Natural Science Guru

Rough Draft of the Final Lab Report

You are required to develop a rough draft for your Final Lab Report, which covers all three experiments from the Week Two Lab assignment “Lab 2: Water Quality and Contamination.” This rough draft must also be reviewed using the Grammarly tool from the Writing Center to help you identify and correct any mistakes to your rough draft. Be sure to submit the Grammarly report and the corrected rough draft to the Week Three Assignment box.

Complete the following steps to submit both reports:

  1. Carefully read the instructions for your Final Lab Report assignment located within Week Five.
  2. Download the Rough Draft of the Final Lab Report Template and utilize this form to ensure correct  formatting and inclusion of all required material.
  3. Use at least four scholarly sources and your lab manual to support your points.
  4. The rough draft must be three to five pages in length (excluding title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style. For information regarding APA samples and tutorials, visit the Ashford Writing Center.
  5. Use the Grammarly tool to review your paper before submitting it for grading. Grammarly is an online tool offered by Ashford University to help you quickly identify errors and learn from your mistakes in order to create professionally written work.
    • Review the Grammarly tutorial to learn how to set up and use Grammarly.
    • Review the issues identified by Grammarly and make corrections to your work before submitting it to Waypoint for grading on Day 7.
    • Save the Grammarly report as a PDF file and submit it along with your assignment. This means that you will submit two documents to Waypoint: the Grammarly report and your corrected rough draft.

Note: Please do not use www.grammarly.com to sign up as you will get limited feedback. Ashford University pays for additional fabulous Grammarly services so you don’t have to. If you encounter any problems or technical issues, please contact support@grammarly.com.

The Rough Draft of the Final Lab Report must contain the following seven sections in this order:

  1. Title Page – This page must include the title of your report, your name, course name, instructor, and date submitted.
  2. Introduction – This section should discuss why the experiment was conducted. At a minimum, it should contain three paragraphs. One paragraph must cover background information of similar studies that have already been done in the area. This is accomplished by citing existing literature from similar experiments and explaining their results. A second paragraph should provide an objective or a reason why the experiment is being done. Why do we want to know the answer to the question we are asking? A third paragraph should provide a hypothesis for each of the three experiments conducted.
  3. Materials and Methods – This section should provide a detailed description of the materials used in your experiment and how they were used. A step-by-step rundown of your experiment is necessary; however, it should be done in paragraph form, not in a list format. The description should be exact enough to allow for someone reading the report to replicate the experiment, but it should be in your own words and not simply copied and pasted from the lab manual.
  4. Results – This section should include the data and observations from the experiment. All tables and graphs should be present in this section. Additionally, there should be at least one paragraph explaining the data in paragraph form. There should be no personal opinions or discussion beyond the results of your experiments located within this section.
  5. Discussion – This section should interpret or explain the meaning of your data and provide conclusions. At least three paragraphs should be outlined here. First, a paragraph should be present that addresses whether the hypotheses were confirmed or denied and how you know this. Second, you are to discuss the meaning of your findings in this area utilizing scholarly sources to put the paper into context. For example, how do your results compare with the findings of similar studies? Also, you should discuss any future questions arising from your results and how you might test them. Finally, you should discuss if there are any outside factors (i.e., temperature, contaminants, time of day) that affected your results. If so, how could you control for these in the future?
  6. Conclusions – This section should provide a brief summary of your work.
  7. References – Provide a list of at least four scholarly sources and your lab manual that will be used in the Final Lab Report. Format your references according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center

    image3.jpg

    Lab 2 – Water Quality and Contamination

    Experiment 1: Effects of Groundwater Contamination

    Table 1: Water Observations (Smell, Color, Etc.)
    Beaker Observations
    1 Clear water without any kind of smells and particles.
    2 I notice a slight change in color but I could smell vegetable oil. After stirring the oil. It settled on top of the water surface and there were some bubbles.
    3 Vinegar mixed in water easily. Didn’t notice any change in color, but there was a strong smell of vinegar.
    4 Laundry detergent was mixed well in the water. A slight change in color but there was a strong smell of detergent. There were also small bubbles on top of the water surface.
    5 The water color changed from clear to brown. There were dirt particles at the bottom of the beaker. And there was also a light odor in the water.
    6 Color changed from foggy to brown, there were also dirt particles at the bottom. Almost 90% of oil was filtered through the soil lined funnel.
    7 The water color was the lightest in beaker 7 out of the last 2 beakers. There were dirt particles at the bottom. The smell of vinegar was reduced in comparison to before filtration through soil.
    8 The water color in beaker 8 was the darkest of all beakers. There were dirt particles at the bottom. The laundry detergent smell was still apparent.

    POST LAB QUESTIONS

    1. Develop hypotheses on the ability of oil, vinegar, and laundry detergent to contaminate groundwater.

    a. Oil hypothesis = If I put a mixture of potting soil and oil, then it will make ground water contaminated.

    b. Vinegar hypothesis = If I put a mixture of potting soil and vinegar together, then it will make ground water contaminated.

    c. Laundry detergent hypothesis = If I put a mixture of potting soil and laundry detergent, then it will make ground water contaminated.

    2. Based on the results of your experiment, would you reject or accept each hypothesis that you produced in question 1? Explain how you determined this.

    a. Oil hypothesis accept/reject = Based on the experiment I will accept the hypothesis. The experiment proved that if the oil is not disposed of properly it will contaminate ground water.

    b. Vinegar hypothesis accept/reject = Based on the experiment I will reject the hypothesis. The reason to reject this hypothesis is that, the filtration of water mixed with vinegar when filtered through soil it kept the smell. I don’t believe that the vinegar smell can be hazardous to human health.

    c. Laundry detergent hypothesis accept/reject = Based on the experiment I will accept the hypothesis. The reason to accept this hypothesis is that, the filtration of water mixed with laundry detergent had the strong smell of laundry detergent that can contaminate ground water resources.

    3. What effect did each of the contaminants have on the water in the experiment? Which contaminant seemed to have the most potent effect on the water?

    Answer = I observed that all of the water samples have one similar result of turning the water color into brown and also dirt particles travel through the filtration process in all 4 beakers. I think vinegar and laundry detergent have the most potent effect on the water because even after going through the soil these two samples still hold on to the odor.

    4. Using at least one scholarly source; discuss the potential effect of each contaminant (oil, vinegar, and detergent) on the town’s water source and the people who drank the water.

    Answer = Answer = According to the CDC, “The presence of contaminates in water can lead to adverse health effects, including gastrointestinal illness, reproductive problems, and neurological disorders,” (CDC, 2014). There are about ten different illnesses associated with this type of contamination. Four of them are: giardia, salmonella, norovirus and Hepatitis A.

    5. Describe what type of human activity would cause contaminants like oil, acid, and detergents to flow into the water supply. Additionally, what other items within your house do you believe could contaminate the water supply if you were to dump them onto the ground?

    Answer = I think sometimes contamination of groundwater by humans are not intentional. Like when we pour down the cooking oil in to the sink grains it may end up in ground water. I have also notice oil marks in the parking leaking from the cars this can be a factor of contamination. We all must have noticed people washing cars in the apartment parking, where there is no proper way of disposing of the soap water in to the drains. On a daily basis we consciously or unconsciously do things that end up seeping into the ground and contaminate our water resources underground.

    Experiment 2: Water Treatment

    POST LAB QUESTIONS

    1. Develop a hypothesis on the ability of your filtration technique to remove contaminants.

    Hypothesis = If the water goes through the filtration process then it will be consumable.

