Error Propagation Adding In Quadrature
Contents |
or more quantities, each with their individual uncertainties, and then combine the information from these quantities in order to come up with a final result of our experiment. How can you state error propagation adding a constant your answer for the combined result of these measurements and their uncertainties scientifically?
Error Propagation Addition
The answer to this fairly common question depends on how the individual measurements are combined in the result. We
Error Propagation Calculator
will treat each case separately: Addition of measured quantities If you have measured values for the quantities X, Y, and Z, with uncertainties dX, dY, and dZ, and your final result,
Error Propagation Addition And Division
R, is the sum or difference of these quantities, then the uncertainty dR is: Here the upper equation is an approximation that can also serve as an upper bound for the error. Please note that the rule is the same for addition and subtraction of quantities. Example: Suppose we have measured the starting position as x1 = 9.3+-0.2 m and the finishing position error propagation addition and subtraction as x2 = 14.4+-0.3 m. Then the displacement is: Dx = x2-x1 = 14.4 m - 9.3 m = 5.1 m and the error in the displacement is: (0.22 + 0.32)1/2 m = 0.36 m Multiplication of measured quantities In the same way as for sums and differences, we can also state the result for the case of multiplication and division: Again the upper line is an approximation and the lower line is the exact result for independent random uncertainties in the individual variables. And again please note that for the purpose of error calculation there is no difference between multiplication and division. Example: We have measured a displacement of x = 5.1+-0.4 m during a time of t = 0.4+-0.1 s. What is the average velocity and the error in the average velocity? v = x / t = 5.1 m / 0.4 s = 12.75 m/s and the uncertainty in the velocity is: dv = |v| [ (dx/x)2 + (dt/t)2 ]1/2 = 12.75 m/s [(0.4/5.1)2 + (0.1/0.4)2]1/2 = 3.34 m/s Multiplication with a constant What if you have measured the uncertainty in an observab
a quick overview of the site Help Center Detailed answers to any questions you might have Meta Discuss the workings and policies of this site About Us Learn more about Stack Overflow the company Business Learn more about hiring developers or error propagation addition and multiplication posting ads with us Physics Questions Tags Users Badges Unanswered Ask Question _ Physics Stack Exchange error propagation sum is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute: Sign up propagation of error division Here's how it works: Anybody can ask a question Anybody can answer The best answers are voted up and rise to the top How to combine measurement error with statistic error up vote 10 down vote favorite 3 We have http://lectureonline.cl.msu.edu/~mmp/labs/error/e2.htm to measure a period of an oscillation. We are to take the time it takes for 50 oscillations multiple times. I know that I will have a $\Delta t = 0.1 \, \mathrm s$ because of my reaction time. If I now measure, say 40, 41 and 39 seconds in three runs, I will also have standard deviation of 1. What is the total error then? Do I add them up, like so? $$\sqrt{1^2 + 0.1^2}$$ Or is it http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/23441/how-to-combine-measurement-error-with-statistic-error just the 1 and I discard the (systematic?) error of my reaction time? I wonder if I measure a huge number of times, the standard deviation should become tiny compared to my reaction time. Is the lower bound 0 or is it my reaction time with 0.1? measurement statistics error-analysis share|cite|improve this question edited Apr 9 '12 at 16:17 Qmechanic♦ 64.1k991242 asked Apr 9 '12 at 12:41 Martin Ueding 3,32221339 add a comment| 3 Answers 3 active oldest votes up vote 6 down vote accepted I think you're exercising an incorrect picture of statistics here - mixing the inputs and outputs. You are recording the result of a measurement, and the spread of these measurement values (we'll say they're normally distributed) is theoretically a consequence of all of the variation from all different sources. That is, every time you do it, the length of the string might be a little different, the air temperature might be a little different. Of course, all of these are fairly small and I'm just listing them for the sake of argument. The point is that the ultimate standard deviation of the measured value $\sigma$ should be the result of all individual sources (we will index by $i$), under the assumption that all sources of variation are also normally distributed. $$\sigma^2 = \sum_i^N{\sigma_i^2}$$ When we account for individual sources of variation in an experiment, we exercise some model that
be down. Please try the request again. Your cache administrator is webmaster. Generated Fri, 14 Oct 2016 15:22:55 GMT by s_wx1127 (squid/3.5.20)