light bulb used
Apparatus/Materials: Two 1.5 V dry cells, battery holder, ammeter, voltmeter, light
bulb, rheostat, press-switch, connecting wire
I
V
A linear graph that goes through
origin is obtained.

Setup:
Procedure:
1. A circuit as shown in the diagram is set up.
2. A light bulb is connected across terminals X and Y.
3. The switch is pressed and the rheostat is adjusted until the ammeter reading, I, is 0.2
A. The voltage across the eureka wire, V is measured using the voltmeter.
4. The rheostat is adjusted to increase the value of current I and the corresponding
voltmeter reading, V is recorded.
5. The experiment is repeated with current values 0.3 A, 0.4 A and 0.5 A.
6. The values of I and V are tabulated and a graph of V against I is plotted.
Results:
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Analysis:
Discussion:
• The resistance of a light bulb’s filament increases when current increases
Conclusion:
A light bulb is a non-ohmic conductor because its resistance increases with the current.
I
V
A curve graph with increasing slope
is obtained.

7.2 RESISTANCE
Experiment 1: Length
Hypothesis:
The longer the wire, the higher the resistance
To study the relationship between the length of the wire and the resistance
Variables:
Manipulated: Length of the eureka wire
Responding: Resistance of the wire
Constant: Cross-section area of the wire, type of wire, temperature of wire
Apparatus/Materials: Battery (4.5 V), ammeter, voltmeter, rheostat, press-switch,
connecting wire, eureka wire
Setup:
Procedure:
1. A eureka wire is connected in the circuit as shown in the diagram.
2. The length of the wire between X and Y is adjusted to 20 cm.
3. The switch is closed and the rheostat is adjusted until the ammeter reading, I is 0.5 A.
The voltmeter reading is recorded.
4. Step 3 is repeated for wire lengths 40 cm, 60 cm, 80 cm, and 100 cm.
5. The resistance, R =
I
V
is calculated for each length.
6. A graph of R against l is plotted.
Results:
L (cm) I (A) V (V)
R =
I
V
(Ω)
20 0.5
40 0.5
60 0.5
80 0.5
100 0.5

Analysis
A graph of R against l is plotted.
Conclusion:
The resistance of the wire is directly proportional to the length of the wire.
Experiment 2: Cross-section area
Hypothesis:
The larger the cross-section area of the wire, the lower the resistance
To study the relationship between the cross-section area of the wire and the
resistance
Variables:
Manipulated: Cross-section area of the eureka wire
Constant: Length of the wire, type of wire, temperature of wire
connecting wire, eureka wire (s.w.g. 22, s.w.g. 24, s.w.g. 30)
Setup:
Procedure:
1. A eureka wire (s.w.g. 22) is connected in the circuit as shown in the diagram.
l
R

4. Step 3 is repeated with eureka wires s.w.g. 24 and s.w.g. 30.
I
V
is calculated for wire.
Results:
Eureka wire Cross-section area I (A) V (V)
R =
I
V
(Ω)
s.w.g. 22 Large 0.5
s.w.g. 24 Medium 0.5
s.w.g. 30 Small 0.5
Conclusion:
The larger the cross-section area of the wire, the lower the resistance
Experiment 3: Type of wire
Hypothesis:
Different types of wires have different values of resistance
To study the relationship between the type of wire and the resistance
Variables:
Manipulated: Type of wire
Constant: Length of the wire, cross-section area of wire, temperature of wire
connecting wire, eureka wire (s.w.g. 30), nichrome wire (s.w.g. 30), copper wire
(s.w.g. 30)
Setup:
Procedure:
1. A eureka wire (s.w.g. 30) is connected in the circuit as shown in the diagram.

4. Step 3 is repeated with nichrome and copper wires with the same cross-section area.
I
V
is calculated for wire.
Results:
Type of wire I (A) V (V)
R =
I
V
(Ω)
Eureka 0.5
Nichrome 0.5
Copper 0.5
Conclusion:
Different types of wires have different resistance values
Experiment 4: Temperature
Hypothesis:
The higher the temperature of the filament in a light bulb, the higher the resistance
To study the relationship between the temperature of the filament in a light bulb
and the resistance
Variables:
Manipulated: Temperature of the filament in the light bulb
Responding: Resistance
Constant: Light bulb used
Apparatus/Materials: Battery, ammeter, voltmeter, rheostat, press-switch, connecting
wire, light bulb
Setup:

