Nadia Eliora 1

Mathematical Modeling
After recording tidal heights of Grindstone Island by the hour on 27 December 2003 (AST),
the data below was recorded:
Time
(AST)
Heigh
t (m)
Time
(AST)
Heigh
t (m)

00.0
0

01.0
0

02.00

03.0
0

04.0
0

05.00

06.0
0

07.00

08.0
0

09.00

10.0
0

11.00

7.5

10.2

11.8

12.0

10.9

8.9

6.3

3.6

1.6

0.9

1.8

4.0

12.00

13.0
0

14.00

15.00

16.00

17.00

18.00

19.00

20.00

21.00

22.00

23.00

6.9

9.7

11.6

12.3

11.6

9.9

7.3

4.5

2.1

0.7

0.8

2.4

When you enter this data in a graphing software time against height you create the graph:

From the data above, it can be seen that the maximum height of the tide is 12.3m at 15.00,
and the minimum height of the tide is 0.7m at 21.00. There is also an obvious logarithmic
pattern to the tidal heights by time, where each period lasts 12 hours (21-9). There are also
horizontal and vertical shifts in the data.
To find a function that applies to the data, we will apply the formulae below and discover the
different variables (a, b, c, d) and collaborate it into the formulae, where a is the amplitude, b
is affected by period, c the horizontal shift, and d the vertical shift.
y=a sin ( b ( xc ) ) + d

Nadia Eliora 2
However, it is important to remember that in real life, tides are affected by external factors
unpredictable in the function formulae above, so the function can only predict (to a degree of
accuracy) the tide heights at for that specific date, if without external forces.
Because we have knowledge on vectors, where the maximum height of the wave is 12.3 and
the minimum height is 0.7, to discover the amplitude (a) we can apply the formulae below:
maximumminimum
a=
2
12.30.7
a=
2
11.6
a=
2
a=5.8
With the same knowledge on vectors, we can discover the vertical shift (d) of the function.
maximum+minimum
d=
2
12.3+0.7
d=
2
13
d=
2
d=6.5
Because we know that one period in the graph is 12, we can also discover b in the function.
2
b=
Period
2
b=
12

b=
6
We can also discover the horizontal shift (c) by using the interpolation law with our
knowledge on the vertical shift (d), using the formulae below
d y low
c=x low +(
) ( x highx low )
y high y low
To do this, we must discover where d lies on the y-axis margins, as the interpolation law uses
the data from the y-axis to discover the x-axis through ratios.
Time (AST)
Height (m)

low
11.00
4.0

x at d
d (6.5)

high
12.00
6.9

With this information, we can apply the interpolation formulae, therefore:

6.54
c=11.00 +
( 12.0011.00 )
6.94
2.5
c=11+
(1)
2.9
25
c=11+
29
344
c=
29
With the knowledge of the variables a, b, c, and d, we therefore have the updated function:

( )

Nadia Eliora 3

344
x
+ 6.5
6
29
When we apply this updated function to the graph, we get this result (function is black line):
y=5.8 sin

((

Time
00.00
01.00
02.00
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00

))

Height (m)
7.5
10.2
11.8
12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6
9.9

Manual Height
6.9
9.8
11.7
12.3
11.3
9.0
6.1
3.2
1.3
0.7
1.7
4.0
6.9
9.8
11.7
12.3
11.3
9.0

Error (%) in
manual height
7.75
4.36
0.69
2.37
3.68
1.46
3.47
9.86
19.94
20.54
5.59
0.75
0.27
0.57
1.03
0.12
2.58
8.79

Nadia Eliora 4
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00

7.3
4.5
2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4

6.1
3.2
1.3
0.7
1.7
4.0
Average Error
(%)

16.69
27.89
39.01
2.16
112.43
65.42
14.89

The function fits the datas vertical shift, horizontal shift, and amplitude, however it is not as
344
, 6.5 as the beginning of the
appropriate to the period and horizontal shift. With
29
function, it is visible that as the function moves either direction, the error increases, meaning
that the fault is that the value of b is too low.
Considering these aspects, I propose this improved function, where the value of b has been
increased to make the period of the function more appropriate.

