• Support PF! Buy your school textbooks, materials and every day products Here!

Significant figures

  • Thread starter aruwin
  • Start date
  • #1
87
0
Can you give me the answer to the right significant number please???
I got R_L(max) = 0.0022 [ohm] and R_L(min) = 0.3 [ohm] but I have a feeling that they're not correct. Someone please check.

R_L(max) = |(5 - 2.4)/(3*(-400) + 40))|

R_L(min) = (5 - 0.4)/(16 - (-1.6))
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
33,818
9,532
Assuming 5 and 16 are fixed constants without uncertainty, you could quote R_L(min) as 0.26, as 5-0.4=4.6 and 16+1.6 = 17.6.

R_L(max) looks fine.
 
  • #3
87
0
Assuming 5 and 16 are fixed constants without uncertainty, you could quote R_L(min) as 0.26, as 5-0.4=4.6 and 16+1.6 = 17.6.

R_L(max) looks fine.
Actually this is the actual question. It's about finding the external load resistance of an open collector of standard TTL.

Here's the picture so you can everything clearly. So can you check if I am doing it right?
 

Attachments

  • #4
33,818
9,532
Actually this is the actual question.
You cannot answer this based on your equations.

Significant figures can be a handy tool to estimate the uncertainty of a result. If you need a proper analysis, use actual uncertainties and not significant figures.
 
  • #5
87
0
You cannot answer this based on your equations.

Significant figures can be a handy tool to estimate the uncertainty of a result. If you need a proper analysis, use actual uncertainties and not significant figures.
But that's the formula given to find the max/min resistance. So how am I supposed to calculate them?
 
  • #6
33,818
9,532
As you did, with the improvement given in post 2 if you know that 5 and 16 are exact. If you do not know that, 0.3 is fine as result.
 
  • #7
87
0
As you did, with the improvement given in post 2 if you know that 5 and 16 are exact. If you do not know that, 0.3 is fine as result.
Did I get the significant figure right?


I know that when we take account of the significant figures, 5-2.4 would be 3 because there is no decimal value after five so it becomes unknown and we can't just make it 0 and minus 4. But I am not sure about this calculation though, because I don't know if I have to calculate everything normally first and then think about the s.g. when I get the final answer OR taking in account of the s.g. for every step of the calculation. I hope I am clear with my doubts here.
 
  • #8
33,818
9,532
But I am not sure about this calculation though, because I don't know if I have to calculate everything normally first and then think about the s.g. when I get the final answer OR taking in account of the s.g. for every step of the calculation.
The second method is better, the first can lead to problems in some types of calculations.
 
  • #9
87
0
The second method is better, the first can lead to problems in some types of calculations.
So I would have to calculate 5-2.4 as 3??Then that means my final answer would only have 1 significant figure. So do I have to do that?
 
  • #10
33,818
9,532
If that value 5 is known to one significant figure only, yes.
 
  • #11
87
0
If that value 5 is known to one significant figure only, yes.
As you can see in the formula, that value of 5 is the source voltage. 5 is obviously one significant figure, right?
 
  • #12
33,818
9,532
Probably, and if you don't know anything else about it, just assume that it is 5 with an uncertainty of ~1.
 
  • #13
87
0
Probably, and if you don't know anything else about it, just assume that it is 5 with an uncertainty of ~1.
So that would mean the significant figure is 1. Correct?
 
  • #14
33,818
9,532
As I said before, yes.
 

Related Threads for: Significant figures

  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
474
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
462
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
653
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
Top