    2. Based on the results of your experiment, would you reject or accept the hypothesis that you produced in question 1? Explain how you determined this.

    Accept/Reject = Based on the experiment I will reject the hypothesis. The filtered water was clean but I am not sure if it will be drinkable even after adding the bleach.

    3. What are the differences in color, smell, visibility, and so forth between the “contaminated” water and the “treated” water?

    Answer = The contaminated water is dirty, dark brown in color and also smells like dirt. There are big particles of dirt floating at the top of the water surface and particles at the bottom as well. The filtered water was yellowish in color and had a strong smell of bleach in it. There seem to be a small amount of particles at the bottom.

    4. From the introduction to this lab, you know that there are typically five steps involved in the water treatment process. Identify the processes (e.g., coagulation) that were used in this lab. Additionally, describe how each of the processes were performed in this lab.

    Answer =

    First step is aeration where I added soil to the beaker and then transferred it back and forth between two beakers total of 15 times.

    Second step was coagulation which is where I added the alum to the beaker of soil and water.

    Sedimentation happened next during the 15-minute time allotted. The clumps sank to the bottom;

    Then filtration happened when I poured the water through sand, gravel and activated charcoal.

    Finally, disinfection took place when I added bleach to filtered water.

    image1.jpg

    Experiment 3: Drinking Water Quality

    Table 2: Ammonia Test Results
    Water Sample Test Results
    Tap Water 0
    Dasani® Bottled Water 0
    Fiji® Bottled Water 0
    Table 3: Chloride Test Results
    Water Sample Test Results
    Tap Water 0
    Dasani® Bottled Water 0
    Fiji® Bottled Water 0
    Table 4: 4 in 1 Test Results
    Water Sample pH Total Alkalinity Total Chlorine Total Hardness
    Tap Water 4 0 0.2 0
    Dasani® Bottled Water 3 0 1.0 0
    Fiji® Bottled Water 8 0 4.0 50
    Table 5: Phosphate Test Results
    Water Sample Test Results
    Tap Water 10
    Dasani® Bottled Water 50
    Fiji® Bottled Water 100
    Table 6: Iron Test Results
    Water Sample Test Results
    Tap Water 0
    Dasani® Bottled Water 0
    Fiji® Bottled Water 0

    POST LAB QUESTIONS

    1. Develop a hypothesis on which water source you believe will contain the most and least chemical components.

    Hypothesis = If all three water samples of tap water, Dasani and Fiji are tested, then tap water will contain the most chemical components.

    2. Based on the results of your experiment, would you reject or accept the hypothesis that you produced in question 1? Explain how you determined this.

    Accept/reject = = I would reject my hypothesis. After testing, it was found that the tap water did not hold more contaminates than the bottled water. Fiji appeared to be more contaminated than the other two. For example, the Phosphate level of tap water was 10 in tap water but in Fiji water it was noticed up to 100 which is the highest according to the comparison chart.

    3. Based on the results of your experiment, what major differences, if any, do you notice between the Dasani, Fiji, and tap water?

    Answer = The Fiji water appeared to be on the top of hardness when compared to the chart and 4.0 in Chlorine Dasani water. After witnessing these results tap water seems to be the safest to drink.

    4. Based on your results, do you believe that bottled water is worth the price? Why or why not?

    Answer = I was not a big fan of bottled water anyways but after conducting these experiments I am positive that bottled water does not worth the price considering it contains more contaminates than tap water. I think that certain areas of tap water may test differently, so can be bottled water. I could save money using what is available to me for almost free compared to bottled water.

    *NOTE – Do not forget to go to Lab 3: Biodiversity, and complete “Experiment 1: Diversity of Plants” steps 1 through 6. Steps 1 through 6 need to be completed in order to be prepared for Week Three, however, results for this experiment will not be calculated until next week. Thus, while nothing is to be handed in for this experiment until the end of Week Three you must plant the seeds this week to ensure that you can complete week 3 on time.

    References

    Contaminates in Public Water Systems. Retrieved from: http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/public/water_diseases.html

    Turk, J., & Bensel, T. (2014). Contemporary environmental issues (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.

    image2.jpg

    © eScience Labs, 2015

Exposure Assessment Case Study

UPDATE: Community meeting on February 6, 2003 Cross-sectional Exposure Assessment of Environmental Contaminants in Churchill County, Nevada

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Study Results Background February 2001 A statistically significant increase in the number of children diagnosed with acute lymphocytic

leukemia (ALL) and acute myelocytic leukemia (AML) was reported in Churchill County, Nevada. By the end of 2001, 15 children had been diagnosed with ALL or AML. An Expert Panel convened by the state recommended conducting a cross-sectional exposure assessment in Churchill County.

March-April The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) met with state health officials and began planning the cross-sectional exposure study of environmental contaminants.

August-October CDC opened a field clinic in Fallon, Nevada to collect biologic samples and worked with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to collect the environmental samples.

February-March 2002 Biologic and environmental sample collection were completed. August Preliminary findings of communitywide elevations of tungsten and arsenic in biologic samples

were announced at a public meeting in Fallon. August-December Laboratory and statistical analyses continued. February 2003 Results of questionnaire, biologic, and environmental data analyses to be released at a public

meeting in Fallon.

Results • Levels of most chemicals in urine and blood samples from Churchill County study participants were not elevated

compared with national estimates reported in CDC’s Second National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. • Arsenic levels were elevated in Churchill County participants’ urine and tap water samples. Levels in urine were not

higher in cases than comparison children and families. Levels of arsenic in tap water do not differ between case and comparison families. • Tungsten levels were elevated in Churchill County participants’ urine samples; however the levels did not differ

between case and comparison children or families. Tungsten was detected in all tap water samples; however, no reference level currently exists for tungsten in water. • Levels of some nonpersistent pesticides in Churchill County participants’ urine samples were slightly elevated;

however, the levels did not differ between case and comparison children or families. Levels of nonpersistent pesticides in environmental samples were not elevated. • Levels of DDE (a breakdown product of the pesticide DDT) were elevated in blood samples of Churchill County

participants; however, the levels did not differ between case and comparison children or families. • Case children have slightly older fathers than comparison children. • No evidence of retrovirus infection or activity was found. No relationship between Epstein-Barr Virus and leukemia

was found.

Arsenic • Exposure to arsenic exceeded health based reference levels in 34% of the Churchill County study population. Exposure

levels were not higher among casea children or families than comparisonb children or families. • The geometric mean of arsenic in Churchill County urine samples was 34.61 µg/Lc (equivalent to parts per billion). • 28.6% of Churchill County results were above normal, in the range of 50–200 µg/L. • 5.4% of Churchill County results were above the arsenic level at which health problems may occur (> 200 µg/L).

Table 1. Arsenic Range (µg/L) Median (µg/L) Reference Leveld (µg/L) Percent Above the

Reference Level Churchill County <LODe–1180.40 37.40 34

Case families <LOD–186.30 28.70 50 25 Comparison families 1.80–1180.4 38.2 37

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tungsten • Exposure to tungsten exceeded the population-based reference level. Exposure levels did not differ between case and

comparison children or families. • Tungsten levels in Churchill County urine samples ranged from <LOD to 53.97 µg/L.

Table 2. Tungsten Second National

Reportf Churchill County Case Families Comparison

Families Median (µg/L) 0.07 0.97 0.99 0.97 Geometric meang (µg/L) 0.08 1.19 1.15 1.20

Nonpersistent Pesticides and Metabolites • More than 10% of the Churchill County study participants had urine levels of six nonpersistent pesticides (two

organophosphate pesticides (chlorpyrifos shown below), two chlorinated phenol pesticides, a repellent, and a fungicide) were greater than the 95th percentileh of a national population survey. • No differences were seen between case and comparison children or families.

