Mapúa Institute of Technology

School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering

Experiment No. 6
PLATFORM BALANCE

Seat No.: 14
Name: Marasigan, Neil Darren P.
Group No.: 3 Date of Performance: February 16, 2016
Course/Section: ME139L / A1 Date of Submission: March 01, 2016
Student Number: 2013151631

Grade

Engr. Teodulo A. Valle

Instructor
Table of Contents

Objectives ..................................................................................................................................................... 1

Theory and Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 1

List of Apparatus........................................................................................................................................... 3

Procedures ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

Set-up ............................................................................................................................................................ 5

Final Data Sheet ............................................................................................................................................ 6

Sample Computations ................................................................................................................................... 8

Discussion of Results .................................................................................................................................... 9

Questions and Answers ............................................................................................................................... 15

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 16

Recommendation ........................................................................................................................................ 17

References ................................................................................................................................................... 18

Preliminary Data Sheet ............................................................................................................................... 19

Objectives

1. To learn the principle behind the operation.

2. To learn how to calibrate.
3. To determine the accuracy, sensitivity and the leverage ratio.

Theory and Analysis

The measurement of quantity of materials can be made directly by weight or volume or inferred from
some other property such as pressure or velocity. The inferential methods are used mainly for fluid-
quantity measurements.
Weighing is a primary method of measuring forces, and volumetric devices are calibrated initially by
direct weighing. Scales have been constructed to weigh a million pounds or more (testing machines),
while the chemical balance, at the opposite extreme, will easily weigh a millionth of a pound.

P
B
R
k f
F

W W
2 2
W

PLATFORM

d b c

Diagram of platform scales

1
Platform scales are probably used more in engineering work about a power plant than any other
measuring device, and usually young engineers do not very well understand their operation. They consist
essentially of a device by which a load is applied to a system of levers, of long and short arms, arranged
so that a load on the platform can be balanced by weights applied at the end of a final lever called the
beam, or by shifting poise along the length of this latter lever. Essentially, it is like the weighing devices
shown in the figure. This weighing beam is usually placed on an upright post at one end of the platform.

Calibration of platform scales: A large weight W is placed on the platform to be balanced by a small
weight on the beam B and the poise R. If the weight P alone (with the poise R at zero) balances the
weight W, then it follows, according to the law of moments, for the symbols given for dimensions in the
figure, that

k W d W e b
P F    
f 2 h 2 c h

If the scales are constructed so that

e b d
 
c h h
Then

k d
P W 
f h,

And the leverage ratio is

P df
F 
W kh .

In order to obtain the leverage ratio by direct measurement, the platform must be removed. Then measure
carefully the distances between the knife edges of the various levers and also the length occupied by the
50 or 100 divisions on the graduated beam. One will save considerable time if these measurements are
made with a decimal scale. From these data and the equation given, the leverage ratio can be obtained.

A better method of obtaining the leverage ratio consists of balancing a standard weight on the poise with a
standard weight on the platform. Then from these data calculate the leverage ratio. An examination of the
weights placed on the poise will show that these weights are marked with their actual weight and the
weight they are supposed to balance on the platform. In case the scales do not balance in making this test,
a little shot can be added to the poise or weight until a balance is obtained.

In calibrating platform scales against known weights, the scales should first be thrown out of adjustment;
that is, the “adjusting” counterpoise (on the threaded rod of the graduated beam) should be moved from
its present setting. To readjust the platform scales, the “adjusting” counterpoise is moved until a balance
is obtained. This should be done without any weight on the scales. Standard weights now should be

2
placed on the scale in 5-pound increments and the scales calibrated. The weights should be removed in a
similar manner and the scales calibrated as the weights are removed. It is also well to calibrate the scales
with weights placed at the four corners and compare these values with those obtained with weights at the
center.

The sensitiveness of the scale is determined by finding the smallest added weight that will affect the
balanced position of the beam first with no load and then with a 50 –pound load upon the scales. This
result will not be the same for different observers, as the result depends on how closely the beam is
observed.

List of Apparatus

 Analog Platform Balance

 Digital Platform Balance
 Set of Standard Weights
 Set of Counter Weights
 Screwdriver

Procedures

A. TEST FOR ACCURACY (ANALOG)

1) Calibrate the platform balance by setting the scale to zero reading and setting the beam between its
lower and upper stops by making screw adjustment.

2) Place the load on the marked area of the platform balance then adjust the poise so that the beam is
centered. Obtain the weight.

