MM 322 – Metrology & Instrumentation

The University of the South Pacific

School of Engineering and Physics
MM322 - Metrology & Instrumentation
Lab 1: Linear Measurement

Lab Session Time: Tuesday 1 - 4 PM

Student Name: Ilisoni Bati, Ulamila R, Andrew Jnr
Student ID#: s11123046, s11137488, s11146790

AIM

To measure length and diameter of different specimen using Vernier Caliper and Micrometer. The measured
is used to determine the accuracy and percentage uncertainty of the instrument.

APPARATUS

 Vernier Caliper
 Micrometer
 3 different cylindrical specimens

INTRODUCTION

Every measurement is subject to some uncertainty. A measurement result is only complete if it is

accompanied by a statement of the uncertainty in the measurement. Measurement uncertainties can come
from the measuring instrument, from the item being measured, from the environment, from the operator, and
from other sources. Such uncertainties can be estimated using statistical analysis of a set of measurements,
and using other kinds of information about the measurement process. There are established rules for how to
calculate an overall estimate of uncertainty from these individual pieces of information. The use of good
practice – such as traceable calibration, careful calculation, good record keeping, and checking – can reduce
measurement uncertainties. When the uncertainty in a measurement is evaluated and stated, the fitness for
purpose of the measurement can be properly judged. Uncertainty as used here means the range of possible
values within which the true value of the measurement lies. You might think that well-made rulers, clocks
and thermometers should be trustworthy, and give the right answers. But for every measurement - even the
most careful - there is always a margin of doubt. In everyday speech, this might be expressed as ‘give or
take’ ... e.g. a stick might be two meters long ‘give or take a centimeter’. Since there is always a margin of
doubt about any measurement, we need to ask ‘How big is the margin?’ and ‘How bad is the doubt?’ Thus,
two numbers are really needed in order to quantify an uncertainty. One is the width of the margin, or
interval. The other is a confidence level, and states how sure we are that the ‘true value’ is within that
margin. In this experiment, students will measure the length and diameter of different specimen using a
Vernier Caliper and micrometer and carry out these tests repeatedly to see how reliable their readings are
and also try to observe some factors that causes these errors in measurement.

Lab Report Page 1

MM 322 – Metrology & Instrumentation

THEORY

Consider the following standard metric ruler.

The ruler is incremented in units of centimeters (cm). The smallest scale division is a tenth of a centimeter or
1 mm. Therefore, the uncertainty ∆x = smallest increment/2 = 1mmof a centimeter since the uncertainty is
stated to a tenth of a centimeter. In the example above, the length of the object would be stated as x = 2.77
cm ± 0.05 cm. /2 = 0.5mm = 0.05cm. Note that a measurement made with this ruler must be stated to a tenth.

Using the Vernier Calipers

The Vernier caliper is an instrument that allows you measure lengths much more accurate than the metric
ruler. The smallest increment in the Vernier caliper you will be using is (1/50) mm = 0.02mm = 0.002cm.
Thus, the uncertainty is ∆x = (1/2)0.002 cm = 0.001 cm.

The Vernier scale consists of a fixed metric scale and a sliding Vernier scale. The fixed scale is divided into
centimeters and millimeters, while the Vernier scale is divided so that 50 divisions on its cover the same
interval as 49 divisions on the main scale. Thus, the length of each scale Vernier division is 49/50 the length
of a main scale division. Close the jaws completely and note that the first line at the far left on the Vernier

Lab Report Page 2

MM 322 – Metrology & Instrumentation

scale (called the “zero” or “index” line) coincides with the zero line on the main scale. Carefully compare
and see that the first Vernier division is 0.02 mm short of the first main scale division, the second Vernier
division is 0.04 mm away from the second main scale division, and so on. If the jaws are slightly opened it is
easy to tell what fraction of the main scale division the Vernier index has moved by noting which Vernier
division best coincides with a main scale division. A measurement is made with a Vernier caliper by closing
the jaws on the object to be measured and then reading the position where the zero line on the Vernier falls
on the main scale. The measurement is incomplete until an additional fraction of a main scale division is
determined. This is obtained by noting which line on the Vernier scale (0,2,4,6,8) coincides best with a line
on the main scale.