Table 3. Organophosphate pesticide: Chlorpyrifos Second National

Report Churchill County Case Families Comparison Families

Median (µg/L) 1.70 3.39 3.06 3.75 Geometric mean (µg/L) 1.77 2.46 2.22 2.54

Persistent Pesticides and Metabolites • DDE was the only persistent pesticide found at levels above the reference level. Exposure did not differ between case

and comparison children or families. • Lipid-adjustedi DDE levels in Churchill County blood samples ranged from <LOD–8169.95. • The 95th percentile for DDE in a national population survey was 1780 ng/gj lipid. Eight percent of the Churchill

County study population had DDE levels greater than the 95th percentile.

Table 4. Organochlorine pesticide metabolite: DDE Second National

Report Churchill County

Case Families Comparison Families

Median (ng/g lipid) 226.0 445.3 393.0 473.0

Geometric mean (ng/g lipid) 260.0 447.1 302.9 501.3

Survey Variables • An increased risk was associated with paternal age at the study child’s birth (ORk1.14, P-valuel 0.03).

Conclusions • Elevations of some chemicals were identified, but these elevations did not explain the incidence of childhood leukemia

in Churchill County. • Levels of most of the chemicals measured in biologic or environmental samples were no different from reference levels. • Levels of arsenic were elevated in tap water and urine samples. Levels of tungsten were elevated in urine samples.

Tungsten was detected in all tap water samples tested, but there is no standard or regulatory value with which to compare levels. • Levels of 7 of 43 pesticides measured were elevated in biologic samples but were not elevated in environmental

samples.

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendations and Next Steps • Until the new drinking water facility is built, we recommend continuing efforts to educate the community about

alternative sources of drinking water to minimize exposure to tungsten and arsenic. Community education is also recommended to help reduce people’s exposure to pesticides. • The National Toxicology Program of the National Institutes of Health is reviewing existing literature before beginning

toxicologic research of tungsten and tungsten compounds to determine their potential link to cancer in humans. • Urine and tap water samples from two cities in Nevada will be analyzed to determine whether the levels of tungsten

found in the Churchill County community are similar to levels found in other areas of the state. • Because elevated levels of some chemicals were found in urine or blood samples from Churchill County study

participants, CDC will perform selected tests of genetic differences and genetic sensitivity on stored samples collected from participants in the Churchill County cross-sectional exposure assessment.

a A person diagnosed with ALL or AML enrolled in the Churchill County exposure assessment. b A person without leukemia enrolled in the Churchill County exposure assessment. c Micrograms per liter. d The reference level is the level considered clinically abnormal. e Less than the limit of detection. Levels were lower than the lowest level that the instrument could detect. f The Second National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals (2003) is a national survey of the U.S. population’s

exposure to 116 chemicals. The report contains reference ranges for these chemicals. g The geometric mean is the measure of the mid-point of a population where the population distribution does not follow a bell-shaped

curve. h The level at or below which 95% of a study population measures. i Lipid adjusting accounts for the amount of lipids (fats, like cholesterol) in blood. Because the amount of persistent pesticides in

blood depends on the amount of lipids in blood, levels are adjusted to provide a more accurate measure of the amount of these chemicals that are in your body.

j Nanogram per lipid k Odds ratio. Measures the strength of the association between two variables. l A measure of the probability that the association suggested by the odds ratio occurred by chance alone.

Finding an Epicenter from Seismograms

Lab 3

Finding an Epicenter from Seismograms

 

Times and Speeds for P and S Waves Yield Distance to the Epicenter

 

Seismograms are pieces of paper on which a wavy line represents vibrations over time. Seismograms record vibrations as a function of time, not distance, but we can obtain the distance to an epicenter from seismograms, by the fact that P and S earthquake waves travel at different speeds.

 

To show mathematically how this is possible, see the Appendix where the equation we will use in this Lab exercise is derived.

 

In this laboratory exercise, you determine the location of an earthquake’s epicenter using data from seismograms.

Method of Calculating Distance Using a Seismogram

 

The Appendix yields an equation that gives the time of arrival tp of an earthquake’s P wave. That time is related to P and S wave speeds and to the interval of time between arrivals of the P and S waves. From such information, the method of determining the distance d from the seismic measuring station to the epicenter is as follows:

 

Directly from the seismogram we obtain the difference in time of arrival of the P and S waves, Δt. (Here, the Greek capital letter “delta” (that is, Δ) is used to represent the words “difference in” because “delta” and “difference” both begin with the letter “d”.)

 

We insert the value of Δt into the following equation to obtain t:

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) ,

[this equation is the one derived in the Appendix]

 

In the above equation for tp we use as values for Vs and Vp the following –

 

P and S waves have been found to have the following average speeds:

 

Vp = 6.01 km/sec

Vs = 4.1 km/sec .

 

Then, using tp we calculate distance d from

 

d = Vp * tp  . (This is the familiar equation of distance = speed X time.)

 

Example of Calculating Distance from a Value of Δt :

 

To illustrate, we will put in some values for the items on the right-hand side of the equation for tp. We use the values for Vp and Vs from above. Let’s say as an example that Δt determined from the seismogram is found to be Δt = 200 sec. Then,

 

tp = (4.1 km/sec * 200 sec) / (6.01 km/sec – 4.1 km/sec) =  429.3 sec . In this equation note the division sign and the minus sign.

 

Then, the distance d is :

 

d = Vp * tp = 6.01 km/sec * 429.3 sec = 2580.2 km .

 

Using a Seismogram to Obtain Δt and Thence to Obtain Distance to the Epicenter

 

From a seismogram, we must find the time interval Δt. We then use the Δt to find the distance from the seismic station to the epicenter.

 

Let the points on the seismogram when the seismic waves arrive be labeled as follows:

 

Point A = arrival time of P-wave , and

Point B = arrival time of S-wave .

 

Figure 1. Fictitious seismogram labeled to show points A and B.

 

We need to find the time interval Δt  between points A and B from the seismogram. We will do this by a simple technique in MS Word (although in this computer age it is routine for the time interval to be computed automatically). The seismogram may not provide the time interval directly, and we may have to figure it out from the time axis on the graph paper.

 

Here is how –

 

On the seismogram find the time axis (usually found beneath the actual trace of the seismic wave). In an actual seismogram, there will always be a time axis, and it will usually be labeled with times. Measure the linear distance between two marks on the time axis for which the times are given. Let’s say that two of the time marks on the axis are for 0 sec and 300 sec (i.e., 5 minutes). If upon measuring the distance on the seismogram between those two time marks, the distance might turn out to be 1.5 inches, then the “time scale” (i.e., the “scale factor”) for the seismogram is 300 sec per 1.5 inches, or 300 sec / 1.5 in = 200 sec/in. The numbers here are simply an example. In our case below, where we use Figure 3, the time scale has been pre-set at 24 sec between tic marks. You will only have to measure the distance in inches between tic marks to obtain the time scale in seconds per inch (sec/in).

 

(Normally we would use millimeters or centimeters (the Metric system) instead of inches, because most scientists use the Metric system, but here we will use inches because MS Word makes measurements in inches.)

 

Now measure the linear distance in inches between points A and B. The procedure for making these measurements in MS Word is explained below in step-by-step fashion. Let’s say as an example that the linear distance is 1 inch. Then, by using the imaginary time scale of 200 sec/inch, the Δt is

 

Δt = 1 inch x 200 sec/inch = 200 sec.

