FIE- School of Engineering 1

Taylor’s University

Preparing Lab Reports

Name : Natasha Anne Binti Mohammed Noor Azam

Student ID : 0326416

Group Members : 1. Natasha Anne Binti Mohammed Noor Azam

2. Shoban Raja A/L Sivaji Raja

3. Saniika A/P Renganadan

4. Mong Jia Ai

Date of Experiment:27th April 2012

Report due date: 4th May 2012
Report submission date: 4th May 2012
Checked by:

Item/marks
Foundation of Science Format/10
Abstract and Introduction/10
School of Biosciences Figures and Diagrams/15
Materials and Method/10
Taylor’s University Results Discussions/45
References/10
Malaysia Total
FIE- School of Engineering 2
Taylor’s University

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................3

1.0 Introduction...............................................................................................................................3

2.0 Experimental Design..............................................................................................................4-6

2.1 Materials.............................................................................................................................7-8

2.2 Methods..................................................................................................................................8

2.3 Procedure............................................................................................................................8-9

3.0 Results and Discussion........................................................................................................9-12

4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations..................................................................................12-13

References.....................................................................................................................................13
FIE- School of Engineering 3
Taylor’s University

ABSTRACT

In this laboratory we measured simple physical quantities (for example, length and mass). We
also took note of the precision of our measurements via recording experimental uncertainties and
found that the uncertainties in our measurements propagate into any quantity calculated using
those measurements.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this lab is demonstrate the concept of absolute uncertainties and % uncertainties
over different measurements types and to understand what these uncertainties tell us about our
measured values and the experiment. We will do this by measuring the length, mass, diameter
and time taken for 20 oscillations of different objects such as weight cell, copper wire and
pendulum bob. Using the equations. We will also be calculating the uncertainty in the diameter,
density, ρ then finally in the period, T. For example, Ron Kurtus derived the Simple Pendulum
Equation which is described as equation 1 [1]

1
T =2 π
√ g
⋯ (1)

For finding uncertainty in more complex physical quantity like density, calculations involving
multiplication and division are carried out, the rule that is applied is as shown in equation 2 [2]

A ± εA A
=( )±(εA +εB )… (2)
B ± εB B
FIE- School of Engineering 4
Taylor’s University

2.0 EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

PART A

Fig. 1.1 Measuring the Thickness using a Ruler

Fig. 1.2 Measuring the Thickness using a Vernier Calliper

FIE- School of Engineering 5
Taylor’s University

Fig. 1.3 Measuring the Thickness using a Micrometre Screw Gauge

PART B

Fig. 2 Measuring the Diameter using a Micrometre Screw Gauge

FIE- School of Engineering 6
Taylor’s University

PART C

Fig. 3 Measuring the Volume of Water using a Measuring Cylinder

PART D

Fig. 4 Measuring the Total Time for 20 Oscillations

FIE- School of Engineering 7
Taylor’s University

2.1 Materials

PART A:

 Ruler
 Vernier calliper
 Micrometre screw gauge
 Weight cell

PART B:

 Micrometre screw gauge

 Copper wire s.w.g. 22

PART C:

 Measuring cylinder (25 cm3 @ 50 cm3)

 Pendulum bob
 30 cm thread
 Weight balance

PART D:

 Pendulum bob
 50 cm string
 Stop watch
 Retort stand, clamp, boss
 Wooden block

2.2 Methods

Part A

We used 3 measuring instruments which are ruler, Vernier calliper, and a Micrometre screw
gauge to measure the thickness of a weight cell. We repeated the measurement 3 times for each
measuring tool and calculated the average value.

Part B

We used a Micrometre screw gauge to measure the diameter of a copper wire. We repeated the
measurement 5 times for each measuring tool and calculated the average value.

Part C

We used an electronic balance to measure the mass of the pendulum bob. Then, we used the
water displacement method to calculate the volume of the pendulum bob. We found the density
of the pendulum bob in g cm^3.
FIE- School of Engineering 8
Taylor’s University

Part D

We tied a pendulum bob to a 50 cm string and adjusted it to 40 cm as we attach it to the retort

stand. Then, we positioned it by an angle (of approximately 30°) and released it while starting
the stopwatch simultaneously. We then stop the stopwatch after 20 oscillations and recorded it.
We repeated the experiment for 3 times and calculated the average value.

2.3 Procedure

Part A

Determining the Absolute Uncertainties and % Uncertainties of Weight Cell using Ruler,
Vernier Calliper, and a Micrometre Screw Gauge
1. The thickness, t of a weight cell was measured using a ruler.
2. The measurement was repeated using a ruler, Vernier calliper, and a Micrometre screw
gauge.
3. The uncertainties of the measurements were determined.
4. The results were tabulated in the table below.

