This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Roxas, Lindley Susi, Jessica Tabuzo Department of Biological Sciences College of Science, University of Santo Tomas España, Manila Philipines
Abstract In this experiment, different measuring devices were used, namely the vernier calliper, micrometer calliper, foot rule, and the electronic gram balance. These devices were used to obtain the mean diameter, volume, mass, and the experimental value of density of the sphere of known composition. 1. Introduction Measurement is the process or act of determining the size, length, quantity, etc. of something being observed or measured. The units of measurement evolved and changed greatly since the day it was made by humans. In different places, these measurements can vary and could well be different from each other. Thus, standards are used nowadays so that we can have a concrete basis and this also prevents fraud or the cheating of somebody especially in business matters. There are different systems of measurement used. We have this CGS system or known as centimeter-gram-second system which is a metric system derived from the meter-kilogram-second system or mks system. It uses centimeter (c) for
length, gram (g), second (s) for time, dyne for force, and erg for energy. The metric system has become a common system for weights and measures. Its simplicity is the reason why scientists use this system of measurement. You can easily change one unit of measure into another. The units of measurement in this system are all based on decimals. By simply moving the decimal point to the right or left, depending on whether the unit is being decreased or increased, you can change its unit. Greek decimal prefixes like deca, hecto, kilo is used to express units of ten multiples or greater. Despite setting all of these standards, one’s measurement can never be exact and can always have a certain amount of error. When a measurement is done, the outcome could depend on several factors like the measuring system, the procedure taken, the execution of techniques of the operator, and the condition of the environment (Bell, 1999). This dispersion of values that can be attributed to a measured quantity is what we call as measurement uncertainty. The flaws in measurement can come from the measuring instrument itself due to aging, wearing, poor readability or even noise. The item being
on the other hand. as the error and the mean diameter as the standard value. The sphere was weighed using the electronic gram balance. Included also in Table 1 are the mean. the more accurate it is. micrometer caliper and the foot rule was determined. the average deviation (A. (5) to compare the accuracy of these measuring devices. are caused by unknown and unpredictable changes in the experiments. The least count of the vernier caliper.) were also calculated. The mean diameter of the sphere was calculated. systematic error and random error.D. Methodology The measuring devices were checked for error.) of the mean diameter was computed. Significant figures were used. if uncertainties. There are two types of measurement error. The % error was then computed. The closer the measurement to the accepted value. (3) to determine the mean of a set of experimental values as well as a set of average deviation of the mean. micrometer caliper. Imperfect calibration of instrument. its age. The % error for the diameter was computed by considering A.measured. When you measure the weight of an object using a particular balance which is improperly tared and you get a certain amount of grams higher for all your mass measurements is an example of systematic error. 4.d. (4) to familiarize the students with the vernier caliper. The volume of the sphere was then computed. Results ad Discussion Table 1 shows the diameters of the sphere using different instruments for measurements. and tear.d. average deviation (a. (2) to determine the average deviation of a set of experimental values. The deviation (d) of each measurement of the mean diameter and the average deviation (a. The same steps were used using the vernier caliper and micrometer caliper. average . The instructor was asked for the accepted value of the density of the sphere.). Irregular changes in the environment can usually cause this and as well as the random noise on an electrical device (Exell). The precision of a measurement is determines the exactness or accuracy of a number of measurements and how the same quantity agrees with each other. Random errors. veracity or truthfulness of a measurement. Theory 3. can produce density of an object given its mass and dimensions. The density of the sphere was calculated using the values obtained from the volume and mass of the sphere. (6) to determine the 2. Ten independent measurements for the diameter of the sphere using the foot rule were made. wear. Accuracy tells the correctness. not stable. In this experiment. and the foot rule. throughout the years which lead to errors can be classified as a systemic error. the group aims to achieve the following objectives: (1) to study errors and how they propagate in simple experiment. This was done by taking measurements at different points along its circumference.D. Then.
