Measurements

Grant Peret September 18, 11 Derek Wood Section 5

In the Block Measurements lab, we were required to measure the length and width of a metal block to the nearest centimeter using a rudimentary paper ruler. Using these measurements we then had to determine the area of the metal block. The results we determined were the length of the block was 1.5cm with an uncertainty of 0.01cm, we found the width to be 1.2cm with no uncertainty. Using these measurements we concluded that the area of the block face was 1.8cm squared with an uncertainty of 0.0144cm. In the second part of the lab, Reaction Time, we were assigned to determine our reaction times. This was done by one partner holding a meter stick vertically above the open hand of his partner with the zero measurement aligned at his fingertips. Without notice the partner holding the meter stick would drop it and the other partner would attempt to catch the meter stick between his thumb and index fingers as soon as possibly without moving their hand. The data we gathered from this experiment calculated to the results that the average distance the ruler dropped before it was caught was 14.315cm. We calculated the standard deviation of this to be 4.425cm.

Questions: 1. What is the relationship between standard deviation, uncertainty, and significant figures? Calculating standard deviation gives the results of uncertainty of calculated numbers. Standard deviation is a single number with no true value until it is applied to uncertainty,

Grant Peret September 18, 11 Derek Wood Section 5 which included the average along with the possible error range, otherwise known as standard deviation. Significant figures are important in this because they allow for no assumptions of digits to be made. Standard deviation keeps the balance of all numbers are known with only one digit assumed, opposed to a system with no standard deviation. It would be unknown how many digits are conclusively known and how many are assumed or estimated in calculations. 2. A. Why did we measure to the nearest tenth of a centimeter in the first part? B. Would the measurements give us more accurate data if we measured to the nearest hundredth? In the first part of the lab, we measured to the nearest tenth because that was the next smallest increment of the metric scale, which wasnt shown on the ruler. When making measurements using significant figures it is standard to only estimate one digit, which you can not accurately measure on the measuring device given. If we had measured to the nearest hundredth our measurements wouldnt have been any more accurate, this is because two digits after the decimal point would be assumed and our measurements wouldnt have been accurate. If given a ruler that had measurements to the tenth of a centimeter it would then be appropriate to measure data to the nearest hundredth. 3. Deriving the error propagation formula, I neglected the term of a product of uncertainties. Why is this okay? This is ok because they are independent variables. In this situation they would cancel each other out anyways. 4. Compare your reaction time to your partners. Can you tell who is faster? Why? In comparing my reaction to my partners I can conclude that my reaction time is faster.

Grant Peret September 18, 11 Derek Wood Section 5 This is simply done because when recording data I went first, being the first data points which show significantly lower numbers than the following ten data points. In this section of the lab the smaller the distance fell before it was caught showed a quicker reaction time, my average was smaller therefore we can conclude I have a faster reaction time. 5. A. Define random error. B. List a possible random source of error in both parts of the experiment. Random error in a lab experiment is an unknown error; usually found while recording measurements, this error is a result of unpredictable events, often induced by the environment. In the first part of the lab there wasnt any random error, which would skew our final data, but possible sources of random error would be the heat change of the block from room temperature to warmer when we held it. This could cause the block to change size resulting in different measurements. In the second part of the lab random error could be found in the change of size of the meter stick after being dropped to the ground the impact would compress the wood. This would change the size of our measurements not making them completely accurate.

6. A. Define systematic error.

B. List a possible systematic source of error in both parts of the experiment. Systematic error in a lab is error, which is a result of a measuring instrument not being completely accurate or being wrongly used. In the first part of the lab, a systematic source of error that we may not have accounted for was the chance that our rudimentary ruler was not printed completely accurately. This chance of error could skew measurements of the length and width, furthermore resulting in a determined area that

Grant Peret September 18, 11 Derek Wood Section 5 wasnt accurate. In the second part of the lab a systematic source of error that we didnt account for was having the ruler placed at exactly the same point between our partners fingers before it was dropped.

After completing this lab I found that both the block experiment and meter stick experiment were conclusive and resulted in accurate data. The block experiment only had an uncertainty of 0.0144cm, which is hardly a difference and is a small range of error when measurements were made in centimeters. Although the uncertainty was larger in part two is was still generally small, in this part of the lab we had a larger range of data, this resulting in our standard deviation being 4.425cm. This lab proved that through experimenting to get results more than once will give a range of uncertainty but will result in more conclusive results.