344
y=5.8 sin
x
+ 6.5
6.2
29
This is the graphed illustration of the first modification (m1).

( (

))

Nadia Eliora 5
The previous function remains indicated with the black line, whilst the improve function is
indicated with the red line. With his improved function, the percentage of error has decreased
5.2%, (from 14.89% to 9.69%) making the improved function more accurate than the manual.
Time

Height (m)
00.00
01.00
02.00
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00

7.5
10.2
11.8
12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6
9.9
7.3
4.5
2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4

Modified 1 (m1)
8.1
10.6
12.1
12.2
10.8
8.4
5.5
2.9
1.1
0.7
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.5
9.5
6.7
3.8
1.7
0.7
1.2
3.0
Average Error
(%)

Error (%) in m1
7.49
3.69
2.26
1.31
0.67
5.51
12.51
20.49
29.56
17.54
0.23
1.16
0.07
0.39
0.21
0.01
0.72
4.31
8.46
14.53
20.15
2.79
51.87
26.61
9.69

Considering the graph above, c, or the horizontal shift, needs to be adjusted so that it matches
with the tidal heights against the time more. Through this visual analysis, I increased the
value of c so that it would move slightly to the right, proposing the following function

350
y=5.8 sin
x
+6.5
6.2
29
344
350
Notice that
has been modified into
, adjusting the graph so that it moves to
29
29
the right. With this second modification (m2), the following graph is produced, with the green
line as the line representing the function:

( (

))

Nadia Eliora 6

Time
00.00
01.00
02.00
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00

Height (m)
7.5
10.2
11.8
12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6
9.9
7.3
4.5

Modified 2 (m2)
7.5
10.1
11.9
12.3
11.2
9.0
6.1
3.4
1.4
0.7
1.5
3.5
6.3
9.1
11.3
12.3
11.8
10.0
7.3
4.4

Error (%) in m2
0.42
0.77
0.55
2.17
2.82
0.81
2.93
6.81
13.43
22.14
18.13
12.26
8.73
5.82
2.48
0.17
1.67
0.78
0.16
2.21

Nadia Eliora 7
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00

2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4

2.0
0.8
1.0
2.6
Average Error
(%)

2.84
14.44
24.25
7.11
6.41

With this modification, the average error has decreased 3.28% (from 9.69% to 6.41%), and a
total of 8.48% from the original function (from 14.89% to 6.41%). This means that the
second modification (m2) of the function is the most accurate than the original and the first
modification (m1).
Using a graphical software, the suggested sinusoidal regression is as follows:
y=5.7132 sin ( 0.5064 x +0.1956 )+ 6.5867
On the graph below, the blue line represents the sinusoidal regression.

Time

Height (m)
00.00
01.00
02.00

7.5
10.2
11.8

Sinusoidal
Regression
7.7
10.3
11.9

Error (%) in
sinusoidal
regression
2.63
0.74
1.09

Nadia Eliora 8
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00

12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6
9.9
7.3
4.5
2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4

12.2
11.1
8.9
6.1
3.4
1.5
0.9
1.7
3.8
6.5
9.3
11.4
12.3
11.7
9.9
7.2
4.4
2.1
1.0
1.2
2.8
Average
Error(%)

2.01
2.14
0.17
3.82
6.49
7.40
2.42
5.13
5.95
5.43
4.09
1.72
0.09
1.26
0.08
0.87
2.18
0.74
35.95
50.27
16.84
6.65

Below is a comparative table of m2 and the software derived sinusoidal regression.