Part B
Determining the Absolute Uncertainties and % Uncertainties of Copper Wire using a
Micrometre Screw Gauge
1. The diameter, d of the copper wire was measured five (5) times along the length of the
wire in different directions using a micrometre screw gauge.
2. The uncertainties of the measurements were determined.
3. The results were tabulated in the table below.

Part C
Determining Water Displacement of Pendulum Bob
1. Using the water displacement method, the density of the pendulum bob was measured.
a) The mass of the pendulum bob was measured.
b) The volume of water in the measuring cylinder was measured.
c) The pendulum bob was immersed inside the measuring cylinder and the new
volume was recorded.
2. The results were tabulated in the table below.

Part D
Determining Time Taken for a Pendulum Bob to Make 20 Oscillations
1. The experimental equipment was set up as shown in Fig. 1.1. (The length, l was
adjusted to approximately 40cm. The length of the simple pendulum is the distance
FIE- School of Engineering 9
Taylor’s University

from the pint of suspension to the centre of the ball. The length, l was recorded with its
uncertainty.)
2. The bob was displaced from its equilibrium position by an angle (of approximately 30°),
then the bob was released to allow it to swing back and forth.
3. The total time it takes to make 20 oscillations was measured.
4. The results were tabulated in the table below.

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

PART A

Table 1. Tabulated Results for Thickness, t of a Weight Cell.

Instrument Reading 1 2 Average ± uncertainty

Ruler t (mm) 10.0 10.0 10.0 ± 0.5 mm

Vernier Calliper t (mm) 10.19 10.21 10.20± 0.02 mm

Micrometre screw gauge t (mm) 10.24 10.25 10.25± 0.01 mm

I. DISCUSSION

1. Calculate the % uncertainty for each of the measurement instruments used in the experiment.
δt δd
a) For ruler: % uncertainty of thickness, t=± ×100 %=± ×100 %
t d
0.5
% uncertainty of thickness=± × 100
10.0
¿±5%
δt
b) For Vernier calliper: % uncertainty of thickness, t=± ×100 %
t
δt
% uncertainty of thickness=± × 100 %
t
¿ ± 0.196 %

δt
c) For micrometre screw gauge: % uncertainty of thickness, t=± ×100 %
t
δt
% uncertainty of thickness=± × 100 %
t
¿ ± 0.098 %

2. Compare and comment on the % uncertainties calculated above.

The % uncertainties decreases from ruler, Vernier calliper to micrometre screw gauge. This is because
when the absolute uncertainty decrease, the %uncertainties decreases too.
FIE- School of Engineering 10
Taylor’s University

PART B

Table 2. Tabulated Results for Diameter, d of the Copper Wire.

Reading 1 2 3 4 5 Average ± uncertainty

Diameter, mm 1.64 1.65 1.63 1.64 1.63 1.64 ± 0.01 mm

II. DISCUSSION

1. Calculate the average diameter, d with its uncertainty.

1.64+1.65+1.63+1.64+ 1.63
average diameter=
1.64
¿ 1.64 ± 0.01 mm

δd
2. Calculate % uncertainty of the diameter, d. ¿ ± ×100 %
d
0.01
% uncertainty of thediameter=± × 100
1.64

¿ ± 0.61 %

PART C
Table 3. Tabulated Results for Measurements of the Pendulum Bob.
Volume before 30.0 ± 0.5 cm3
Volume after 34.0 ± 0.5 cm3
Volume of pendulum bob 4.0 ± 1.0 cm3
Mass of pendulum bob 30.94 ± 0.01 g

III. DISCUSSION

1. Determine the density, ρ of the pendulum bob along with its absolute uncertainty.
30.94 g
ρ=
4.0 cm3
¿ 7.735 g cm−3

A ± εA A
=( )±(εA +εB )… (2)
B ± εB B

∆V ∆a ∆b
= +
V a b
FIE- School of Engineering 11
Taylor’s University

∆ ρ ∆v ∆m
= +
ρ v m

∆ρ 1.0 0.01
= +
7.735 4.0 30.94

∆ ρ=± ( 0.25+0.000232 )

Δρ=±0.25 g cm-3

So, density, ρ of the pendulum bob along with its absolute uncertainty is 7.735 ± 0.25 g cm -3

2. Determine the % uncertainty of the density, ρ.

0.01
uncertainty of mass=± ×100 %
30.94

¿ ± 0.032%

1.0
uncertainty of volume=± ×100 %
4.0

¿ ± 0.25 %

uncertainty of density =( ± 0.032% ± 0.25 % )

¿ ± 0.28 %

3. Suggest 2 ways to minimize the error through improving the measurement.

Use a measuring cylinder with smaller scale divisions and ensure that the eye level is parallel to
the meniscus to avoid parallax error.

