Engineering Physics Lab Report
1. Is a descriptive title given, author information provided and a date? (1)
Abstract (4/4)
Is the aim of the experiment stated clearly and concisely? Are the questions to be answered by the experiment clearly identified? Are the sources of discrepancy clearly stated? Is a quantifying comparison between theoretical expectations and the experimental results given? (4)
Theory (8/8)
Are the basic physical principles and relevant assumptions involved in the experiment explained? (2)
Are the physical principles applied correctly to the specific situation investigated in the experiment? (2)
Are all mathematical relationships relevant for the analysis of the experiment given, connected to relevant physical principles and variables and units correctly identified? (3)
Are all concepts properly referenced to external sources? (1)
Equipment/Apparatus (5/5)
Has all the equipment used in the experiment been listed with relevant make and model info? (2)
Is a figure of the experimental setup shown with all important features clearly labeled in the figure? (3)
Procedure (5/5)
Has the general procedure (in past tense) been explained with all major experimental steps given in a logical order? (1)
Are descriptions of each step in the procedure given in sufficient detail for the experiment to be replicated? Are assumptions made stated explicitly? Are values of experimental variables stated? (4)
Data and Analysis (7/7): This section can either be in the uncertainty or in the discussion section if necessary
Is the data presented in a clear fashion? Do all graphs/tables have explanatory titles? Are table columns/graph axes labeled with appropriate scales, units and titles? Are data points clearly differentiated from model fits? Are fitting model-fitting parameters clearly labeled? (1)
Is the description of each table and figure written in size 11 and according to the guidelines? (1)
Did the student use connecting sentences or paragraphs between tables or figures? (1)
Is the data adequate to answer the questions posed in the experiment? Are there enough data points to yield valid results? If data is discarded, are valid reasons cited? (1)
Are all appropriate values calculated? Is the process by which these values are calculated clearly explained with references to equations and data values from the Theory and Data sections given? (2)
Is the process by which results are calculated correct? (1)
Uncertainty (8/8)
Are types of uncertainty correctly identified? Are models of uncertainty applied appropriately? Are all relevant relationships for uncertainty calculations given and appropriate input values for calculating uncertainties given? (4)
Are all appropriate uncertainties calculated and propagated? Is the process by which these values are calculated clearly explained with references to equations and data values from the Theory and Data sections given? (4)
Discussion (8/8)
Are all results stated with appropriate units and significant figures? (2)
Have reasonable explanations for discrepancies between literature and experimental values been given? Have reasonable explanations for the magnitude of uncertainties been given? (3)
Have all important relationships revealed in the data discussed? Does the data support the conclusions made? Have systematic and random errors (if any) correctly described? (3)
Conclusions (4/4)
Does the conclusion refer back to the aim of the experiment? Have all relevant numerical and logical results been quoted with uncertainties? (3)
Are suggestions made to improve the values and uncertainties in experimentally determined quantities? (1)
General
Does the report follow the specified format? Are all sections of the report included? (2)
Is all information given in the report relevant? Are paragraphs and sections well connected? Are ideas explained clearly? (2)
Does the grammar and spelling in the report follow standard English conventions? (2)