As an example, let’s consider measuring the length of the aluminum block below.

Note that the zero line on the Vernier scale falls between the 4.4 cm and 4.5 cm mark on the main scale.
Thus, the first significant digits are 4.4 cm. The remaining two digits are obtained by noting which line on
the Vernier scale (0,2,4,6,8) coincides best with a line on the main scale. Looking closely at the picture
below indicates that the 46-line lines up the closest. Therefore, the reading is 4.446 cm. Or in standard form
4.446 cm ± 0.001 cm.

Using the Micrometer Caliper

The micrometer caliper has a linear scale engraved on its sleeve and a circular scale engraved on what is
properly called the thimble. The linear scale is divided into divisions of 1 mm and is 25 mm long. Half-
millimeter marks are provided below the linear scale. The circular scale has 50 divisions. One complete
revolution of the circular scale moves the thimble 0.5 mm along the linear scale so that the distance between
the jaws is also changed to 0.5 mm. Since the circular scale has 50 divisions, rotating it through one circular-

Lab Report Page 3

MM 322 – Metrology & Instrumentation

scale division, will cause the rod to move through a distance equal to 1/50 of 0.5 mm, or 0.01 mm. Thus, the
numbers on the circular scale represent hundredths of a millimeter. A micrometer caliper can be used to
measure lengths directly to 0.01 mm, and by estimating tenths of a circular scale division, it can be used to
estimate lengths to 0.001 mm. Measurements made with a micrometer caliper can be estimated to
thousandths of a millimeter. The total micrometer caliper reading is the sum of the readings on the main and
circular scales.

In the figure to the left, notice the main scale which is marked with a 0 and a 5. These indicate millimeters.
Below the main scale are marks at the half way points between mm marks. These l/2 mm marks are present
because one revolution of the thimble moves the thimble only 1/2 mm down the barrel.
Possible settings and readings of the micrometer caliper are shown here. In the first example, the sixth main
scale mark is visible just to the left of the circular scale. This means we have a reading somewhere between
6.0 and 6.5 mm. The line on the main scale points to the barrel about halfway between 19 and 20 divisions.
Therefore, the micrometer caliper reading is 6.0 mm + 0.19 mm + 0.005 mm = 6.195 mm = 0.006195
meters.

In the second example, the half-millimeter mark to the right of the sixth main scale mark is visible. So, the
reading is somewhere between 6.5 and 7.0 mm. The line on the main scale points to a point of the barrel just
slightly past the 41 mark. So, we can estimate the last place of the reading to be 0.002 mm. The reading is
then 6.5 mm + 0.41 mm + 0.002 mm = 6.912 mm = 0.0069 12 meters. This shows that we can estimate
micrometer readings to one thousandth of a millimeter.

RESULTS

Vernier Caliper-Internal Diameter

Sample Test Test Test Test Test Mean Standard %
1 2 3 4 5 Deviation Uncertainty
1.       PVC 21.75 21.67 21.64 21.68 21.7 21.69 0.04 0.02
Pipe
2.       Brass 24.22 24.1 24.08 24.11 24.07 24.12 0.06 0.03
cylinder
3.       16.82 16.9 16.87 16.86 16.84 16.86 0.03 0.01
Metallic pipe

Lab Report Page 4

MM 322 – Metrology & Instrumentation

Vernier Caliper-External Diameter

Sample Test 1 Test Test Test Test Mean Standard %
2 3 4 5 Deviation Uncertainty
1.       PVC 26.84 26.87 26.8 26.85 26.84 26.84 0.03 0.1
Pipe
2.       Brass 37.23 37.27 37.22 37.23 37.24 37.24 0.02 0.05
cylinder
3.       47.06 47.02 47 47.05 47.02 47.03 0.02 0.04
Metallic pipe

