46 R. HOSKING. 
Capillary IIT.  pivgt Method. | Second Method. | Third Method. | Mean Values. 
(Elliptical) | | 
02028 02066 02069 020608 
Section 1 | -02016 01969 | 02020 ‘020023. 
‘02083 02064 - 02066 “020682 
Bower 02016 ‘02009 | 01993 ‘020022 
02124. ‘02119 ‘02069 ‘020948 
hs: «| 02043 01983 | 01996 020000 
02097 02032 02075 020643 
ee 02043 | ‘02010 | 01998 “020095 
(a) :020719 
Mean radius by mercury = ‘020415. Mean (b) "020035 
aPintealy, | First Method. | Second Method. Third Method. | Mean Values. 
| 02138 02125 _ °02088 ‘021087 
Section 1 | 02023 | ‘02070 01976 ‘020152 
02130 “O21 if ‘02086 ‘021040 
as Ba ie>?1] 02048 ‘02007 | 01984. 020015 
| -02144 | 02143 02068 021057 
ote Jno 02023 | 01954 01976 ‘019765 
| -02183 02125 02079 021042 
er aie ae 02023 | ‘01997 | 01994 ‘019723 
(a) 021056 
Mean radius by mercury = ‘020482. Mean (b) -019914 
In determining the mean value for each section, the 
values obtained by the three methods were weighted in the 
following manner, Method 1, weight, 1; Method 2, weight, 
2; Method 3, weight, 3; thus for Capillary 1, Section 1, by 
adding together *01905 cm., twice °01879 cm., and three 
times *01880 cm., and dividing the sum by 6, we obtain the 
value ‘018838 cms. The mean obtained in this way is, I 
consider, the best value the individual results will produce, 
taking in account the experimental difficulties in measur- 
ing such small bores in the three cases. 
The mean values by measurement were then combined 
with the values obtained by mercury column and in this 
way the final values were obtained. 
