The tension in the suspenders transfers to the cables which run horizontally between the two far-flung anchorages, through which the tensional forces pass in to the ground and are dissipated. (Bagga 2014).
We get that the percent error for method 1 is 19.3% and the percent error for method 2 is 1.2%. This affirms that the method 2 is the more accurate method to measure the resonant frequency. This may be due to the fact that method 1 involves using estimations by eye, which allows for human error and inaccurate estimations. The difference between the experimental and theoretical values for the resonant frequency could also result from faulty equipment, which may not function as the manufacturer claims or be worn down by natural decay.
For improving results we cut four rectangular slots S1, S2, S3 and S4 in which two horizontal slots S1 and S2 are of same dimensions with length L1 and width W1 and the vertical slots S3 and S4 are of same dimensions with length L2 and width W2 as shown in Fig.3. With these four slots we are getting good return loss for the above resonant frequencies as shown in Fig.4 but the return loss and bandwidth at all resonant frequencies can be improved by using cylindrical slot.
However, there are some limitations which are always associated with every type of design, for example in this case though the Q-factor can be decreased accordingly by lowing the value of dielectric constant but if lowered drastically, it fails to capture enough amount of electromagnetic energy and to act as an efficient resonator.
and a compressive force on the other one. These axial forces will cause an opposite change in the stiffness of the resonators and this opposite change separates their resonance frequencies. These double-ended resonators also provide a differential output which has so many advantages like cancelling the output’s offset and effect of temperature variations on frequency.
complex. The results were combined with findings from 4A and 4B to determine the empirical formula
In the study called Meter fluctuation in Lully’s Recitativ, Remi Castonguay concludes about the three types with two additional subdivisions.
This experiment shall be repeated twice or more to enhance accuracy of the results obtained. Besides detecting systematic errors, this experiment would aid on the technique and understandings to the correct use of these equipments.
Purpose: The purpose of this Physics Lab is to investigate what factors determine the amount of flexion of the cantilever. Hence, the objective is to establish a relationship between the length of a cantilever, which may give some insight into the physics of cantilevers.
Mapped meshes are made according to requirements as it gives user control over size and shape and deformation of the mesh in all regions The surface stress on the microcantilever surface can be calculated from the observed microcantilever deflection using Stoney’s equation Where Δσs is the differential surface stresses on the surface of the microcantilever, is the Young’s modulus, is the Poisson’s ratio r and h are the radius of curvature and thickness of cantilever beam respectively.For a two-layer piezoresistive microcantilever, the relationship between the surface stress and the relative change in resistance ∆R/R for a piezoresistor is given by Where 1, 1 are the Young’s modulus and thickness of the polysilicon while 2, 2 are the young’s modulus and thickness of piezoresistive, whereas T is the distance from bottom to top of the microcantilever beam that contain the piezoresistive and is the gauge factor of piezoresistive sensor, although above equation applies when polysilicon and piezoresister both are different here . The surface stress associated with the deflection of micro cantilever is commonly calculated using Stoney’s formula, which is simply relates an induced substrate curvature to a surface stress. Piezoresistive microcantilever deflection process involves the embedded of a piezoresistive material such as doped polysilicon on the top surface of the microcantilever to measure the stress change, while the microcantilever beam deflects a stress