 

Because the distance numbers are fictitious and were made up, this time was deliberately arranged to be the same value of Δt that we used in the example earlier.

 

And from Δt we had calculated tp and d as follows (repeating what we did before):

 

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) = (4.1 km/sec * 200 sec) / (6.01 km/sec – 4.1 km/sec) = 429.3 sec .

 

Then, the distance d to the epicenter is:

 

d = Vp * tp = 6.01 km/sec * 429.3 sec = 2,580.2 km .

 

Using Distance Values from Three Seismograms to Determine the Location of an Epicenter

 

On a map, the distance of an epicenter from a seismic station can be represented as a circle. The seismogram provides the distance, but does not provide the direction to the epicenter. With only one seismogram, the epicenter could be anywhere around the circle whose radius is the distance determined for the epicenter. With two seismograms, however, there are two points of intersection of the circles around the seismic stations where the epicenter could be located. Even better, three distances from three different seismograms will enable the determination of the epicenter’s exact location by a three-way intersection.

 

The diagram in Figure 2 shows the situation graphically.

 

Figure 2. Exact Epicenter Location Requires 3 Distance Circles.

 

The Lab Exercise

From one seismogram, you will determine the distance from the seismic station’s location to the epicenter of an earthquake. This will provide for your drawing one circle on a map. But you need two more circles to solve for the location of the epicenter.

You will be given the S-P time intervals Δt from two other seismograms, located at other stations, relieving you from having to find the values of Δt yourself from two more seismograms. From those provided values of Δt you will calculate the distances of the two stations. These distances will provide for your drawing two more circles on the map. Then you will determine the exact location of the epicenter from the intersection of the three circles.

As a refresher, see Figure 1 above, a fictitious seismogram fully labeled to show points A and B and the time axis.

The actual seismogram to be used for this lab is shown below in Figure 3. Notice that it contains three traces, one trace for each of the three directions of motion in three-dimensional space. The two horizontal traces emphasize S waves (shear waves, side-to-side), while the vertical trace de-emphasizes S waves and emphasizes longitudinal waves.

Although Figure 3 shows an actual seismogram, it was not obtained from the location labeled as Albuquerque, and furthermore the time axis has been altered. For this lab, the time scale on this seismogram has been arbitrarily set at 24 sec for the distance between two tic marks. (You will have to measure the distance in inches between tic marks to determine the time scale in sec per inch). These changes were made for convenience to suit this lab exercise.

From the seismogram shown in Figure 3 (using the method described above but presented step-by-step below), you will determine the S-P time interval Δt between the first arrivals of P and S waves at the Albuquerque seismograph station. Then you will use the Δt to obtain tp and ultimately the distance d. But first, enter the value of Δt you obtain into the column for Δt in Table 1 below. If you need more help to obtain Δt from the seismogram, look at the details in the next section.

Details of Procedure for Measuring Δt on the Seismogram

To obtain an accurate measure in seconds of the S-P time interval Δt, you will have to measure the distance between the P and S waves on the seismogram, and compare that distance with the time scale at the bottom of the seismogram. Here is the step-by-step procedure:

Procedure for measuring the S-P time interval Δt (presuming use of MS Word) —

1– Arrange for display of the drawing toolbar (in MS Word 2003), or the portion of the “ribbon” in MS Word 2007, or other means on other computers, so that you can select an icon for drawing lines and circles. Note: If you have a Macintosh computer the procedures below will be slightly different.
2– Click on line icon
3– Position the cursor on the seismogram anywhere on the P-line (red), depress left mouse button, move cursor to create and extend a line horizontally to the S-line (green). This is our Δt interval.
4– Measure the line length by —

a– Position cursor on line
b– Right-click mouse button
c– Choose Format Auto Shape (or Size)
d– Choose Size
e– Read Width for the Δt interval line length in inches (the Height should be 0.0 inches if your line is actually horizontal)

 

Compare the Δt line length just obtained with the time scale at the bottom of the seismogram. For example, draw a line that extends over 10 units of the scale (where a unit is the distance between a pair of tic marks). Measure the length of that line, and then divide that length by 10 to find the distance for one scale unit (the distance between two tic marks). That distance represents 24 sec.

 

Divide the line length for the Δt interval by the distance for one scale unit, and then multiply by 24 sec to find the total number of seconds in the Δt interval. Write that number in the column for Δt in Table 1.

 

 

 

Figure 3. Actual seismogram, but from a fictitious seismic station, and with the time scale altered for convenience in this lab exercise. An orange line has been drawn between the beginnings of the P and S waves. Because MS Word does not allow highly accurate positioning, the orange line does not exactly line up with the red and green lines. This deficiency in MS Word will mean that results in this lab will not be exact. Macintosh computers may give more accurate results.

 

Table 1. Epicenter Distances from Three Seismic Stations.
Station Name S-P time interval Δt (sec) tp (sec) Distance to epicenter (km) Radial distance on map (in)
Albuquerque        
Boise 79.58      
Sacramento 30.96      

Details of Procedure for Obtaining tp

Then, determine the value of tp by means of the equation yielding tp —

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) ,

 

In the above equation for tp , remember that the values for Vs and Vp are the following –

 

Vp = 6.01 km/sec

Vs = 4.1 km/sec .

 

Put the resulting value of tp in the column for tp  in Table 1.

Details of Procedure for Obtaining d

Now, use the equation below yielding d from tp to determine the distance d of the Albuquerque seismograph station from the earthquake’s epicenter, and enter that distance into the column for d in Table 1. Using tp we calculate distance d from

 

d = Vp * tp .

The S-P time intervals (Δt ) from two other fictitious seismograph stations are also listed in Table I: Boise and Sacramento. (Figure 4 is a map showing the location of Albuquerque and the other two seismic stations of interest.) Use the above equations to complete Table 1 for Boise and Sacramento. Determine their tp values and distances d from the earthquake’s epicenter, using their figures for Δt, and enter their tp values and distances d into Table 1.

 

Figure 4. Western United States, showing the location of the fictitious seismic stations in Albuquerque, Boise, and Sacramento. For explanations of the circles see the text.

Details of Procedure for Obtaining Radii of the Circles

What remains is to figure out the radii of the circles you will draw on the map in Figure 4. For your lab report, download a copy of the map in Figure 4 from the Blackboard module under Lab 4, and paste it into an MS Word document where you will compose your lab report. Make the map big on the paper.

To draw the circles on the map in Figure 4, you are going to have to figure out how large they should be. You already know the actual ground distances (on the surface of the Earth) from the next to last column in Table 1. But you must calculate how large the circles are when those ground distances are represented on the map. You must convert ground distances from the next to last column in Table 1 into radii of circles to be drawn on the map (last column of Table 1).

This calculation of the radii of the circles requires that you determine the scale factor for the map— On the map find the scale bar in the lower left corner. Its full length represents a ground distance of 400 km on the Earth itself. Measure the length of the scale bar with MS Word, using the size-measuring procedure presented earlier. It might be close to 1 inch or 30 mm. (This number will vary depending on how large the map is on your computer screen. On your computer screen, or on a hard copy printout, you can vary the size of the map, and so we cannot say what the length of the scale bar is in your case; only you can). If the length is 1 inch, then the scale factor is 400 km / I inch, or 400 km per inch (each inch on the map would represent 400 km on the Earth). You will obtain a scale factor that is probably different from this value.