3) For the remaining weights needed, transfer the load to another marked area and repeat the step above
in obtaining their corresponding weights.

4) Repeat the steps above for the succeeding trials by increasing the load to the platform balance.

5) Calculate the average reading for each trial and determine the percent error.

B. TEST FOR ACCURACY (DIGITAL)

1) Place the load on the marked area of the platform balance and obtain the weight.

2) For the remaining weights needed, transfer the load to another marked area and repeat the step above
in obtaining their corresponding weights.

3) Repeat the steps above for the succeeding trials by increasing the load to the platform balance.

4) Calculate the average reading for each trial and determine the percent error.

3
C. TEST FOR SENSITIVITY
1) Place the load on the center of the platform.

2) Adjust the poise until the beam is centered. Obtain the reading.

3) Adjust the poise again to the left carefully until the beam touches the upper stops. Obtain the
reading.

4) Adjust the poise until the beam is centered. Obtain the reading.

5) Adjust the poise to the right carefully until the beam touches the lower stops. Obtain the reading.

6) For the succeeding trials, add the load by 15 kg increment and repeat the steps above.

D. LEVERAGE RATIO
1) Place the counterweight on the analog platform balance and obtain the reading.

2) Place the counterweight on the digital platform balance and obtain the reading.

3) Repeat the steps above for the remaining counterweights

4) Divide the measured weight by the load to obtain the leverage ratio.

4
Set-up
LEVERAGE RATIO

Counter Weight
TEST FOR ACCURACY TEST FOR SENSITIVITY
DIGITAL

Standard Weight
Analog Platform Balance
Digital Platform Balance

5
Final Data Sheet

A. Accuracy (Analog)

Beam Readings
Trial Load Average Error % Error
(kg) Corner Center (kg)
1 2 3 4
1 15 15 15 15.2 15 15 15.04 0.04 0.27 %
2 30 30 30 30.2 30 30 30.04 0.04 0.13 %
3 45 44.6 45 44.8 45 44.8 44.89 0.16 0.36 %
4 60 59.1 59.2 59.4 59.7 59.3 59.34 0.66 1.1 %
5 75 74 74.3 74.7 74.4 74.9 74.36 0.64 0.85 %
6 90 89.2 89.6 90.1 90 90 89.78 0.22 0.24 %

B. Accuracy (Digital)

Beam Readings
Trial Load Average Error % Error
(kg) Corner Center (kg)
1 2 3 4
1 15 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 0.1 0.67 %
2 30 29.85 29.85 29.9 29.95 29.9 29.89 0.11 0.37 %
3 45 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 44.9 0.1 0.22 %
4 60 59.75 59.75 59.75 59.75 59.75 59.75 0.25 0.42 %
5 75 74.65 74.70 74.70 74.70 74.70 74.70 0.55 0.4 %
6 90 89.45 89.45 89.45 89.45 89.45 89.45 0.30 0.61 %

6
C. Sensitivity

Upper Stops Lower Stops

Trial Standard
Weights Initial Final Difference Initial Final Difference
Reading Reading Reading Reading
1 15 15.1 14.4 0.7 15.1 15.4 0.3
2 30 30 29.3 0.8 30 30.4 0.4
3 45 45 44.2 0.8 45 45.3 0.3
4 60 59.6 58.8 0.9 59.6 60.2 0.6
5 75 74.5 73.6 1.4 74.5 75.3 0.8
6 90 90 88.6 0.7 90 90.4 0.4

D. Leverage Ratio

Counterweights Analog Digital

kg ratio kg ratio
50 0.6 0.6:50 0.5 0.5:50
100 1.2 1.2:100 0.95 0.95:100
100 0.9 0.9:100 0.95 0.95:100
200 2.3 2.3:200 2 2:200

7
Sample Computations

Table A. Accuracy (Analog)

15 + 15 + 15.2 + 15.15
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 = = 𝟏𝟓. 𝟎𝟒 𝒌𝒈
5

𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 15.04 − 15.00 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟒

0.04
% 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 𝑥 100% = 𝟎. 𝟐𝟕 %
15

8
Discussion of Results

Based on the results of the experiment, the percentage of error of using the analog platform
balance is lower compared to the digital platform balance except in using the 75 kg weight which
produced a 0.85 % error in analog while 0.4 % only in digital. On the other hand, it was easier to measure
the weights of the load when using the digital balance compared to the analog. Sources of error in the
analog could be in getting the reading as well as in moving the poise in the correct position to achieve a
balance or straight line in the analog platform balance. In table C (Sensitivity), it was found that the upper
stops had higher difference compared to the lower stops. While the leverage ratio approximately gives a
1:100 ratio based on the data.
In this experiment, we have calibrated a Platform Balance, checked for its accuracy, its sensitivity
and the leverage ratio used was also determined to increase the range of the platform balance. When there
is no weight on the platform, we calibrated the balance by rotating a screw inside the balance which raises
and lowers the beam so that the beam will be in the middle of the stops. The movable poise also is set at
the zero reading before rotating the screw.
In the first part, we recorded the values of various weights along the corners and the center part of
the conventional balance, with increasing weight. In this part I observed and noted some observations.
The percentage error and difference of the weights from the actual weight is greater than the percent error
and difference of the digital balance. This is because, the interior weighing components of the
conventional balance off-sets as new and heavier weights are introduced. Second, the readings are very
inconsistent and inaccurate since the reading requires observer’s intervention in reading the measurement.
There is a large probability of committing error in reading since each student had different perspective of
reading the measurements in conventional balance. It is also important to use the counter weights it
increase the range of the balance. Before it was only limited to 50 kg but with the use of the counter
weights, the range can increase up to 200 kg. In the calibration of the digital balance, I observed that the
readings are more accurate and precise compared to that of the conventional platform balance. The trial
readings vary by one or two unit(s) and less error are committed since the reading is made by the device
itself. Moreover, no observer intervention is required during the reading.
In the third part of the experiment, we are asked to test the sensitivity of the conventional
platform balance. In doing this, we determined the limiting weights wherein the arm will first strike the
upper and lower metal boundaries. In this part, I observed that the sensitivity of the conventional platform
is varying depending on the load. I realized that the sensitivity of the balance leads to accuracy and
precision of work. Knowing the sensitivity will give you hints whether the values you measured is
acceptable or not, whether it requires re-measuring or not. Accuracy of reading in conventional platform
balance depends on the correctness of visual measurement on the scale, condition of the scale.
The fourth, we determined the leverage ratio. The leverage ratio is the ratio of the
distances of the load and the weights from a common point. The leverage ratio is determined by dividing
the weight of the load to that of the dead weight. The leverage ratio is important since it is the piece which
makes the reading a platform balance correct. Without the leverage ratio, the reading that would be
registered will be lesser, and thus erroneous from the original one.
Platform Scales is used to broadly describe weighing scales that have larger weighing surfaces
than those found in the typical bench type. The weight indicators also tend to be separate to the platform,

9
or weighing surface, enabling the indicator to stand to one side out of harm’s way, mounted on the wall or
as in some types mounted on a pillar to the rear of the base. The benefits of using a larger weighing table,
platform, is obvious; much larger items can be weighed without the object obstructing the visual display
of the scale as this indicator can be positioned to one side or above the platform. Platforms come in
various sizes, but generally they are from 300mm to 1500mm square, with load capacities up to 5000
kilograms. Scales such as the GBK and the GFK can be used without the pillar assembly and can also be
used on work benches, they do not have to be used on the floor. The larger platform scales are used for
pallet weighing typically in warehouses or dispatch departments, some variations can be pit mounted
(lowered into the floor) enabling pallet or fork lift trucks to stand on them with the items being weighed.
A lower cost version of this is the pallet truck with a built in weighing scale. Wash-down fully stainless
steel versions can also be provided, these are ideal for use in the food and pharmaceutical industries
where hygiene is critical and the environment needs to be cleaned.
A balance may be based on mechanical principles, such as the position of a loaded beam or the
extension of a spring element or on electrical principles linked to the measurement of force or on a
combination of both. A mechanical balance may involve a balanced beam offering two weighing pans,
one on either side of the balance point, or it may be of single-pan design. An electronic balance will
usually be a single-pan device. On a two balance it is possible to measure the difference between the
masses of the two bodies directly, while a single-pan device can be used to give an indication of the mass
of a single body. The single pan device may also be used to measure mass difference by sequentially
weighing one object and then the other. Typically, a two-pan balance is used to compare the mass of an
unknown weight with that of a calibrated reference weight, whereas with the single-pan device the
reference weight is used to calibrate the balance, after which the unknown weight can itself be calibrated.
Repeatability testing entails repeatedly weighing a given object, recording the results, and
analyzing those results. Select a test weight equal to, or nearly equal to, the weighing capacity of the
instrument.
Corner load testing verifies that the instrument delivers the same weight reading, regardless of
where on the weighing pan the object being weighed is placed. Corner load performance specifications
are often not advertised.
Linearity testing verifies the accuracy of the instrument at intermediate values of weight.
Manufacturers often use the term "accuracy" in advertised specifications. A common error in linearity
(accuracy) testing is to simply place test weights on the weighing pan and observe the difference between
the indicated weight and the nominal value of the test weight.
This process fails to account for the fact that test weights are imperfect and that the difference
between the nominal value and the actual weight might be significant. This is especially true with
analytical balances, where the balance may be more accurate than any standard test weight.