590 0.590 0.0057 and micrometer caliper . Conclusion 7 1.50 0.585 1.17% 0.005 1.005 1. 0.585 0.25 0. which is Volume 1.000 1.0802 cm3 0.02 1. 0.585 0.85 %) while measurements from Among the three measuring devices. Diameter of Sphere (cm) accuracy of the instruments can Trial Foot Rule Vernier Micrometer be infer.013. 7.08 1.50 0.85 % 0. Possible errors for the measurements are systematic error especially human error. namely.D.5850 0. vernier caliper is more Caliper Caliper 1 1. For the foot rule.5845 0.092 0.13 1.5850 0.385 0.8 (g/cm ) devices were compared and value of recorded in table form.10 1.0012 foot rule is certain in vernier 4 1.30 0. that members of the group wrongly read the values.0018 for the foot rule. The density density of the sphere was (g/cm3) determined. vernier caliper.D. 0.585 0. A.30 0. It is also possible error using different measuring instruments. Base from the the data.29g 3 deviation of the mean was also Exp’l 12 (g/cm ) 7. Based on the for information written above. 7. This is 2 1.08 1.0018 (cm3) respectively.095 1.5845 0.5850 0. density.813 7. and 0.0007 6 1.17%). mass. members of the group possibly commit an error because the foot rule has no handle so that the end of Table 1: Dimensions. The desnsity 3 (g/cm ) accuracy of the said measuring 3 Accepted 7. 0. The 10 1. the the vernier caliper had the least % error vernier caliper gave the least percent error. the density objectives of this experiment were achieved.680 0. 5 1.085 cm3 2. The average Mass (g) 16.0088 accurate that the foot rule.12 1.0012 5.5840 0.5850 0.4cm3 2.831 g/cm3 .38 1. density and % error for density.0012 for errors.042 0.deviation of the mean (A.590 0. 0.042.00057 respectively.095 1.029 0. and studied how they 9 1. Base from the data.40 0.005 1.45 0.5750 0.005 1.5850 0. 12 g/cm3 .092.48 0.013 0.831 (g/cm3) determined.029.20 0. value of (g/cm3) and 0.40 0.0017 caliper.580 0. Applications from the foot rule had the greatest % error for density (53. and percent the sphere could easily see.)volume.0012 mean 1.200 1. (0.18 1.d.5855 0.40& g/cm3 . .5838 average deviation was computed a.005 1.005 1.0007 because the uncertain digit of the 3 1.0002 propagated in the experiment.07 1.0012 The calipers were checked 8 1.12 1. measurements 6.02 1.813 % error 53.680 0.
% Error = = 0. The errors that we encountered during the experiment were more of systematic errors. = 0.21% In an experiment on determination of mass of a sample. Find the mean.03 0.34 0. 14.33 0.0125 A.007 Base on the computed data above.30 a. A beginner's guide to uncertainty measurement.32 g. What is the percentage error in his reported weight if he uses this conversion: 1 kg=2. Suppose that your group is required to make only four determination for the mass of the sample.02 0.33 g. without this data.32 14. It is the imprecision in measurements that cannot be avoided. = 0. Its’ accuracy would always be uncertain because every measuring instrument has a distinctive amount of uncertainty in its measurement.D. a. If you were the leader of the group.34 g.01 4 14. Reference Bell. A systemic error occurs if there is a defect in the equipment or in the design of the experiment.33 14. = 0. Mass and deviation of the sample in five trials Trial 1 2 3 4 5 Mean = 14. United Kingdom: Crown. A student weighs himself using a bathroom scale calibrated in kilograms. % Error = will you omit? Recalculate the mean. the some measurement in the vernier caliper are obtained from wrong used of the instrument.032 A.d. Error is the deviation of a measured value from the actual value.The accuracy of a measurement is affected by the least count of the measuring device. and A. S.d. and 14.23 Deviation (d) 0.D. your group consisting of 5 students obtained the following results: 14. .014 Mass (g) 14. (1999).07 14.04 0.00 3 14. Most errors are human errors. random and systematic. He reported his weight in pounds. Mass and deviation of the sample in the chosen four trials Trial Mass (g) Deviation (d) 1 14. the data from table 2 are preferred. Which results will you prefer? Table 1.2046.32 0.30 0. Table 2.23 will be omitted because it is the farthest value from each other. There are two types of error.00 0. 14.02 Mean = 14. and A. which date 7.D.d. = 0. 14.30 14. Repeated measurements obtained from a random error can still be reliably estimated.2 pounds? The standard kilogram is equal to 2.34 14. a.32 a.32 g.d.30 g.D.02 2 14.
org/en/modules/Acti vities/p04-error4.umd.html . December 1).columbia." Microsoft® Encarta® 2009 [DVD]. Retrieved from http://www. December 1). Random Errors.physics. (2012.html "Metric System.htm Exell. Retrieved from http:/www. Retrieved December 1.lepla.edu/~tutorial/ran d_v_sys/tut_e_5_1.edu/~allen/ 252/PHY_error_analysis. 2008. Undergraduate Physics. 128-129.sunysb. J.physics.Error Analysis. December 1). from http://phys.edu/courses/ Phys276/Hill/Information/Notes/Error Analysis. (1999). (2012.html Taylor. (2012. November 30). University Science Books. Redmond. Retrieved from http://felix.Physics Laboratory Tutorial. An Introduction to Error Analysis: The Study of Uncertainties in Physical Measurements. WA: Microsoft Corporation.Error and Statistics. (2012. 2012. Error Analysis.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.