Determine ruling from grating constant

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alexandra7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant Grating
AI Thread Summary
To determine the ruling (number of lines per meter) from the grating constant "d," the formula N = 1/d is used. Given a grating constant of 1.6555x10^-6 m, the calculation yields approximately 604,230 grooves per meter. This result is consistent with the understanding that a smaller grating constant leads to a larger number of lines per meter. The discussion emphasizes the importance of grasping how these numbers relate to each other in practical terms. Overall, the calculations appear correct, and the user is encouraged to familiarize themselves with the behavior of such values.
Alexandra7
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If "d" is the grating constant, determine the ruling (number of lines/grooves per meter) "D"

Homework Equations


I have spent hours researching sites that are far too complicated for my understanding of physics. As a result the only relevant equation I could remotely relate to this problem is as follows:

N= 1/d

The Attempt at a Solution



N= 1/1.6555x10^-6m
= a really big number! such as 604,230 grooves/m or lines/mIt just doesn't make sense and I'm getting upset!
Please, pretty please with a cherry on top, is anyone able to help me? Physics is by far my worst subject but I'm trying!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Alexandra7 said:

Homework Statement


If "d" is the grating constant, determine the ruling (number of lines/grooves per meter) "D"

Homework Equations


I have spent hours researching sites that are far too complicated for my understanding of physics. As a result the only relevant equation I could remotely relate to this problem is as follows:

N= 1/d

The Attempt at a Solution



N= 1/1.6555x10^-6m
= a really big number! such as 604,230 grooves/m or lines/mIt just doesn't make sense and I'm getting upset!
Please, pretty please with a cherry on top, is anyone able to help me? Physics is by far my worst subject but I'm trying!
Seems like it might be OK to me. 604,000 grooves/m is 6040 grooves in a centimeter. You didn't give the grating constant in your problem statement, but assuming that number is correct and your formula is correct, I don't see a problem. Do you have the answer available?
 
  • Like
Likes Alexandra7
Mark44 said:
Seems like it might be OK to me. 604,000 grooves/m is 6040 grooves in a centimeter. You didn't give the grating constant in your problem statement, but assuming that number is correct and your formula is correct, I don't see a problem. Do you have the answer available?

First of all, thank you for your contribution.

Unfortunately my textbook does not include a solutions manual so I can only try, then hope for the best. My professor said we would have a question similar to this one on a test which is why I'm freaking out.

The grating constant is 1.6555x10^-6m
 
Alexandra7 said:
First of all, thank you for your contribution.

Unfortunately my textbook does not include a solutions manual so I can only try, then hope for the best. My professor said we would have a question similar to this one on a test which is why I'm freaking out.

The grating constant is 1.6555x10^-6m
If the grating constant is the gap between consecutive lines then the number of lines per unit distance is clearly just the inverse of this. Your answer must be right.
 
It just doesn't make sense and I'm getting upset!
... you are going to have to get used to how numbers behave.
Try checking your reasoning with something you are more used to:

If d=1mm, then N=1000 lines/meter right?
The short lines on a meter-rule are 1mm apart: how many of them are there?

For your example, d ~ 1000th of a millimeter - so how many lines are there in 1mm?
... how many of those groups are in 1m?
... so how many overall?

You actual d is slightly bigger than that so you'd get slightly fewer lines per meter - is your number consistent?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top