Once you have the value of your map’s scale factor, divide it into each of the ground distances in Table 1 and put the results in the last column. These results are the radii of the circles you must draw on the map (not the diameters, but the radii).

In the above procedure the units of measurement will work out perfectly as follows —

ground distance (km) divided by scale factor (km/inch)  = map distance (inches)

Details of Procedure for Drawing Circles

Now, the next step is to draw circular arcs (partial circles, or whole circles if they will fit) on the map in Figure 4 using radii from column 5. Hint: the circle for Albuquerque will be too large to fit on the map entirely.

The first circle should, of course, be centered on Albuquerque, representing the distance from Albuquerque to the earthquake’s epicenter. Initially, let’s just get the size correct. If you are working on a hard copy map, use a compasses to draw the arc, with tines spread enough to yield the correct radius for each circle. But you can use MS Word to draw and size the circles. On the computer screen, you will have to adjust the sizes of circles until the circle size shows the correct radius as measured in inches (last column in Table 1).

Circles can be created by means of MS Word drawing features. The procedure is as follows —

– Arrange for display of the MS Word drawing toolbar, or other means, for drawing lines and circles
– Click on ellipse icon
– Position cursor on map (anywhere, because later the circle’s location will be adjusted), depress the shift key, depress left mouse button, move cursor to create a perfect circle (if you forget to depress the shift key the figure drawn will be an ellipse rather than a circle). The circle’s size does not matter yet; size will be adjusted below.
– Initially the circle will be opaque white. For convenience later, make it transparent or partially transparent by the following procedure (see Figure 4 for illustration of both opaque and partially transparent circles) —

– Position cursor inside circle
– Right-click mouse button
– Choose Format Auto Shape
– Choose Colors and Lines
– Adjust transparency (try 60-70%)

Details of Procedure for Centering Circles over the Stations

 

– Now draw two lines like cross hairs to enable proper location of the circle over Albuquerque —

– Draw one line horizontally across the map and intersecting Albuquerque’s location (the red square); draw another line vertically and also intersecting Albuquerque’s red square. These lines will be used like cross hairs to center the circle over the red square.
– Position the cursor inside the circle, depress the left mouse button, and move the circle to center it roughly over the red square.
– To position the circle exactly, release the button. Then click inside the circle – this will create tiny marker circles on the circle’s perimeter. Move the circle until those tiny marker circles are aligned on the horizontal and vertical lines used as cross hairs over the red square.

 

Details of Procedure for Adjusting the Size of Each Circle

 

Now, adjust the circle size —

– Position cursor inside the circle
– Right-click mouse button
– Choose Format Auto Shape (or Size)
– Choose Size
– Put a check mark inside the tiny box labeled Lock Aspect Ratio (this will force any change in the vertical dimension to be matched by the same change in the horizontal dimension, and vice versa)

– Adjust the number in one or the other dimension boxes to be twice the distance in the last column of Table 1 (because that distance is a radiusbut Size in MS Word measures diameter, not radius)

– The result will be a circle of the right size, positioned over Albuquerque’s red square. Some of the circle will be off the page in the case of Albuquerque.

In the above way, draw the arc or full circle for Albuquerque. This arc shows the possible locations for the epicenter based on arrival times at Albuquerque.  Then add two more arcs or circles, one for each of the other two seismographic stations (Boise and Sacramento), positioning the center of these other two circles in the correct locations for each of those two additional seismographic stations.

The three arcs should intersect at one point, or close to one point. Errors in the construction of this exercise by the lab instructor (map scales, map reproduction, and so on), plus any errors in your arithmetic and/or graphical methods, will combine to produce some total error in the determination of the epicenter. This total error will show up as a failure of the three arcs to intersect at a single point on the map.

N.B. Surprise! — It is possible for the three circles to be sized incorrectly and still intersect. Thus, intersection does not guarantee that you have done your arithmetic and graphing correctly. But gross failure to intersect means absolutely that you have made a large error somewhere.

In addition to the three arcs or circles on the map in your lab report (put a copy of the map into the report), pinpoint the location of the earthquake’s epicenter on the map and label it with the letter E. Estimate by eye, from the map labels, the latitude and longitude of the location E. This is the final step for completing the exercises of this lab – to specify the actual location of E in terms of latitude and longitude. Express the result as degrees north latitude and degrees west longitude; as an example, the location could be 24 N, 145 W. (If you omit N and W, your answer is incomplete and will be wrong.)

Lab Report

Write your lab report in the required style as prescribed in the Lab Report Format document – include all sections, properly labeled. Provide a brief Introduction, a Methods section, and then a Results section. Finally, write an Abstract – position it at the top, immediately under the title and your name (both centered) and before the Introduction. The Abstract summarizes the entire lab exercise in a few sentences (including the location of the epicenter – always state major results in the Abstract).

In the Results section, include Figure 3 from this document showing the seismogram, and the map of Figure 4 (obtained from Blackboard), showing the three circles you have drawn and the pinpointed location of the epicenter. (It is possible to grab Figure 3 from this document — right-click it and choose Copy, and then Paste the figure into your lab report developed in MS Word. However, a better copy of the map is on Blackboard.)

Include a copy of Table 1, completely filled in with data.

If you worked with the map in hard copy print form, then you will have to scan the map to get an electronic copy for inclusion in this report. However, you probably worked with the map on your computer screen right inside your developing lab report. (If not, then copy your map (with the three circles and designation of E) by right-clicking on the image and choosing Copy, and then Paste the map image into your lab report that you are developing in MS Word.)

State the latitude and longitude of the epicenter. Repeating what was said above, express the result as degrees north latitude and degrees west longitude; as an example, the location could be 24 N, 145 W.

Properly label the seismogram and map with figure legends as prescribed in the Lab Report Format document (legends should be placed beneath the figures).

In the text of the report, refer to the figures and to Table 1. For example, you may have text discussing the circles on the map, and therefore you would put in one of the sentences the following — “(see Figure 1).” For convenience, you may put the figures and table at the end of your report, instead of positioning them within the text (within the text would be the common arrangement in scientific literature). To position figures within the text requires some familiarity with MS Word and the techniques are tricky at times.

The total length of text in your report (not counting any space given to figures and Table 1) can be as little as 1-2 pages single space or a little more.

If you need help in manipulating the figures and the table, to get them into your report, you may find help in the document “Graphing Helps,” on Blackboard under Assignments/Before You Begin.

Appendix: Derivation of the Equation for tp

 

Using simple algebra, we will obtain an equation to be used with data from a seismogram.

 

P and S waves have been found to have the following average speeds:

 

Vp = 6.01 km/sec

Vs = 4.1 km/sec

 

These equations yield graphs of distance versus time with the form of straight lines (v = d/t for distance d and time t), and therefore these equations are called linear equations. In actuality, distance-time graphs for earthquake waves are not straight lines, but slightly curved lines, as seen in slides 11-13 of the Power Point presentation for Week 3. But the linear equations here will be used in this lab as an approximation to reality.

 

Because speed equals distance divided by time, we obtain distance from speed multiplied by time, or d = V x t. This is true for both types of waves; we must use the correct speed and time for each type of wave.

 

The P waves have higher speed but therefore shorter travel times, from the location of the earthquake to the location of the seismic measuring station, while the S waves have lower speed and correspondingly longer travel times. But the distance traveled is the same with both types of waves. Hence we can write

 

dp = dwhere dp is the symbol for distance for the P wave, and dis the symbol for distance for the S wave.

 

Substituting d = V * t into both sides and using appropriate subscripts,

 

Vp * tp = Vs * ts .