Procedure:
1. A light bulb is connected in the circuit as shown in the diagram.
2. The rheostat is adjusted to the maximum value so that the light bulb does not light up.
3. The ammeter and voltmeter readings are recorded.
4. Steps 2 and 3 are repeated by adjusting the rheostat until the light bulb lights up
dimly, and then until it lights up brightly. The corresponding ammeter and voltmeter
readings are recorded.
I
V
is calculated for each instance and graph V against I is plotted.
Results:
Light bulb
condition
Filament
temperature
I (A) V (V)
R =
I
V
(Ω)
Does not light up Very low
Very dim Low
Dim Medium
Bright High
Brighter Higher
Very bright Very high
Analysis:
The brightness of the light bulb increasing shows the temperature of the
filament increasing. This also shows the increase in current flowing
through the filament. Based on the graph, it is found that the resistance
increases with the temperature.
7.3 E.M.F. AND INTERNAL RESISTANCE
Hypothesis:
The potential difference across the terminals of dry cells decrease when the current
supplied by the cells increase
To study the relationship between the potential difference and current of the dry
cells
Variables:
Responding: Potential difference across the terminals, V
Constant: Dry cell used
Apparatus/Materials: Dry cells, ammeter, voltmeter, rheostat, resistor, switch,
connecting wires
I
V

Setup:
Procedure:
1. A circuit as shown in the diagram above is set up.
2. The switch is started. The rheostat is adjusted until the ammeter reading shows 0.2 A.
3. Step 2 is repeated with current values of 0.3 A, 0.4 A, and 0.5 A.
4. A graph of V against I is plotted. The slope of the graph is calculated and the V-
crossing is extrapolated.
Results:
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Analysis:
Conclusion:
From the experiment, the potential difference across the dry cells when the current
supplied increases.
Internal resistance, r = slope value
Electromotive force, E = V-crossing

Chapter 8: Electromagnetism Page 24 of 27
CHAPTER 8:
ELECTROMAGNETISM
6.12 ELECTROMAGNETIC STRENGTH
Hypothesis:
The higher the current flowing through the solenoid, the stronger the electromagnet
To study the relationship between the current and the strength of the electromagnet
Variables:
Manipulated: Current
Responding: Number of pins stuck to the electromagnet
Constant: Number of coils, type of pins used
Apparatus/Materials: Metal rod, ammeter, rheostat, pins in a dish, power supply,
insulated copper wires, retort stand, wooden clamp
Setup:
Procedure:
1. The metal rod is wrapped with 10 turns of the insulated copper wire and both ends are
connected to a circuit as shown in the diagram.
2. The circuit is started and the rheostat is adjusted to get 1.0 A current.
3. One end of the electromagnet is inserted into the dish of pins, and then removed. The
current is switched off. The number of pins that were stuck to the electromagnet is
counted.
4. The experiment is repeated with current values of 2.0 A, 3.0 A, 4.0 A, and 5.0 A.

Results:
Current (A) Number of pins stuck to electromagnet
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Analysis
From the results, the number of pins stuck to the electromagnet increase when the current
increases. This shows that the strength of the electromagnet increases with the current.
Conclusion:
The increase in current flowing through the solenoid increases the strength of the
electromagnet. Hypothesis proven.
Note: The experiment can be modified to study the relationship between the number of
turns on the coil and the strength of the electromagnet.
6.13 INDUCED FORCE
Hypothesis:
When the current in the conductor increases, the magnitude of the induced force
increases
To study the relationship between the current in the conductor and the magnitude
of the induced force
Variables:
Manipulated: Current
Responding: Speed of the movement of the wire
Constant: Number of magnets
Apparatus/Materials: Four magnadur magnets, U-shaped metal piece, non-insuloated
copper wire (s.w.g. 26), wooden block, connecting wires, press pin, rheostat

Setup:
Procedure:
1. The rheostat is adjusted to the maximum resistance to get a small current flowing
through the short copper wire. The movement of the short copper wire when the
power supply is started.
2. The rheostat is adjusted to the minimum resistance so that a bigger current flows
through the short copper wire. The speed of the movement of the short copper wire is
compared.
Results:
The speed of the movement of the copper wire increases when a bigger current flows
through.
Conclusion:
The speed of the movement of the copper wire increases when a bigger current flows
through the conductor.
Note: The experiment can be modified to study the relationship between the speed of the
movement of the copper wire and the strength of the magnet
6.14 INDUCED CURRENT
Hypothesis:
The faster the relative movement of the magnet with the solenoid, the higher the
induced current
To study the relationship between the relative movement of the magnet with the
solenoid and the induced current
Variables:
Manipulated: Speed of relative movement of the magnet with the solenoid
Responding: Deflection of the galvanometer
Constant: Type of magnet, type of wires, solenoid size, galvanometer used, number of
magnet bars, number of turns on the solenoid

Apparatus/Materials: Insulated copper wire, galvanometer with zero in the middle,
magnet bar, cardboard tube
Setup:
Procedure:
1. A magnet is placed into the solenoid slowly. The deflection of the galvanometer is
observed.
2. The speed of movement of the magnet is increased. The deflection of the
galvanometer is observed.
Results:
The faster the magnet bar is moved, the higher the deflection of the galvanometer.
Conclusion:
The faster the magnet bar is moved, the higher the current induced
Note: The experiment can be modified to study the relationship between the number of
turns on the coil and the value of the current induced

F5 Physics Experiment List

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to F5 Physics Experiment List

More from Zhang Ewe

Recently uploaded

In this document

F5 Physics Experiment List