Propagation Error 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 your answer for the combined result of these measurements and their uncertainties scientifically? The answer to propagation of error division this fairly common question depends on how the individual measurements are combined in the result. We
Error Propagation Formula Physics
will treat each case separately: Addition of measured quantities If you have measured values for the quantities X, Y, and Z, with uncertainties propagation of uncertainty calculator dX, dY, and dZ, and your final result, 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 propagation square root 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 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
Adding Errors In Quadrature
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 observable X, and you need to multiply it with a constant that is known exactly? What is the error then? This is easy: just multiply the error in X with the absolute value of the constant, and this will give you the error in R: If you compare this to the above rule for multiplication of two quantities, you see that this is just the special case of that rule for the uncertainty in c, dc = 0. Example: If an object is realeased from rest and is in free fall, and if you measur
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 posting ads with error propagation chemistry us Physics Questions Tags Users Badges Unanswered Ask Question _ Physics Stack Exchange is a question error propagation average and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute: Sign up Here's how it works: Anybody
Error Propagation Inverse
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 4 We have to measure a period of an http://lectureonline.cl.msu.edu/~mmp/labs/error/e2.htm 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 just the 1 and I discard the (systematic?) error http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/23441/how-to-combine-measurement-error-with-statistic-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♦ 64.4k991242 asked Apr 9 '12 at 12:41 Martin Ueding 3,31221439 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 formalizes our expectation about the consistency of the experiment. Your particular model is that the length of the str
ads with YouTube Red. Working... No thanks Try it free Find out whyClose Uncertainty propagation a: Quadrature lookatphysics SubscribeSubscribedUnsubscribe568568 Loading... Loading... Working... Add to Want to watch this again later? Sign in to add this video to a https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8VKGFNm850 playlist. Sign in Share More Report Need to report the video? Sign in to report inappropriate content. Sign in Transcript Statistics 748 views 4 Like this video? Sign in to make your opinion count. Sign in 5 1 Don't like this video? Sign in to make your opinion count. Sign in 2 Loading... Loading... Transcript The interactive transcript could not be loaded. Loading... Loading... Rating is error propagation available when the video has been rented. This feature is not available right now. Please try again later. Published on Jan 16, 2013(C) 2012-2013 David Liao (lookatphysics.com) CC-BY-SAQuadrature formula is a result of Taylor expanding functions of multiple fluctuating variables, assuming that fluctuations are independent, and then applying the identity "variances of sums are sums of variances" Category Education License Standard YouTube License Show more Show propagation error quadrature less Loading... Autoplay When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next. Up next Uncertainty propagation b: Sample estimates - Duration: 14:53. lookatphysics 531 views 14:53 Propagation of Uncertainty, Parts 1 and 2 - Duration: 16:31. Robbie Berg 22,296 views 16:31 Propagation of Uncertainty, Part 3 - Duration: 18:16. Robbie Berg 8,782 views 18:16 Multivariate Uncertainty Analysis - Duration: 8:34. Dr. Cyders 2,679 views 8:34 Differential Equations I: Numerical integration - Duration: 10:18. lookatphysics 2,376 views 10:18 Error Propagation - Duration: 7:27. ProfessorSerna 7,172 views 7:27 Propagation of Errors - Duration: 7:04. paulcolor 30,464 views 7:04 Uncertainty propagation through sums and differences - Duration: 10:45. Steuard Jensen 88 views 10:45 Sums b: Introduction to infinite series - Duration: 4:30. lookatphysics 134 views 4:30 IB Physics: Uncertainties and Errors - Duration: 18:37. Brian Lamore 48,159 views 18:37 Propagation of Error - Duration: 7:01. Matt Becker 11,257 views 7:01 Calculating the Propagation of Uncertainty - Duration: 12:32. Scott Lawson 48,350 views 12:32 IB Chemistry Topic 11.1 Uncertainties and errors - Duration: 20:45. Andrew Weng 669 views 20:45 Independent Uncertainty Analysis - Duration: 6:15. ME310Course 336 views 6:15 Gauss Quadrature Rule: Example - Duration: 8:56. numericalmethodsguy 93,711 vie