Designing the Apparatus of Experimental Research

To design is to contrive for a purpose; purpose is the all-impor­tant consideration. The first question any researcher needs to ask, as a way of designing the apparatus is, What do I want to observe? The answer to this question is part of the hypothesis. To the extent that the answer to the above question is explicit, the design is made easy. If, instead, the hypothesis can provide only an implicit answer, the task of the experimenter is to revisit, rede­fine, and reword, if necessary, the hypothesis to obtain an explicit answer. When the question is explicitly answered, it is a matter of detail to know whether what to be observed is an object, a phe­nomenon, or a measurable quantity. To suit the nature of the object or the phenomenon, one needs to decide the mode of per­ception, the one mode most commonly used being sight. Con­sidering the limitations of human perception, for instance, with the “invisible” band of electromagnetic radiations, several devices of detection or amplification are often found necessary. Now, returning to the key role of hypothesis in designing the appara­tus, there is reason to expect innumerable variations. For conve­nience, in principle, we may think of two sides to the apparatus: the cause side and the effect side, The two can be in both space and time, close or widely separated; each side may consist of one or more stages, and each stage may, in turn, contain many devices, measuring instruments, and connections among those. Considering the various fields of study, various hypotheses, and, above all, various human decisions, it is hardly possible even to hint as to what ought to be the structure of, and how to build, an experimental setup, but there are some common features in the effort of designing the apparatus, of which experimenters can avail themselves.

Seeking Advice

Firstly, it is a desirable trait of the experimenter to be resourceful, professionally inquisitive, and open. This sounds like a truism, but it is not uncommon for an individual researcher to be overly private, even sensitive, about his hypothesis, hence, the kind of setup he may need to experiment with. Projecting his attitude onto other colleagues and coworkers, he may shy away from ask­ing questions relative to the details of a setup they may be using, even in the next room. He may not need the same pieces of equipment, but the logic as to why certain pieces of equipment are chosen, among other possibilities, and why the different pieces are put together in that particular arrangement: that itself is a valuable education. Many researchers reinvent the wheel, though not so dramatically, even those who are close and accessi­ble. Visiting a few researchers in related areas, observing their apparatus, and candidly asking for advice is likely to yield hand­some dividends. While one may wish to be original, a rare gift, imitation is the sure way to learn. Many pitfalls may be avoided by gratefully seeking a helping hand.

Source: Srinagesh K (2005), The Principles of Experimental Research, Butterworth-Heinemann; 1st edition.