Vernier Caliper-Length
Sample Test Test Test Test Test Mean Standard %
1 2 3 4 5 Deviation Uncertainty
1.       PVC 35.5 35.42 35.33 35.38 35.38 35.40 0.06 0.2
Pipe
2.       Brass 20.41 20.42 20.43 20.41 20.44 20.42 0.01 0.04
cylinder
3.       13.97 13.98 13.97 13.99 13.97 13.98 0.01 0.07
Metallic pipe

Micrometer-Internal Diameter
Sample Test Test Test Test Test Mean Standard %
1 2 3 4 5 Deviation Uncertainty
1.       PVC 21.02 20.53 20.53 20.52 20.52 20.62 0.22 1
Pipe
2.       Brass 23.46 23.6 23.35 23.56 23.71 23.54 0.14 0.6
cylinder
3.       16.16 16.16 16.08 16.13 16.12 16.13 0.03 0.2
Metallic pipe

Micrometer-External Diameter
Sample Test Test Test Test Test Mean Standard %
1 2 3 4 5 Deviation Uncertainty
1.       PVC 26.2 26.21 26.24 26.22 26.22 26.22 0.01 0.04
Pipe
2.       Brass 37.2 37.2 37.21 37.22 37.25 37.22 0.02 0.05
cylinder
3.       47.5 47.4 47.5 47.25 47.28 47.39 0.12 0.3
Metallic pipe

Lab Report Page 5

MM 322 – Metrology & Instrumentation

Sample Calculation
Vernier caliper: Internal Diameter
Mean
 Sample: 21.75, 21.67, 21.64, 21.68, 21.70
 21.75+ 21.67+ 21.64+ 21.68+ 21.70= 108.44
 108.44/5 =21.69
 Mean=21.69

Standard deviation
 Sample: 21.75-21.69= 0.06, 21.67-21.69= -0.02, 21.64-21.69= -0.05, 21.68-21.69= -0.01, 21.70-
21.69= 0.01
 0.062 +−0.022+−0.052+−0.012+ 0.012=0.0067
 0.0067/5= 0.00134
 √ 0.00134=¿0.03

DISCUSSION

The standard deviation for the Digital Vernier calliper is far less compared to the manual micrometre. This
indicates that the test value for the digital Vernier calliper is much closer to the mean value; its uncertainty
falls in the range 0.03 and under. This indicates that the digital Vernier calliper is giving near accurate
results. The manual micrometre has standard deviation ranging from 0.22 to 0.01 and an uncertainty as great
as 0.1. Though these values are small, they make a huge difference when considered for application.
Possible reason, the manual micrometre due to errors such as parallax error, instrumental error, theoretical
errors and random errors. Thus, standard deviation simply shows that how close or far the values of the data
are from the mean value or simply the distribution of data it is near 0, this showed that the data obtained are
accurate and precise and from the results it was seen that for some measurements the data were distributed
close to each other thus the uncertainty or percentage error was not so much . Since the data collected were
multiples the best estimation for error was done from the standard deviation since there was a digital
instrument present.

CONCLUSION

At the end of this experiment, the accuracy and precision of measuring devices used were observed. The
main prospective was to learn how to use the instruments correctly and derive the uncertainty or the error of
the device. Therefore, it was noted that in comparison to many devices of same purpose and usage, the level
of accuracy and precision were different and that is was not only dependent on the device but the operator
also. Thus, the precision and accuracy of the operator in reading the measurements from the device was the
most important task to reduce and minimize errors and uncertainties in the results collected. Therefore, the
results had differed mainly due to this error [operator error] while other means of error caused during this
experiment were systematic, whereby the instruments sensitivity and resistance could not be adjusted.

REFERENCE

Lab Report Page 6

MM 322 – Metrology & Instrumentation

1. Stephanie Bell 1999, A beginner’s guide to uncertainty, Centre for Basic, Thermal and Length
Metrology National Physical Laboratory. Accessed date 16 August 2020, Online-
https://www.dit.ie/media/physics/documents/GPG11.pdf
2. Deanza.Edu, Measurements and Error Analysis, Deanza Faculty of Science. Accessed Date 16
August 2020, Online -
https://www.deanza.edu/faculty/lunaeduardo/documents/MeasurementsandErrorAnalysis.pdf

Lab Report Page 7