 

Now,  we know from seismograms that ts is longer than tp by some time interval, so we can write ts = tp + <time interval between P and S waves>. Let’s substitute the symbol Δt in place of <time interval between P and S waves>, where Δ is a symbol for the Greek letter “delta” meaning “difference”; so Δt stands for the difference in time of arrival of P and S waves. Thus, using the symbol Δt,

ts = tp + Δt .

 

Then,

 

Vp * tp = Vs * (tp + Δt) .

 

Now we solve for tp in this equation by taking the following steps :

 

Vp * t = Vs * t + Vs * Δt .

 

Collecting terms,

 

(Vp – Vs) t = Vs * Δt .

 

Finally, the solution for tp is :

 

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) .

 

Notice that tp depends only speeds that we already know (the values above), and the difference in time of arrival of the P and S waves, Δt, which we measure directly from the seismogram.

 

Once we have tp, we will use it to get the distance to the epicenter by using

 

d = Vp * tp .

 

 

An alternative method for using Δt to obtain distance d is to employ the S-T graphs such as found on the Power Point presentation.  No matter which method is used (the equation for tp or an S-T graph), we have to get Δt in order to find d.

Lab 3

Finding an Epicenter from Seismograms

Times and Speeds for P and S Waves Yield Distance to the Epicenter

Seismograms are pieces of paper on which a wavy line represents vibrations over time. Seismograms record vibrations as a function of time, not distance, but we can obtain the distance to an epicenter from seismograms, by the fact that P and S earthquake waves travel at different speeds.

To show mathematically how this is possible, see the Appendix where the equation we will use in this Lab exercise is derived.

In this laboratory exercise, you determine the location of an earthquake’s epicenter using data from seismograms.

Method of Calculating Distance Using a Seismogram

The Appendix yields an equation that gives the time of arrival tp of an earthquake’s P wave. That time is related to P and S wave speeds and to the interval of time between arrivals of the P and S waves. From such information, the method of determining the distance d from the seismic measuring station to the epicenter is as follows:

Directly from the seismogram we obtain the difference in time of arrival of the P and S waves, Δt. (Here, the Greek capital letter “delta” (that is, Δ) is used to represent the words “difference in” because “delta” and “difference” both begin with the letter “d”.)

We insert the value of Δt into the following equation to obtain tp :

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) ,

[this equation is the one derived in the Appendix]

In the above equation for tp we use as values for Vs and Vp the following –

P and S waves have been found to have the following average speeds:

Vp = 6.01 km/sec

Vs = 4.1 km/sec .

Then, using tp we calculate distance d from

d = Vp * tp . (This is the familiar equation of distance = speed X time.)

Example of Calculating Distance from a Value of Δt :

To illustrate, we will put in some values for the items on the right-hand side of the equation for tp. We use the values for Vp and Vs from above. Let’s say as an example that Δt determined from the seismogram is found to be Δt = 200 sec. Then,

tp = (4.1 km/sec * 200 sec) / (6.01 km/sec – 4.1 km/sec) = 429.3 sec . In this equation note the division sign and the minus sign.

Then, the distance d is :

d = Vp * tp = 6.01 km/sec * 429.3 sec = 2580.2 km .

Using a Seismogram to Obtain Δt and Thence to Obtain Distance to the Epicenter

From a seismogram, we must find the time interval Δt. We then use the Δt to find the distance from the seismic station to the epicenter.

Let the points on the seismogram when the seismic waves arrive be labeled as follows:

Point A = arrival time of P-wave , and

Point B = arrival time of S-wave .

image4.png

Figure 1. Fictitious seismogram labeled to show points A and B.

We need to find the time interval Δt between points A and B from the seismogram. We will do this by a simple technique in MS Word (although in this computer age it is routine for the time interval to be computed automatically). The seismogram may not provide the time interval directly, and we may have to figure it out from the time axis on the graph paper.

Here is how –

On the seismogram find the time axis (usually found beneath the actual trace of the seismic wave). In an actual seismogram, there will always be a time axis, and it will usually be labeled with times. Measure the linear distance between two marks on the time axis for which the times are given. Let’s say that two of the time marks on the axis are for 0 sec and 300 sec (i.e., 5 minutes). If upon measuring the distance on the seismogram between those two time marks, the distance might turn out to be 1.5 inches, then the “time scale” (i.e., the “scale factor”) for the seismogram is 300 sec per 1.5 inches, or 300 sec / 1.5 in = 200 sec/in. The numbers here are simply an example. In our case below, where we use Figure 3, the time scale has been pre-set at 24 sec between tic marks. You will only have to measure the distance in inches between tic marks to obtain the time scale in seconds per inch (sec/in).

(Normally we would use millimeters or centimeters (the Metric system) instead of inches, because most scientists use the Metric system, but here we will use inches because MS Word makes measurements in inches.)

Now measure the linear distance in inches between points A and B. The procedure for making these measurements in MS Word is explained below in step-by-step fashion. Let’s say as an example that the linear distance is 1 inch. Then, by using the imaginary time scale of 200 sec/inch, the Δt is

Δt = 1 inch x 200 sec/inch = 200 sec.

Because the distance numbers are fictitious and were made up, this time was deliberately arranged to be the same value of Δt that we used in the example earlier.

And from Δt we had calculated tp and d as follows (repeating what we did before):

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) = (4.1 km/sec * 200 sec) / (6.01 km/sec – 4.1 km/sec) = 429.3 sec .

Then, the distance d to the epicenter is:

d = Vp * tp = 6.01 km/sec * 429.3 sec = 2,580.2 km .

Using Distance Values from Three Seismograms to Determine the Location of an Epicenter

On a map, the distance of an epicenter from a seismic station can be represented as a circle. The seismogram provides the distance, but does not provide the direction to the epicenter. With only one seismogram, the epicenter could be anywhere around the circle whose radius is the distance determined for the epicenter. With two seismograms, however, there are two points of intersection of the circles around the seismic stations where the epicenter could be located. Even better, three distances from three different seismograms will enable the determination of the epicenter’s exact location by a three-way intersection.

The diagram in Figure 2 shows the situation graphically.

image1.pngFigure 2. Exact Epicenter Location Requires 3 Distance Circles.

The Lab Exercise

From one seismogram, you will determine the distance from the seismic station’s location to the epicenter of an earthquake. This will provide for your drawing one circle on a map. But you need two more circles to solve for the location of the epicenter.

You will be given the S-P time intervals Δt from two other seismograms, located at other stations, relieving you from having to find the values of Δt yourself from two more seismograms. From those provided values of Δt you will calculate the distances of the two stations. These distances will provide for your drawing two more circles on the map. Then you will determine the exact location of the epicenter from the intersection of the three circles.

As a refresher, see Figure 1 above, a fictitious seismogram fully labeled to show points A and B and the time axis.

The actual seismogram to be used for this lab is shown below in Figure 3. Notice that it contains three traces, one trace for each of the three directions of motion in three-dimensional space. The two horizontal traces emphasize S waves (shear waves, side-to-side), while the vertical trace de-emphasizes S waves and emphasizes longitudinal waves.

Although Figure 3 shows an actual seismogram, it was not obtained from the location labeled as Albuquerque, and furthermore the time axis has been altered. For this lab, the time scale on this seismogram has been arbitrarily set at 24 sec for the distance between two tic marks. (You will have to measure the distance in inches between tic marks to determine the time scale in sec per inch). These changes were made for convenience to suit this lab exercise.

