Bryan Zheng

September 13, 2013

Period 7
Uncertainty in Measurement Lab
Part I:
1.)
a) The percent uncertainties of the measurements are different because the sizes of the
measurements are different. Since both tools have equal precision, the estimated digit is divided
by different measured values, which results in differing percent uncertainties. In this case, both
tools have an uncertainty of .01cm. However the ruler measured an object that was 24.10cm
while the meter stick measured a different object that was 166.42cm. Since percent uncertainty is
the estimated digit over the measured value, the larger measurement will have a smaller percent
uncertainty because both ratios have the same numerator of .01cm.
Percent uncertainty = estimated digit 100%
measured value
Percent uncertainty = .01cm 100% = .006%
166.42cm
Percent uncertainty = .01cm 100% = .04%
24.10cm
Generally, as the measured value increases, the potential error when guessing the last digit
becomes less significant, therefore the percent uncertainty decreases.
b) A tools precision might contribute significantly to error in the lab if the estimated digit is large
compared to the size of the measurement, which would create a large percent uncertainty. For
example, if the triple beam balance lacked its third beam, then the smallest division would be 10
grams. This would mean the estimated digit would be the ones digit. The mass of the ball was
9.09g, meaning that with the less precise balance, it would have measured 9g instead. This results
in an 11% uncertainty since 1g/9g = .11. This is 100 times larger than the original percent
uncertainty of .11%. The increase is due to the fact that the range when guessing the estimated
digit increased. This would also increase the variation in measurements, which would make the
data less precise. Though increased variation does not guarantee inaccurate results, in general,
larger potential variation in measurements would make values more likely to be far from the
actual result, which would increase error.


Different measured values



2.)
a) V = s
3

V = (0.24cm)
3
V = .014cm
3
The accepted volume of the cube is .014cm
3
.
b) Percent error = Experimental Value Actual Value 100%
Actual Value
Percent error = .26cm - .24cm 100%
.24cm
Percent Error = .02cm 100%
.24cm
Percent Error = .08 100% = 8%
The percent error for the length of the cube is 8%.
c) V = s
3

V = (0.26cm)
3
V = .018cm
3
The experimental volume of the cube is .018cm
3
.
Percent error = Experimental Value Actual Value 100%
Actual Value
Percent error = .018cm
3
- .014cm
3
100%
.014cm
3
Percent error = .004cm
3
100%
.014cm
3
Percent error = .29 100% = 29%

The percent error for the volume of the cube is 29%.
This shows that error propagates because the original uncertainty in the length of the cube
increases when the measured length is cubed. The measured value of .26cm varied from the
actual value of .24cm by +.02cm. When the measured value is cubed, this error would affect the
calculated volume of .014 so that it is greater by .004cm
3
, which is 29% of the accepted value.
This clearly shows that the original error when measuring the length a side, which had a relatively
small percent error, contributes to a large variation in the final volume since the error propagated.

3.) The definition of precision is the degree to which different measurements can show the same
or similar results. In other words, it describes the consistency or reproducibility of measurements.
Therefore the smaller the markings on a tool, the smaller the estimated digit of a measurement is.
This would decrease variation in the subsequent measurements since the range of guessing is
reduced. This relationship between the markings on a tool and precision means that the larger the
markings, the less precise measurements are. For example, in this lab, the mass of a foam ball
was measured at 9.09g using a triple beam balance. The balance has an estimated digit at the
hundredths place since the smallest division is at the tenths place. Therefore the largest possible
difference in 2 measurements would be .02g, since it could have been measured at 9.10g or 9.08.
The percent difference between these two values would be |9.08g-9.10g| divided by the average
of both measurements. This equates to .02g 9.09g, or .22%. If the triple beam balance had a
larger space between markings, for example ones representing 1g instead of .1g, then the
estimated digit would be moved to the tenths place. Instead of 9.09, the first measurement would
have been 9.1g. The uncertainty would be .1g making 9.2g the maximum possible measurement
and 9.0 the minimum possible measurement. The percent difference would be the difference
between the maximum and the minimum over their average, or .2 divided by 9.1, which equals
2.1%. Since 2.1% is greater than .22, this proves that the larger the space between markings, the
less precise measurements are. Furthermore, the conclusion that smaller the spaces between
markings make measurements more precise can also be drawn through this logic.

Part II
4.)
a) The uncertainty of graduated cylinder is .1mL. However, the volume with the pennies is
being subtracted from the value without them, so the uncertainty of the 20 pennies themselves
doubles to .2mL. Therefore the measured value could equal:
6.8mL + .2mL = 7.0mL or
6.8mL - .2mL = 6.6mL
Measure of 1 penny = 7.0mL 20 = .35mL or
Measure of 1 penny = 6.7mL 20 = .33mL
These two possible values (.35mL and .33mL) differ from the calculated value of .34mL (see
Table II) by .01mL. This proves that the uncertainty of a single coin is 1/20 of that of 20
because when the original uncertainty .2mL is multiplied by 1/20, the result is the same .01mL
that was calculated using the greatest possible variation in values.


b) The percent uncertainty for a single coin remains the same as it was for twenty because the
ratio of uncertainty over measured value remains the same. This is mathematically proven by
these calculations:
measured volume of 20 coins = 6.8mL
uncertainty of volume of 20 coins = .2mL
percent uncertainty = estimated digit = .2mL = 3%
measured value 6.8mL
calculated volume of 1 coin = measured value of 20 coins 20 = 6.8mL 20 = .34mL
uncertainty of volume of 1 coin = uncertainty of volume of 20 coins 20 = .2mL 20 = .01%
percent uncertainty = estimated digit = .01mL = 3%
calculated value .34mL
3% = 3%
5.) Procedure B reduces uncertainty because the same tool measures a larger value. Therefore the
potential variation in results would be less significant than it would be for a smaller value. The
graduated cylinder has an estimated digit of .1mL, and since the volume without the penny is
being subtracted from the volume with the penny, the uncertainty of the penny itself doubles to
.2mL. This is a large percent of an individual penny since its volume is so small. In fact the
percent uncertainty is 50%, which cannot be reduced by division since it is already a single coin.
However with more coins, in this case 20 times more, the uncertainty of the pennies in Procedure
B is reduced by a factor of 1/20. This is because the final value should be the volume of 1 penny,
not the measured 20 pennies. Since the measured volume of 20 pennies, 6.8mL, needs to be
multiplied by 1/20, the uncertainty of .2mL must also be multiplied by 1/20. Therefore the
uncertainty of a singular penny in this case is .01mL. Dividing this by the calculated volume of
a penny, .34mL, gives the percent uncertainty of the volume of a single penny: 3%. This shows
that Procedure B reduces uncertainty.