Combining Errors: Solving Pythagorean Distance Error

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bunting
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Errors
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around combining errors in the context of calculating the Pythagorean distance, specifically focusing on the formula for distance in three-dimensional space. Participants are exploring how to correctly combine the errors associated with the individual coordinates x, y, and z to find the overall error in the distance calculation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to combine errors using various mathematical expressions and formulas, questioning whether their approach is correct. Some participants suggest using derivatives and the chain rule to express the error in terms of the individual component errors. Others raise questions about the applicability of these methods to different types of error combinations.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering different methods for error calculation and discussing the validity of these approaches. There is a recognition of the need for clarification on how to apply these methods to various scenarios, but no explicit consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of understanding the assumptions behind the error calculations, particularly regarding the nature of the errors in the measurements being combined.

Bunting
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
I didn't really know on the forum to put this, it isn't really homework or coursework, but it is a very small part of a project I am doing for uni, so essentially it could be worth marks so here it is, anyway...

Homework Statement


Im rubbish at combining errors and was wondering if someone could just guide me on this sepcific issues... I am trying to get the error in a pythagorean distance, i.e the error in...

Distance =(x2 + y2 + z2)1/2

Now I have all the errors of x, y and z respectively. My problem is that I don't think I am combining the error corrrectly, see section3...

The Attempt at a Solution


So what I am doing is to say...

1. x*x, y*y and z*z are all combinations of errors, for all of which I have been using...

z = axy

where a=1, x=x, y=x, such that...

E(x2) = 2x3(E(x))2

which is the same for the error in y2, and the same for the error in z2.

2. next I say, find the error in x*x + y*y + z*z, for which I use...

z = ax + by + cz where a=b=c=1

where the error is...

(E(z))2 = a2(E(x))2 + b2(E(y))2 + c2(E(z))2

I work all this through and get a value for the error in x*x + y*y + z*z, then...

3. error in distance = (x*x + y*y + z*z)1/2, for which I use...

z = axb where a=1, b=0.5

this uses the formula E(z)/z = bE(x)/x

So I rearrange all this, calculate the individual errors, but I get a number that is just plain wrong.

So, in summery of how I do it...
1 - Work out the error in
----a = x*x
----b = y*y
----c = z*z

2 - work out the error in...
----d = a + b + c

3 - work out the error in...
----e = d1/2

Is this a correct way of going about it ?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]s=\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}[/tex]

Use derivatives and the chain rule:

[tex]ds=\frac{\partial s}{\partial x}dx+\frac{\partial s}{\partial y}dy+\frac{\partial s}{\partial z}dz[/tex]

Now evaluate the partials

[tex]ds=\frac{x}{s}dx+\frac{y}{s}dy+\frac{z}{s}dz[/tex]

This gives the error ds in terms of the individual component errors.
 
marcusl said:
[tex]s=\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}[/tex]

Use derivatives and the chain rule:

[tex]ds=\frac{\partial s}{\partial x}dx+\frac{\partial s}{\partial y}dy+\frac{\partial s}{\partial z}dz[/tex]

Now evaluate the partials

[tex]ds=\frac{x}{s}dx+\frac{y}{s}dy+\frac{z}{s}dz[/tex]

This gives the error ds in terms of the individual component errors.

I think you need to put some absolute value signs around those partials :wink:
 
True enough :redface: Thanks.
 
Oops, sorry about the lack of thanks here! I read it ages ago, use dit then must have forgotten! :S

Thank you for the help :)
 
Out of interest can that be used for any means of combinational error ? I.e.

f = (d2 - d1) / (d2 + d1)

Can I just take derivatives and then use the chain rule, or because d2 and d1 have the same error it can be done differantly ?
 
You can use the derivative to approximate errors. For example if f(x)= x2 and x can be "[itex]x_0\pm \delta[/itex]", then x could be as large as [itex]x_0+ \delta[/itex] so f(x) could be as large as [itex](x_0+ \delta)^2= x_0^2+ 2x_0\delta+ \delta^2[/itex] which is, to "first order", that is, ignoring the [itex]\delta^2[/itex], [/itex]f(x_0)+ 2x_0\delta[/itex]. Or x could be as [itex]x_0- \delta)^2= x_0^2- 2x_0\delta+ \delta^2[/itex]. Again, ignoring the [itex]\delta^2[/itex] term, that is [itex]f(x_0)- 2x_0\delta[/itex] so we can write, approximately, [itex]f(x_0)\pm 2x_0\delta= f(x_0)\pm f'(x_0)\delta[/itex]

There is an engineer's "rule of thumb" that say if you add measurements, you add the errors and if you multiply measurements, you add the "relative errors".

That is because if h(x)= f(x)+ g(x), h'(x)= f'(x)+ g'(x) while if h(x)= f(x)g(x), h'(x)= f'(x)g(x)+ f(x)g'(x) and dividing both sides by h= fg, h'/h= f'/f+ g'/g. "h'/h" is the "relative error".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
44
Views
6K