Numerical integration and errors

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the challenges of numerical integration of measured variables, specifically when integrating force with respect to displacement to calculate work. The user, PorridgeMan, identifies multiple sources of error, including instrument calibration, sampling frequency variations, quantization, and interpolation. The conversation highlights the need for a systematic approach to quantify these errors and suggests attaching error terms (##\varepsilon_i##) to input variables for analysis. A referenced paper provides general rules for error analysis in numerical integration.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of numerical integration techniques
  • Familiarity with error analysis in experimental measurements
  • Knowledge of interpolation methods for time-series data
  • Experience with data acquisition systems and their limitations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study error propagation in numerical integration methods
  • Learn about different interpolation techniques, such as linear and spline interpolation
  • Research instrument calibration methods for accurate force and displacement measurements
  • Explore the impact of sampling frequency on data integrity and analysis
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, engineers, and data analysts involved in experimental physics or engineering who are working with numerical integration and need to understand and mitigate errors in their measurements.

PorridgeMan
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I was wondering if anyone can point me to a general treatment of errors when doing numerical integration of measured variables?

My problem is that I am integrating force with respect to displacement (of a piston) in an attempt to calculate work...and getting some impossible numbers. The force and displacement values are sampled from analogue transducers in a laboratory set-up. The data acquisition system samples each signal sequentially and creates trends with their own unique time bases. The frequency of sampling varies somewhat and I have no control over this. Anyway, to do the integration I then need to interpolate the acquired values at common points in time (e.g. every 0.1 s). I therefore have multiple sources of error - the initial measurement (instrument calibration), the sampling, the quantisation and finally the interpolation. I'm ignoring rounding and truncation in software for the time being.

I suspect these errors are adding up with adverse consequences, but I can't figure out how to derive an expression incorporating all the variables to assess their impact. This must be a common problem, but my old uni textbooks and Google haven't been much help. Any advice is much appreciated,

PorridgeMan.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Here is a short paper with some general rules for the error analysis of numerical integration:
http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~amos/412/lecture-notes/lecture19.pdf

PorridgeMan said:
I suspect these errors are adding up with adverse consequences, but I can't figure out how to derive an expression incorporating all the variables to assess their impact.
Maybe you could attach ##\varepsilon_i## to your input variables and see whether they add up, or better, are divided by at some place of the algorithm you use.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
12K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K