Need very fast answer please. very easy if you know how to read a vernier scale.

  • Thread starter Thread starter pyroknife
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Scale
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on reading a vernier scale to determine if a measurement aligns at .44mm or .46mm. Participants express difficulty in interpreting the drawing provided, with one suggesting the measurement may be between the two values but closer to .46mm. There is also a mention that the drawing may not accurately represent the vernier scale, which is crucial for finding the correct alignment. Clarification is sought on the divisions of the scales, as one has 10 divisions while the other has 9. Accurate reading of the vernier scale is emphasized as essential for resolving the measurement issue.
pyroknife
Messages
611
Reaction score
4
i know how to read these scales, but this problem was really hard to see for me. can you guys see if it lines up at .44mm or .46 mm? I attached drawing
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    14.7 KB · Views: 420
Physics news on Phys.org
My opinion is that it is somewhere in between, but closer to .46
 
pyroknife said:
i know how to read these scales, but this problem was really hard to see for me. can you guys see if it lines up at .44mm or .46 mm? I attached drawing

I suspect neither - but this doesn't look the vernier part of the scale. That is where you find which one is lining up
On the vernier part One scale has 10 divisions, the other has 9
 
Last edited:

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

How Does a Vernier Caliper Work?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Normal force reading on a scale -- How and why?
Replies
9
Views
4K
Spacetime Physics (2nd ed.) problem 2-2: Bathroom scale and a Trampoline
Replies
5
Views
1K
Two spring scales holding a hanging mass, what're the readings on both scales?
Replies
3
Views
16K
Determining mass of a weight on a three spring scale setup
Replies
14
Views
4K
Introductory Physics: Connection of Resistors ...
Replies
15
Views
834
The elevator, the scale, and the wrong answer: Solving the Puzzle
Replies
7
Views
9K
Why Does the Scale Read Higher at the Top of a Rollercoaster Loop?
Replies
1
Views
4K
How to calc the period of this mass spring system?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Ball on a string thrown around a spool
Replies
3
Views
833

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top