From the seismogram shown in Figure 3 (using the method described above but presented step-by-step below), you will determine the S-P time interval Δt between the first arrivals of P and S waves at the Albuquerque seismograph station. Then you will use the Δt to obtain tp and ultimately the distance d. But first, enter the value of Δt you obtain into the column for Δt in Table 1 below. If you need more help to obtain Δt from the seismogram, look at the details in the next section.

Details of Procedure for Measuring Δt on the Seismogram

To obtain an accurate measure in seconds of the S-P time interval Δt, you will have to measure the distance between the P and S waves on the seismogram, and compare that distance with the time scale at the bottom of the seismogram. Here is the step-by-step procedure:

Procedure for measuring the S-P time interval Δt (presuming use of MS Word) —

1– Arrange for display of the drawing toolbar (in MS Word 2003), or the portion of the “ribbon” in MS Word 2007, or other means on other computers, so that you can select an icon for drawing lines and circles. Note: If you have a Macintosh computer the procedures below will be slightly different. 2– Click on line icon 3– Position the cursor on the seismogram anywhere on the P-line (red), depress left mouse button, move cursor to create and extend a line horizontally to the S-line (green). This is our Δt interval. 4– Measure the line length by —

a– Position cursor on line b– Right-click mouse button c– Choose Format Auto Shape (or Size) d– Choose Size e– Read Width for the Δt interval line length in inches (the Height should be 0.0 inches if your line is actually horizontal)

Compare the Δt line length just obtained with the time scale at the bottom of the seismogram. For example, draw a line that extends over 10 units of the scale (where a unit is the distance between a pair of tic marks). Measure the length of that line, and then divide that length by 10 to find the distance for one scale unit (the distance between two tic marks). That distance represents 24 sec.

Divide the line length for the Δt interval by the distance for one scale unit, and then multiply by 24 sec to find the total number of seconds in the Δt interval. Write that number in the column for Δt in Table 1.

image2.jpg

Figure 3. Actual seismogram, but from a fictitious seismic station, and with the time scale altered for convenience in this lab exercise. An orange line has been drawn between the beginnings of the P and S waves. Because MS Word does not allow highly accurate positioning, the orange line does not exactly line up with the red and green lines. This deficiency in MS Word will mean that results in this lab will not be exact. Macintosh computers may give more accurate results.

Table 1. Epicenter Distances from Three Seismic Stations.
Station Name S-P time interval Δt (sec) tp (sec) Distance to epicenter (km) Radial distance on map (in)
Albuquerque        
Boise 79.58      
Sacramento 30.96      

Details of Procedure for Obtaining tp

Then, determine the value of tp by means of the equation yielding tp —

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) ,

In the above equation for tp , remember that the values for Vs and Vp are the following –

Vp = 6.01 km/sec

Vs = 4.1 km/sec .

Put the resulting value of tp in the column for tp in Table 1.

Details of Procedure for Obtaining d

Now, use the equation below yielding d from tp to determine the distance d of the Albuquerque seismograph station from the earthquake’s epicenter, and enter that distance into the column for d in Table 1. Using tp we calculate distance d from

d = Vp * tp .

The S-P time intervals (Δt ) from two other fictitious seismograph stations are also listed in Table I: Boise and Sacramento. (Figure 4 is a map showing the location of Albuquerque and the other two seismic stations of interest.) Use the above equations to complete Table 1 for Boise and Sacramento. Determine their tp values and distances d from the earthquake’s epicenter, using their figures for Δt, and enter their tp values and distances d into Table 1.

image3.jpg

Figure 4. Western United States, showing the location of the fictitious seismic stations in Albuquerque, Boise, and Sacramento. For explanations of the circles see the text.

Details of Procedure for Obtaining Radii of the Circles

What remains is to figure out the radii of the circles you will draw on the map in Figure 4. For your lab report, download a copy of the map in Figure 4 from the Blackboard module under Lab 4, and paste it into an MS Word document where you will compose your lab report. Make the map big on the paper.

To draw the circles on the map in Figure 4, you are going to have to figure out how large they should be. You already know the actual ground distances (on the surface of the Earth) from the next to last column in Table 1. But you must calculate how large the circles are when those ground distances are represented on the map. You must convert ground distances from the next to last column in Table 1 into radii of circles to be drawn on the map (last column of Table 1).

This calculation of the radii of the circles requires that you determine the scale factor for the map— On the map find the scale bar in the lower left corner. Its full length represents a ground distance of 400 km on the Earth itself. Measure the length of the scale bar with MS Word, using the size-measuring procedure presented earlier. It might be close to 1 inch or 30 mm. (This number will vary depending on how large the map is on your computer screen. On your computer screen, or on a hard copy printout, you can vary the size of the map, and so we cannot say what the length of the scale bar is in your case; only you can). If the length is 1 inch, then the scale factor is 400 km / I inch, or 400 km per inch (each inch on the map would represent 400 km on the Earth). You will obtain a scale factor that is probably different from this value.

Once you have the value of your map’s scale factor, divide it into each of the ground distances in Table 1 and put the results in the last column. These results are the radii of the circles you must draw on the map (not the diameters, but the radii).

In the above procedure the units of measurement will work out perfectly as follows —

ground distance (km) divided by scale factor (km/inch) = map distance (inches)

Details of Procedure for Drawing Circles

Now, the next step is to draw circular arcs (partial circles, or whole circles if they will fit) on the map in Figure 4 using radii from column 5. Hint: the circle for Albuquerque will be too large to fit on the map entirely.

The first circle should, of course, be centered on Albuquerque, representing the distance from Albuquerque to the earthquake’s epicenter. Initially, let’s just get the size correct. If you are working on a hard copy map, use a compasses to draw the arc, with tines spread enough to yield the correct radius for each circle. But you can use MS Word to draw and size the circles. On the computer screen, you will have to adjust the sizes of circles until the circle size shows the correct radius as measured in inches (last column in Table 1).

Circles can be created by means of MS Word drawing features. The procedure is as follows —

– Arrange for display of the MS Word drawing toolbar, or other means, for drawing lines and circles – Click on ellipse icon – Position cursor on map (anywhere, because later the circle’s location will be adjusted), depress the shift key, depress left mouse button, move cursor to create a perfect circle (if you forget to depress the shift key the figure drawn will be an ellipse rather than a circle). The circle’s size does not matter yet; size will be adjusted below. – Initially the circle will be opaque white. For convenience later, make it transparent or partially transparent by the following procedure (see Figure 4 for illustration of both opaque and partially transparent circles) —

– Position cursor inside circle – Right-click mouse button – Choose Format Auto Shape – Choose Colors and Lines – Adjust transparency (try 60-70%)

Details of Procedure for Centering Circles over the Stations

– Now draw two lines like cross hairs to enable proper location of the circle over Albuquerque —

– Draw one line horizontally across the map and intersecting Albuquerque’s location (the red square); draw another line vertically and also intersecting Albuquerque’s red square. These lines will be used like cross hairs to center the circle over the red square. – Position the cursor inside the circle, depress the left mouse button, and move the circle to center it roughly over the red square. – To position the circle exactly, release the button. Then click inside the circle – this will create tiny marker circles on the circle’s perimeter. Move the circle until those tiny marker circles are aligned on the horizontal and vertical lines used as cross hairs over the red square.

