How to combine instrument uncertainty with deviation

AI Thread Summary
When reporting the average thickness of the film measured with a digimatic indicator, the error calculation should consider the instrument's specifications. The accuracy of the tool is 3 um, but the resolution is 1 um, suggesting that the uncertainty for each reading should be half of the resolution, approximately 0.5 um. Additionally, the unevenness of the film necessitates taking multiple measurements, which can help in assessing the overall variability. It's important to clarify how to handle the uncertainty from both the instrument and the measurement process. Properly combining these factors will yield a more accurate representation of the average thickness and its associated error.
Celder
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Here's my problem: I have been using a digimatic indicator tool to measure the thickness of a somewhat uneven film. The digimatic indicator has a digital screen that shows up to 1 um, but according to specifications the accuracy is only 3 um. To account for the uneveness I have taken 10 measurements at different points of the film.

My question is: When I report the average thickness, how should I calculate the error?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF;
Check the machine spec to see what they mean by "accuracy".
Rule of thumb is to take the uncertainty on each individual reading to be half the instrument resolution.
It is not unusual for you to have to use equipment which has a higher resolution than the uncertainty in the measurement - i.e. you cannot use a stopwatch to 1/100s accuracy but it displays to that resolution.
What do you normally do with the stopwatch measurements?
 

Thread 'Query on Isentropic relationships (such as PV^gamma = constant)'

Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
View full post »

Thread 'Dry sump pump issue'

I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
View full post »

Similar threads

Standard deviation vs measurement uncertainty
Replies
3
Views
3K
I Uncertainties accumulate when measuring longer lengths?
Replies
7
Views
1K
I Reported uncertainties for time and distance in physics experiment
Replies
1
Views
1K
I What is the correct definition of measurement uncertainty?
Replies
21
Views
3K
Is my textbook wrong about absolute uncertainties?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Instrument Error or Standard Deviation
Replies
2
Views
3K
A Linear combination of data with uncertainty
Replies
5
Views
2K
I Error bars in Excel (standard deviation, standard error, percentage)
Replies
4
Views
3K
I Significant figures and uncertainty in measurements
Replies
13
Views
4K
Error propagation leads to different uncertainties, which do I choose?
Replies
15
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top