The calculated wavelength was then multiplied by the respected frequency to finally achieve our goal, the speed of sound. These include utilizing the correction factor, considering estimate of error, and acquiring multiple measurements for the average. This significantly reduced the random error, and led to a more precise and agreeable outcome. By measuring the diameter of tube, the correction factor was calculated. This value is quite significant when it comes to measuring the wavelength, due to the erection factor accounts for the oscillation of the air from the tube.

Meaning the actual length (corrected length) of the tube is the sum of correction factor and the measured length. As stated already, the wavelength is obtained by multiplying the length of the tube by four. Without the correction factor, the wavelength would had been off by 4. CM. In addition, the wavelength is used to calculate the speed of sound, which would of also affected this value. The measured length was used to calculate the corrected length, and to eliminate the systematic error. For this part of data, collecting few measurements of the same resonance and taking the average of it gave the most precise value.

Since sound is such subjective property, it wouldn’t make much sense to determine the value with one measurement. Also for an added precision, estimated of error was also put in account. This was used to obtain the Max experimental speed, which was compared to the measured speed, leading to the estimate of error for measured speed. The measured speed then was used to obtain the percent difference. From the theoretical speed formula at temperature of ICC, and the percent difference ormolu, the percent difference was calculated to roughly 2%.

This states that all the measurement and calculation of this experiment had accuracy of 98% of its real value. To further improve this experiment some factors needs a closer attention, such as the location of the experiment. The temperature of the classroom, due to the air conditioning system, was inconsistent and varied in parts of the room. Also instead of experimenting at one temperature, taking multiple experiments in different temperature may lead to a better outcome. Another measurement needed a variety of testing was the frequency.

As more variety of frequency is measured, the more random error is eliminated. Lastly, instead of one tube, use multiple tubes at different diameter and execute the experiment on each one of them. Taking data from each diameter and finding the average of them would result in a data with much reduced random and systematic error, thus lowering the percent difference. Conclusion: The result of the experiment agreed with the theoretical value. The measured value was 351 m/s В±mm/s and the theoretical value was mom/s В±1 m/s.