Random Error Examples
Contents |
of the measurement device. Random errors usually result from the experimenter's inability to take the same measurement in exactly
Random Error Examples Physics
the same way to get exact the same number. Systematic how to reduce random error errors, by contrast, are reproducible inaccuracies that are consistently in the same direction. Systematic errors are
Random Error Calculation
often due to a problem which persists throughout the entire experiment. Note that systematic and random errors refer to problems associated with making measurements. Mistakes made how to reduce systematic error in the calculations or in reading the instrument are not considered in error analysis. It is assumed that the experimenters are careful and competent! How to minimize experimental error: some examples Type of Error Example How to minimize it Random errors You measure the mass of a ring three times using the same systematic error calculation balance and get slightly different values: 17.46 g, 17.42 g, 17.44 g Take more data. Random errors can be evaluated through statistical analysis and can be reduced by averaging over a large number of observations. Systematic errors The cloth tape measure that you use to measure the length of an object had been stretched out from years of use. (As a result, all of your length measurements were too small.)The electronic scale you use reads 0.05 g too high for all your mass measurements (because it is improperly tared throughout your experiment). Systematic errors are difficult to detect and cannot be analyzed statistically, because all of the data is off in the same direction (either to high or too low). Spotting and correcting for systematic error takes a lot of care. How would you compensate for the incorrect results of using the stretched out tape measure? How would you correct the measurements from improperly tared scale?
of causes of random errors are: electronic noise in the circuit of an electrical instrument, irregular changes in the heat loss rate from a solar collector due to
Personal Error
changes in the wind. Random errors often have a Gaussian normal distribution instrumental error (see Fig. 2). In such cases statistical methods may be used to analyze the data. The mean m
Zero Error
of a number of measurements of the same quantity is the best estimate of that quantity, and the standard deviation s of the measurements shows the accuracy of the estimate. https://www2.southeastern.edu/Academics/Faculty/rallain/plab193/labinfo/Error_Analysis/05_Random_vs_Systematic.html The standard error of the estimate m is s/sqrt(n), where n is the number of measurements. Fig. 2. The Gaussian normal distribution. m = mean of measurements. s = standard deviation of measurements. 68% of the measurements lie in the interval m - s < x < m + s; 95% lie within m - 2s < x < m + http://www.physics.umd.edu/courses/Phys276/Hill/Information/Notes/ErrorAnalysis.html 2s; and 99.7% lie within m - 3s < x < m + 3s. The precision of a measurement is how close a number of measurements of the same quantity agree with each other. The precision is limited by the random errors. It may usually be determined by repeating the measurements. Systematic Errors Systematic errors in experimental observations usually come from the measuring instruments. They may occur because: there is something wrong with the instrument or its data handling system, or because the instrument is wrongly used by the experimenter. Two types of systematic error can occur with instruments having a linear response: Offset or zero setting error in which the instrument does not read zero when the quantity to be measured is zero. Multiplier or scale factor error in which the instrument consistently reads changes in the quantity to be measured greater or less than the actual changes. These errors are shown in Fig. 1. Systematic errors also occur with non-linear instruments when the calibration of the instrument is not known correctly. Fig. 1. Systematic errors in a
of this type result in measured values that are consistently too high or consistently too low. Systematic errors may be http://www.physics.nmsu.edu/research/lab110g/html/ERRORS.html of four kinds: 1. Instrumental. For example, a poorly calibrated instrument http://physics.appstate.edu/undergraduate-programs/laboratory/resources/error-analysis such as a thermometer that reads 102 oC when immersed in boiling water and 2 oC when immersed in ice water at atmospheric pressure. Such a thermometer would result in measured values that are consistently too high. 2. Observational. For example, parallax random error in reading a meter scale. 3. Environmental. For example, an electrical power ìbrown outî that causes measured currents to be consistently too low. 4. Theoretical. Due to simplification of the model system or approximations in the equations describing it. For example, if your theory says that the temperature of the surrounding will random error examples not affect the readings taken when it actually does, then this factor will introduce a source of error. Random Errors Random errors are positive and negative fluctuations that cause about one-half of the measurements to be too high and one-half to be too low. Sources of random errors cannot always be identified. Possible sources of random errors are as follows: 1. Observational. For example, errors in judgment of an observer when reading the scale of a measuring device to the smallest division. 2. Environmental. For example, unpredictable fluctuations in line voltage, temperature, or mechanical vibrations of equipment. Random errors, unlike systematic errors, can often be quantified by statistical analysis, therefore, the effects of random errors on the quantity or physical law under investigation can often be determined. Example to distinguish between systematic and random errors is suppose that you use a stop watch to measure the time required for ten oscillations of a pendulum. One source
or experimental values. This calculation will help you to evaluate the relevance of your results. It is helpful to know by what percent your experimental values differ from your lab partners' values, or to some established value. In most cases, a percent error or difference of less than 10% will be acceptable. If your comparison shows a difference of more than 10%, there is a great likelihood that some mistake has occurred, and you should look back over your lab to find the source of the error. These calculations are also very integral to your analysis analysis and discussion. A high percent error must be accounted for in your analysis of error, and may also indicate that the purpose of the lab has not been accomplished. Percent error: Percent error is used when you are comparing your result to a known or accepted value. It is the absolute value of the difference of the values divided by the accepted value, and written as a percentage. Percent difference: Percent difference is used when you are comparing your result to another experimental result. It is the absolute value of the difference of the values divided by their average, and written as a percentage. A measurement of a physical quantity is always an approximation. The uncertainty in a measurement arises, in general, from three types of errors. Systematic errors: These are errors which affect all measurements alike, and which can be traced to an imperfectly made instrument or to the personal technique and bias of the observer. These are reproducible inaccuracies that are consistently in the same direction. Systematic errors cannot be detected or reduced by increasing the number of observations, and can be reduced by applying a correction or correction factor to compensate for the effect. Random errors: These are errors for which the causes are unknown or indeterminate, but are usually small and follow the laws of chance. Random errors can be reduced by averaging over a large number of observations. The following are some examples of systematic and random errors to consider when writing your error analysis. Incomplete definition (may be systematic or random) - One reason that it is impossible to make exact measurements is that the measurement is not always clearly defined. For example, if two different people measure the length of the same rope, they would probably get different results because each person may stretch the rope with a diffe