PART D
Table 4. Tabulated Results for Time taken for 20 oscillations.
Time taken (s) for 20 oscillations

1 2 3 Average ± uncertainty

24.5 24.53 24.5 24.51 ± 0.20 s

IV. DISCUSSION

1. Calculate the period, T (the time taken for one complete oscillation).
20 -1
Period, T = s
24.51

= 0.82 s-1
FIE- School of Engineering 12
Taylor’s University

0.20
Uncertainty of time taken for one complete oscillation, Δt20 = ×t
24.51 20

0.20 24.51
= 24.51 × 20

= ± 0.01s

So, the period, T is 0.82 ± 0.01s

2. Calculate the value of g in m/s2 and the uncertainty of g

l
Hint: The period of oscillation of a simple pendulum is expressed as T =2 π
√ g
⋯ (1)0.82

0.4 ± 0.0005
± 0.01= 2π √
g
0.4 ± 0.0005
0.130 ± 0.002 = √
g
0.4 ± 0.0005
0.0169 ± 0.004 =
g
0.4 ± 0.0005
g=
0.0169± 0.0004
g=23.67 m/s2 ± 0.0004

3. Suggest three sources of error of limitations for this experiment.

The length of the thread from the centre of the pendulum bob to the point of suspension may not be
accurate due to human error. This may cause an uncertainty in the length. Human reaction time may cause
a delay. The swinging of the pendulum bob becomes elliptical.

4. Suggest three improvements that could be made to this experiment.

Repeat the experiment several times and obtain the average reading. Furthermore, increase the number of
oscillations to obtain a better reading. Finally, ensure that the pendulum bob swings in a steady manner by
ensuring that the angle from its equilibrium position is approximately the same.

4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This lab helped us learn how to make measurements using a ruler, Vernier calliper and
micrometre screw gauge and find out the uncertainties. Using these uncertainties, we can find
out whether our measurements were accurate, precise, and realistic. In our trials we found that
out of all the measuring devices, Micrometre screw gauge has the highest accuracy as it a
smaller scale division the rest. For instance, from experiment in Part A, in comparison from the
three measuring devices, the Micrometre screw gauge had the lowest percentage uncertainty
FIE- School of Engineering 13
Taylor’s University

while the metre rule had the highest percentage uncertainty. This data proves that the
Micrometre screw gauge has a higher accuracy than the rest of the measuring devices. Hence,
the Micrometre screw gauge was used to measure the diameter, d of the copper wire in the
experiment from Part B.

In the experiment from Part C, the uncertainty of the density, ρ was calculated using the
uncertainties obtained from mass and volume calculated. Hence, certain uncertainties can be
calculated by calculating the combination of uncertainties of several quantities.

Improvement that can be made in Part A by taking more measurement for each
measuring device and calculating the average to ensure that a more precise reading is obtained.
In experiment from Part B, a less malleable wire could be used do that it doesn’t bend inwards
when using the micrometre screw gauge. For Part C, we could use a measuring cylinder with
smaller scale divisions. This ensures that the measurements will have a lower percentage
uncertainty and more accurate readings. Finally, in Part D, the angle of the pendulum bob from
the position of equilibrium can be more precise if it was measured with a protractor instead.

the average diameter of the weight cell to be 10.0 mm and the uncertainty in the diameter was
0.5 mm using the ruler. We took the average value because our measurements were random.
Then, we calculated the absolute uncertainties of the diameter of the weight cell. We used to
excel to calculate these values. With these values we found the percent error of 11.2 percent. The
Vernier callipers shows a different value of percent error. The value with the Vernier calliper
was a more accurate measurement than the ruler because the percent difference was smaller. The
density the pendulum bob turned out to be 8600 kg/m^3 with a percent error of 11.2 percent.
Furthermore, we discover how to use measurement uncertainties to find the density of the
pendulum bob.

REFERENCES

[1] Shibata, T. (2009). Precise asymptotic behaviour of solutions to damped simple pendulum
equations In Electronic Journal of Differential Equations. p1-15.

[2] University of Victoria. (2016). Basic Rules for Uncertainty Calculations. Retrieved 01 Mar
2016 from http://web.uvic.ca/~jalexndr/192UncertRules.pdf