10
 Set-up for cornerload testing of digital balance
Span refers to the adjustment of the sensitivity of the instrument across the full weighing range.
Span differs from the previous performance parameters in that it is readily adjustable, whereas cornerload,
linearity, and repeatability generally are not. Span adjustment of instruments is different from instrument
to instrument. Generally, the adjustment procedure is described in the user's manual which comes with the
instrument.
Many (not all) instruments now include internal calibration weights, so calibration is as easy as
pushing a single button. The user may reasonably ask, "How do I know the internal calibration weight is
correct?" The answer is that the only way to know is to have an external standard for comparison. The
advantage of an external standard, whether it's used to adjust span, or just to confirm the internal weight,
is that it is completely external to the instrument, and can therefore be compared to external standards. By
that process, the overall calibration of the instrument is matched to international standards and all other
weighing instruments.
Standardized test weights are made to various levels of accuracy. ASTM class 1 is the most
accurate weight class commonly available. Most weights in ASTM class 1 are accurate to one part in
400,000. Since many lab balances are considerably more accurate (resolution of greater than one part in a
million), one might reasonably wonder how a standard weight can be used to test or adjust analytical
balances. The answer would be that the standard weight can itself be calibrated to a level of accuracy that
exceeds even the most accurate lab balances. The characterization of the weight will determine the actual
value of the weight to a much higher degree of precision than required by the ASTM class 1 standard.
Such a weight can be used to verify the accuracy of an internal calibration weight. Simple "traceability"
of an external weight is insufficient.
After placing a test weight on an operating instrument and finding that the displayed weight value
does not exactly match the nominal value of the test weight, many users have concluded that the
instrument is miscalibrated. However, that conclusion is by no means certain unless the test weight has

11
been calibrated and its correction from nominal value is known. The calibration weights internal to high
quality lab balances are more accurate than commonly available test weights.
There are also platform weighing scales designed to provide shock and static overload protection
by absorbing the spring. Cardinal brand offers a variety of stainless steel bench scales in both wash-down
and splash-proof capabilities. Cardinal's stainless steel bench scales are carefully designed to provide
long-term accuracy. Cardinal's EB series bench scales feature lift-off platforms to facilitate overhaul by
providing direct access to all of the components. Quick Silver Series Bench Scales are versatile and are
ideal for all types of food processing applications, ready to eat applications, pharmaceutical and chemical
applications. It features a low profile shock resistant base that is in conformity with the Scale
Manufacturers Association (SMA) standards for shock and overload protection. It also provides highly
accurate and reliable weighing.

Calibration of Platform Scale

Regular platform scale calibration is a necessity for any business that relies on measurement
accuracy to perform its daily operations, whether it’s a manufacturing, water treatment, shipping, farming,
or food service business. The following is a general guideline to help you make the most of the delicate
procedure for calibrating a platform scale:
1. Always be sure to place the scale on a completely flat surface, otherwise the scale will still not
read accurately after all your efforts.
2. It should not be close to any vibrating machinery.
3. Make sure that the conditions for the procedure are between 65 and 85 degrees Fahrenheit.
4. Do not try to calibrate it if the environmental humidity is outside of 40% (+/- 10%).
5. Make sure no magnetic devices such as cell phones or radios are near the scale when you are
calibrating, as they will cause the reading to become erratic.
6. Consult the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) guidelines for the technical
details you need to familiarize yourself with before you begin.
7. Tare the scale so the display reads all zeros all the way across.
8. Place an appropriate calibration weight on the scale. You can purchase calibration weights from
the manufacturer.
9. If any readings are out of the parameters called for on the scale's requirements, take the
calibration records to your quality assurance manager for review and recording. Your QA
manager can take the necessary steps to make sure that the scale conforms to ISO 9001
requirements.
Also Remember:
No calibration procedure can be more accurate than the test weights themselves. For extremely
precise calibration, handle the test weights very carefully, with rubber gloves and/or tweezers.
Even the oils or acids present on your skin can etch material from a weight and throw off its true
weight value. Be sure to store the weights in their padded case when they aren't in use. Corroded or

