UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS DADESAI E-mail:ddesai14@gmail.com The contents of this brief note are in accordance with the recommendations of the document jpblished by 1SO for bringing uniformity in evaluating uncertainties in measurements. The document referred is JEGM 100:2008 minor corrections ee" 1995 _ valuation of measurement data — Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. IntRopuctION The knowledge about a physical quantity is useful when we know how to measure it and express its magnitude as a multiple of a chosen unit. The knowledge about a measured quantity is useful only when the uncertainty in its magnitude is stated. When we measure a quantity with a measuring instrument, we get a reading of the instrument. We do not know whether the reading is the true value of the measured quantity. If we repeat the measurements of the same quantity and get the same reading, we may tend to believe that the reading is correct. But it is possible that the measuring instrument may not be calibrated correctly, or the conditions of use of the instrument may be violated, or the procedure of taking readings may be wrong. In such cases the true value of the measurand (quantity being measured) and the reading may not be same. The difference between the true value of the measurand and the measured value is called error. By looking at the reading we do not know whether there is really any error or not. But by ing the conditions under which the reading is taken one may be able to critically exami guess what the possible causes for the errors can be. In some cases, such as in zero error, where the zero of the measuring instrument does not coincide with the true zero position, a reading for correcting for that error can be taken and making the appropriate addition to the readings the errors can be eliminated. When voltage is measured using a voltmeter, because of the finite resistance of the voltmeter, an error in the measurements occurs. Knowing the resistance of the voltmeter appropriate correcting factor can be calculated to get observations corrected for the error. Such errors are called systematic errors. Systematic errors are time independent. It is not possible to know all systematic errors, or to get exact procedure to make corrections to eliminate their contribution to the readings. ‘Sometimes, we can know what the worst case value of such systematic error is, though it is impossible to make exact correction for it. For example, a real image of an object may be projected on a screen using a lens. It may be difficult to observe the change in the sharpness 1of the image even if the screen is displaced within a small distance and then itis impossible to know exactly what the image distance is. In such cases, we can determine the range within which we cannot discriminate clarity of image. The smallest and largest distances defining this range give us worst case error positions. The worst case errors are then used to evaluate the uncertainty in the value of the measured image distance. So, we see that when we know the existence of systematic errors in our observations, either wwe can apply corrections to the readings to get data without those known systematic errors or we may be able to state the worst case systematic errors in the expected value, The result of an experiment calculated from various measurements is, in fact, an indirect measurement, The errors present in the various independent measurements get propagated to the result through calculation and so, the error in the result is determined By the error in the various measurements. Additional errors may be introduced in the calculations due to rounding or truncating numbers in the course of calculations. The simple but approximate rules for determining significant figures in calculations are meant to suggest the uncertainty in the result when the errors are only due to rounding, Due to devices like calculators and computers the errors of rounding introduced during calculations can be avoided. So, the error in the result of an experiment is mostly dependent on errors in measurements. When the expected result of the experiment is known, the difference between obtained result and the value accepted as standard may be called the error in the experimental value. However the accepted standard value cannot be called the true value of the quantity. With better methods of measurement previously unknown errors may be discovered and corrected in due course. But for practical purpose such values may be treated as “true” values and the error may be evaluated with that assumption. But when such knowledge is not available, we cannot know if there is error or not in the measured value. Experiments meant for determining known physical constants are meant for training in experimental methods. The answers of problems in exercises in textbooks provided at the end are meant to check whether the student has mastered the procedures of applying correct physical principles and calculation techniques for solving such problems. The experiments meant to determine known physical constants have the same utility. But even when the measurements and calculation are done with great care, the results of such experiments do not give same values because the measurement data changes with each individual experiment. This is not the case with the answers of numerical problems in textbooks because there data is unique. So, while comparing the results of experiments with the accepted standard values we should have some idea how much variation in the measured data is legitimate and how 2