Finding the Space Between Lead Shots - Revision history

Oborn at 06:26, 5 February 2009

2009-02-05T06:26:01Z

2008-07-28T11:16:39Z

Conclusion

2008-07-28T11:14:55Z

Plan 2

2008-07-28T11:12:59Z

Plan 2

2008-07-16T17:32:51Z

Plan 1

2008-07-16T17:19:07Z

Experiment

2008-07-16T17:12:20Z

Plan 2

2008-07-16T17:12:00Z

Plan 2

2008-07-16T17:09:02Z

Plan 2

2008-07-16T17:08:42Z

Experiment

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Plan 1==
 By Mass
@@ Line 95: / Line 98: @@
 Experiment  also shows that shaking will increase the packing ratio significantly.

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:16, 28 July 2008
Line 93:		Line 93:

	We believe the plan 2 is more precise. The reason is in the plan 1 the scales we had are not precise and there are error propagation when use mass to calculate volume. However, in plan 2 we directly measured the volume.		We believe the plan 2 is more precise. The reason is in the plan 1 the scales we had are not precise and there are error propagation when use mass to calculate volume. However, in plan 2 we directly measured the volume.
		+
		+	Experiment also shows that shaking will increase the packing ratio significantly.

@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 |V<sub>H2O</sub> = V<sub>sp</sub> (<math>cm^3</math>)
 |V<sub>tot</sub> (<math>cm^3</math>)
 |-
-|1 ||without shaking ||2600 || 6500
+|1 ||without shaking ||2600 || 6500 ||60%
 |-
-|2 ||without shaking ||840 ||2000
+|2 ||without shaking ||840 ||2000 ||58%
 |-
-|2 ||with a lot of shaking ||210 ||510
+|2 ||with a lot of shaking ||210 ||510 ||64.7%
 |-
 |}
@@ Line 87: / Line 88: @@
 Calculations
-Ration = 1 -  V<sub>sp</sub>/V<sub>tot</sub>
+Ratio = 1 -  V<sub>sp</sub>/V<sub>tot</sub>
 == Conclusion==
 We believe the plan 2 is more precise. The reason is in the plan 1 the scales we had are not precise and there are error propagation when use mass to calculate volume. However, in plan 2 we directly measured the volume.

@@ Line 71: / Line 71: @@
 {| border="1" cellpadding="20" cellspacing="0"
 |-
-|Mesurements
+|Measurements
 |V<sub>H2O</sub> = V<sub>sp</sub> (<math>cm^3</math>)
 |V<sub>tot</sub> (<math>cm^3</math>)
 |-
-|1 ||2600 || 6500
+|1 ||without shaking ||2600 || 6500
 |-
-|2  ||840 ||2000
+|2 ||without shaking ||840 ||2000
 |-
 |}

@@ Line 65: / Line 65: @@
 V<sub>Pb</sub> = (m<sub>4</sub> - m<sub>1</sub>)/ρ<sub>H2O</sub>=5896.8 <math>cm^3</math>
-Ratio = V<sub>Pb</sub>/V<sub>Pb</sub> =67%
+Ratio = V<sub>Pb</sub>/V<sub>tot</sub> =67%
 === Plan 2===

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:19, 16 July 2008
Line 92:		Line 92:
	So, on average		So, on average
	R = 59%		R = 59%
		+
		+	== Conclusion==
		+
		+	We believe the plan 2 is more precise. The reason is in the plan 1 the scales we had are not precise and there are error propagation when use mass to calculate volume. However, in plan 2 we directly measured the volume.

@@ Line 88: / Line 88: @@
 R<sub>1</sub>=60%
-R<sub>1</sub>=58%
+R<sub>2</sub>=58%
 So, on average
                                                      R = 59%

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:12, 16 July 2008
Line 80:		Line 80:
	\|-		\|-
	\|}		\|}
		+
		+
		+	Calculations
		+
		+	Ration = 1 - V<sub>sp</sub>/V<sub>tot</sub>
		+
		+	R<sub>1</sub>=60%
		+
		+	R<sub>1</sub>=58%
		+
		+	So, on average
		+	R = 59%

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:08, 16 July 2008
Line 68:		Line 68:

	=== Plan 2===		=== Plan 2===
		+
		+	{\| border="1" cellpadding="20" cellspacing="0"
		+	\|-
		+	\|Mesurements
		+	\|V<sub>H2O</sub> = V<sub>sp</sub> <math>cm^3</math>
		+	\|V<sub>tot</sub> <math>cm^3</math>
		+	\|-
		+	\|1 \|\|2600 \|\| 6500
		+	\|-
		+	\|2 \|\|840 \|\|2000
		+	\|-
		+	\|}