12
damaged weights are going to be almost worthless for an accurate calibration procedure with close-
tolerance requirements.
Different platform scales will also have different processes for calibration. For NIST and ISO
9001 compliance, careful record-keeping is essential. Keep a master list of all calibrated scales, and
record what actions are taken when an instrument or scale is found to be out of calibration.
Determine how to identify defective standards, cover the handling and storage of weights, and be
absolutely sure to discuss the process of handling lost standards and out-of-calibration instruments. This
should put you in good shape in case of an ISO 9001 audit.
Most scales can be accurately and quickly calibrated using test weights. Whether you need to
maintain ISO 9001 or NIST compliance or not, it’s always a good idea to bear the general guidelines in
mind when embarking on a procedure, and to keep a record of past calibrations along with the platform
scale.
Accuracy and Precision
Accuracy is defined as, "The ability of a measurement to match the actual value of the quantity
being measured". If in reality it is 34.0 F outside and a temperature sensor reads 34.0 F, then than sensor
is accurate.
Precision is defined as, "(1) The ability of a measurement
to be consistently reproduced" and "(2) The number of significant
digits to which a value has been reliably measured". If on several
tests the temperature sensor matches the actual temperature while
the actual temperature is held constant, then the temperature
sensor is precise. By the second definition, the number 3.1415 is
more precise than the number 3.14
An example of a sensor with BAD accuracy and BAD
precision: Suppose a lab refrigerator holds a constant temperature
of 38.0 F. A temperature sensor is tested 10 times in the
refrigerator. The temperatures from the test yield the temperatures of: 39.4, 38.1, 39.3, 37.5, 38.3, 39.1,
37.1, 37.8, 38.8, and 39.0. This distribution shows no tendency toward a particular value (lack of
precision) and does not acceptably match the actual temperature (lack of accuracy).
An example of a sensor with GOOD accuracy and BAD precision: Suppose a lab refrigerator
holds a constant temperature of 38.0 F. A temperature sensor is tested 10 times in the refrigerator. The
temperatures from the test yield the temperatures of: 37.8, 38.3, 38.1, 38.0, 37.6, 38.2, 38.0, 38.0, 37.4,
and 38.3. This distribution shows no impressive tendency toward a particular value (lack of precision) but
each value does come close to the actual temperature (high accuracy).
An example of a sensor with BAD accuracy and GOOD precision: Suppose a lab refrigerator
holds a constant temperature of 38.0 F. A temperature sensor is tested 10 times in the refrigerator. The
temperatures from the test yield the temperatures of: 39.2, 39.3, 39.1, 39.0, 39.1, 39.3, 39.2, 39.1, 39.2,
and 39.2. This distribution does show a tendency toward a particular value (high precision) but every
measurement is well off from the actual temperature (low accuracy).
An example of a sensor with GOOD accuracy and GOOD precision: Suppose a lab refrigerator
holds a constant temperature of 38.0 F. A temperature sensor is tested 10 times in the refrigerator. The

13
temperatures from the test yield the temperatures of: 38.0, 38.0, 37.8, 38.1, 38.0, 37.9, 38.0, 38.2, 38.0,
and 37.9. This distribution does show a tendency toward a particular value (high precision) and is very
near the actual temperature each time (high accuracy).
The goal of any measuring instrument is to have high accuracy (sensor matching reality as close
as possible) and to also have a high precision (being able to consistently replicate results and to measure
with as many significant digits as appropriately possible).
Leverage Ratio
A lever is a beam connected to ground by a hinge,
or pivot, called a fulcrum. The ideal lever does not
dissipate or store energy, which means there is no friction
in the hinge or bending in the beam. In this case, the
power into the lever equals the power out, and the ratio of
output to input force is given by the ratio of the distances
from the fulcrum to the points of application of these
forces. This is known as the law of the lever.
The mechanical advantage (leverage ratio) of a
lever can be determined by considering the balance
of moments or torque, T, about the fulcrum,

where M1 is the input force to the lever and M2 is the output force. The distances a and b are the
perpendicular distances between the forces and the fulcrum.
The mechanical advantage of the lever is the ratio of output force to input force,

This relationship shows that the mechanical advantage can be computed from ratio of the
distances from the fulcrum to where the input and output forces are applied to the lever.