Details of Procedure for Adjusting the Size of Each Circle

Now, adjust the circle size —

– Position cursor inside the circle – Right-click mouse button – Choose Format Auto Shape (or Size) – Choose Size – Put a check mark inside the tiny box labeled Lock Aspect Ratio (this will force any change in the vertical dimension to be matched by the same change in the horizontal dimension, and vice versa)

– Adjust the number in one or the other dimension boxes to be twice the distance in the last column of Table 1 (because that distance is a radius but Size in MS Word measures diameter, not radius )

– The result will be a circle of the right size, positioned over Albuquerque’s red square. Some of the circle will be off the page in the case of Albuquerque.

In the above way, draw the arc or full circle for Albuquerque. This arc shows the possible locations for the epicenter based on arrival times at Albuquerque. Then add two more arcs or circles, one for each of the other two seismographic stations (Boise and Sacramento), positioning the center of these other two circles in the correct locations for each of those two additional seismographic stations.

The three arcs should intersect at one point, or close to one point. Errors in the construction of this exercise by the lab instructor (map scales, map reproduction, and so on), plus any errors in your arithmetic and/or graphical methods, will combine to produce some total error in the determination of the epicenter. This total error will show up as a failure of the three arcs to intersect at a single point on the map.

N.B. Surprise! — It is possible for the three circles to be sized incorrectly and still intersect. Thus, intersection does not guarantee that you have done your arithmetic and graphing correctly. But gross failure to intersect means absolutely that you have made a large error somewhere.

In addition to the three arcs or circles on the map in your lab report (put a copy of the map into the report), pinpoint the location of the earthquake’s epicenter on the map and label it with the letter E. Estimate by eye, from the map labels, the latitude and longitude of the location E. This is the final step for completing the exercises of this lab – to specify the actual location of E in terms of latitude and longitude. Express the result as degrees north latitude and degrees west longitude; as an example, the location could be 24 N, 145 W. (If you omit N and W, your answer is incomplete and will be wrong.)

Lab Report

Write your lab report in the required style as prescribed in the Lab Report Format document – include all sections, properly labeled. Provide a brief Introduction, a Methods section, and then a Results section. Finally, write an Abstract – position it at the top, immediately under the title and your name (both centered) and before the Introduction. The Abstract summarizes the entire lab exercise in a few sentences (including the location of the epicenter – always state major results in the Abstract).

In the Results section, include Figure 3 from this document showing the seismogram, and the map of Figure 4 (obtained from Blackboard), showing the three circles you have drawn and the pinpointed location of the epicenter. (It is possible to grab Figure 3 from this document — right-click it and choose Copy, and then Paste the figure into your lab report developed in MS Word. However, a better copy of the map is on Blackboard.)

Include a copy of Table 1, completely filled in with data.

If you worked with the map in hard copy print form, then you will have to scan the map to get an electronic copy for inclusion in this report. However, you probably worked with the map on your computer screen right inside your developing lab report. (If not, then copy your map (with the three circles and designation of E) by right-clicking on the image and choosing Copy, and then Paste the map image into your lab report that you are developing in MS Word.)

State the latitude and longitude of the epicenter. Repeating what was said above, express the result as degrees north latitude and degrees west longitude; as an example, the location could be 24 N, 145 W.

Properly label the seismogram and map with figure legends as prescribed in the Lab Report Format document (legends should be placed beneath the figures).

In the text of the report, refer to the figures and to Table 1. For example, you may have text discussing the circles on the map, and therefore you would put in one of the sentences the following — “(see Figure 1).” For convenience, you may put the figures and table at the end of your report, instead of positioning them within the text (within the text would be the common arrangement in scientific literature). To position figures within the text requires some familiarity with MS Word and the techniques are tricky at times.

The total length of text in your report (not counting any space given to figures and Table 1) can be as little as 1-2 pages single space or a little more.

If you need help in manipulating the figures and the table, to get them into your report, you may find help in the document “Graphing Helps,” on Blackboard under Assignments/Before You Begin.

Appendix: Derivation of the Equation for tp

Using simple algebra, we will obtain an equation to be used with data from a seismogram.

P and S waves have been found to have the following average speeds:

Vp = 6.01 km/sec

Vs = 4.1 km/sec

These equations yield graphs of distance versus time with the form of straight lines (v = d/t for distance d and time t), and therefore these equations are called linear equations. In actuality, distance-time graphs for earthquake waves are not straight lines, but slightly curved lines, as seen in slides 11-13 of the Power Point presentation for Week 3. But the linear equations here will be used in this lab as an approximation to reality.

Because speed equals distance divided by time, we obtain distance from speed multiplied by time, or d = V x t. This is true for both types of waves; we must use the correct speed and time for each type of wave.

The P waves have higher speed but therefore shorter travel times, from the location of the earthquake to the location of the seismic measuring station, while the S waves have lower speed and correspondingly longer travel times. But the distance traveled is the same with both types of waves. Hence we can write

dp = ds where dp is the symbol for distance for the P wave, and ds is the symbol for distance for the S wave.

Substituting d = V * t into both sides and using appropriate subscripts,

Vp * tp = Vs * ts .

Now, we know from seismograms that ts is longer than tp by some time interval, so we can write ts = tp + <time interval between P and S waves>. Let’s substitute the symbol Δt in place of <time interval between P and S waves>, where Δ is a symbol for the Greek letter “delta” meaning “difference”; so Δt stands for the difference in time of arrival of P and S waves. Thus, using the symbol Δt,

ts = tp + Δt .

Then,

Vp * tp = Vs * (tp + Δt) .

Now we solve for tp in this equation by taking the following steps :

Vp * t = Vs * t + Vs * Δt .

Collecting terms,

(Vp – Vs) t = Vs * Δt .

Finally, the solution for tp is :

tp = (Vs * Δt) / (Vp – Vs) .

Notice that tp depends only speeds that we already know (the values above), and the difference in time of arrival of the P and S waves, Δt, which we measure directly from the seismogram.

Once we have tp, we will use it to get the distance to the epicenter by using

d = Vp * tp .

An alternative method for using Δt to obtain distance d is to employ the S-T graphs such as found on the Power Point presentation. No matter which method is used (the equation for tp or an S-T graph), we have to get Δt in order to find d.

The Therapeutic Value of Stem Cells

orksheet: The Therapeutic Value of Stem Cells

image1.jpg Student name:

Objective: To understand the therapeutic value of stem cells

About tissue stem cells

Stem cells are one of the most amazing types of cells because they can (1) make copies of themselves and (2) make specialized cells like skin cells, red blood cells or liver cells.

1. We need stem cells in our body. What would happen to you if you didn’t have stem cells?

image2.jpg

Tissue stem cells have the potential to make several types of specialized cells, but not all. For example blood stem cells can make all the different types of cells in your blood, but they can’t make skin cells.

2. Add the following labels to the diagram:

a. specialized cells in blood; b. blood stem cell; c. make copies; d. bone marrow.

image3.jpg

image4.jpg

 

 

Questions 1 and 2 used with permission of www.eurostemcell.org (Creative Commons license)

Therapeutic value of stem cells

3. Read the article from US News and World Report: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/06/05/scientists-find-stem-cells-in-liposuctioned-fat

Scientists study stem cells for many reasons, for example to better understand the cell cycle and

to develop and test new ways to treat patients.

4. Give one more reason why Dr Chazenbalk is doing this research.

 

Scientists can now take a cell from a body, for example a skin cell, and turn it into a cell that behaves like stem cells from an embryo.

5. What are these special types of cells called?

 

6. Why is Dr Chazenbalk eager to use this technique to study Parkinson’s?

 

 

Bernardo Tinoco

 

 

 

 

 

Found in:

 

Blood progenitor cells

 

 

 

=