14
Questions and Answers

1. What is leverage ratio? Why is it important?

- It is the ratio of the needed weight in the balance over the weight being measured. It is
needed so the one measuring a certain weight would know the amount of standard weight needed
to correctly measure the unknown weight. With the help of the leverage ratio, the correctness of
the addition of the counterweights can be ensured.

2. What is sensitivity?

- Sensitivity is the reaction of the platform balance to a minimal amount of weight being
measured, more sensitivity the smaller masses can be measured. A measuring instrument is more
sensitive the smaller the quantity that it is able to measure. The sensitivity with which measuring
instruments are made depends on what they will be used for.

3. Give the advantages and disadvantages of using a conventional platform scale.

- Conventional platform scale can measure greater range of values compared to digital
platforms. Consequently, it results to a slightly higher percentage error in measurement compared
to that of the digital balance since it requires/prompts the user to move a certain indicator weight
to determine the mass of an object. It is also heavy and inconvenient to use.

4. Give the advantages and disadvantages of using a digital platform scale.

- Electronic scales will not automatically solve all of the problems. Many digital scales are
simply a load cell and a digital indicator coupled to an old style mechanical scale. Instead of a
dial, the steelyard rod is attached to an “S” type load cell. The electronic readout is fixed to the
top of the scale post. This type of digital scale will not have the same user error issues, as the
weight will be unambiguous and easy to read. But all of the mechanical problems noted for beam
and dial scales will still be present.
5. What is meant by correctness/accuracy?

- Correctness or accuracy is the measure of the exactness or nearness of the values

registered to the true value. It indicates how much the value deviates from the true value. The
higher the accuracy, the nearer the value get from the true value. On the other hand, the lower the
accuracy, the farther it is from the actual value. Accuracy is a means of quantifying the validity of
measurements.

15
Conclusion

At the end of the experiment, we were able to learn the principle behind the operation of a
platform balance. We also learned how to calibrate a platform balance by moving its movable poise until
it is midway the two stops. We also determined the accuracy and sensitivity of a platform scale both
analog and digital, using different loads and lastly, we were able to determine the leverage ratio.
I can conclude that the measurement for the accuracy of a specific load is more accurate using a
digital platform scale. The digital platform balance is the one that provides us an exact measurement of
the weight. The test for accuracy or the measurement of how the values are near to the true value by
putting the load on the center and the four corners of the platform enables us to know if the platform
balance is calibrated. The load on the platform must be distributed so that the value of the weight are the
same regardless of the position of the specimen or load. We can say that a properly calibrated platform
balance exhibits this condition. In our experiment, the results vary meaning the device used in our
experiment is not properly calibrated.
Leverage ratio is the ratio between the weights of the standard counter relative to the weight of
the pan. It represents the actual weight of the counter weight. It represents the action of the lever and the
mechanical advantage gained by it. The leverage ratio must be equal to one so that the accuracy of the
determination of the weight of the load is ensured. The reference or counter weight represents the ratio of
the actual weight of the load to the experimental.
The possible sources of errors in this experiment are the inaccurate reading or movement of the
analog platform scale as well as mechanical problem regarding the balance because of being old. Another
source of error is the inaccurate reading of the measured value of the load. Aside from those mentioned,
most sources of errors are related to human errors.

16
Recommendation

The experiment was relatively easy to do and understand. As for me, I would recommend that
better sets of standard weights be used since some of it are very hard to handle, and their overall volume
affects its bulkiness. Also, to make this experiment more safe and efficient, students who are performing
certain parts of the experiment should keep away from the stack of weights so avoid any accidents.
Measurements should be taken with care and accuracy, especially in the analog platform balance.

17
References

 Perry Scale Company. Importance of Platform Weighing Scales. Retrieved from:

http://www.perryscale.com/platform-weighing-scales.html

 Interweigh Systems, Inc. Platform Scales. Retrieved from:

http://www.interweigh.ca/scalesplatform.htm

 Measurement Standards Laboratory of New Zealand. Calibrating Balances. Retrieved from:

http://www.msl.irl.cri.nz/sites/all/files/training-manuals/tg25-december2-2010.pdf

18
Preliminary Data Sheet

19