Time

00.00
01.00
02.00
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00

Height (m)

7.5
10.2
11.8
12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6

Modified 2
(m2)

7.5
10.1
11.9
12.3
11.2
9.0
6.1
3.4
1.4
0.7
1.5
3.5
6.3
9.1
11.3
12.3
11.8

Error (%) in
m2

0.42
0.77
0.55
2.17
2.82
0.81
2.93
6.81
13.43
22.14
18.13
12.26
8.73
5.82
2.48
0.17
1.67

Sinusoidal
Regression
from
software

7.7
10.3
11.9
12.2
11.1
8.9
6.1
3.4
1.5
0.9
1.7
3.8
6.5
9.3
11.4
12.3
11.7

Error (%) in
sinusoidal
regression

2.63
0.74
1.09
2.01
2.14
0.17
3.82
6.49
7.40
2.42
5.13
5.95
5.43
4.09
1.72
0.09
1.26

Nadia Eliora 9
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00

9.9
7.3
4.5
2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4

10.0
7.3
4.4
2.0
0.8
1.0
2.6
Average
Error (%)

0.78
0.16
2.21
2.84
14.44
24.25
7.11
6.41

9.9
7.2
4.4
2.1
1.0
1.2
2.8
Average
Error (%)

0.08
0.87
2.18
0.74
35.95
50.27
16.84
6.65

The average error in the sinusoidal regression from the software is 6.65%, which is higher
than the average error in the second modification (m2) of the manual function, which is
6.41%. My final function is therefore 0.24% more accurate than the software proposed
sinusoidal function. Both the function and the sinusoidal regression share similar period
lengths and are place similarly on the horizontal axis in the graph. The most apparent
difference in the graph is how the functions amplitude reaches both the crest and the trough
of the data, appropriated with the vertical shift, as compared to the amplitude of the
sinusoidal regression, where the troughs do not reach the minimum height of the tides. From
this alone, it is appropriate to conclude that the function is more accurate than the sinusoidal
regression. However, in the data table above, m2 is more accurate lesser times than the
software suggested sinusoidal regression, in a ratio of 7:17 for accuracy. This creates a
contradiction; after looking at the data, the contradiction is plausible because t hours 21.00
and 22.00, the sinusoidal regression has large errors of 35.95% and 50.27% respectively. This
huge shift in data makes the average error for the sinusoidal regression larger than the error
for the m2 function. In this, the effects of an amplitude that is too short is apparent, because
the sinusoidal regression compromises overall accuracy for the accuracy of individual points,
whilst the function focuses on the wholeness of the function and its application to the data
instead of focusing solely on individual figures. So, although the sinusoidal regression is
more take more accurate to the data than the m2 function, it is overall less accurate. Also
observable is that the percentage errors of m2 increases where the graph concaves up, and
most accurate when the graph concaves down. These figures prove that m2 is more accurate
by average, and the sinusoidal regression is more accurate by value, because it compromises
average accuracy for individual accuracy.
Before 17 December 2003 the day the data was recorded the tidal range between 16:01
and 22:36 is 6 meters, with the following as the representing data:

Tuesday

Time
04:23
09:56
16:01
22:36

Height of tide (m)

4.6
0.9
5.8
0.7

If, supposedly, there is strong win to the shore in Nova Scotia on 27 Dec. 2003 from 01.0004.00. If the wind were to come immediately on the shore, there would be no prominent
effect on the tides, except that the tide would bear more waves. This is because the nature of
tides is that they are caused by the gravitational pull of the sun and the moon, and for waves
to turn into tides, it would require time and distance for the tides to grow. If the wind were
immediately on the shore, the short distance would not provide enough time for the tides to

Nadia Eliora 10
grow, because the tide and their waves would break against the shore before having the
opportunity to grow. There would be insignificant difference in the tidal heights between the
hours. However, if the wind came a distance from the source, the change would be more
apparent, depending on the source of the wind and the intensity of the wind these are called
swells. Below is a table illustrating the relationship of wells and how they affect tides,
depending on source and strength of the wind.
Strength of the Wind (Sea Waves, Swells and Other Effects.)
Weak
Strong
The weak strength of the wind would
The strong strength of the wind would
create smaller wells, with smaller
create large wells, with large amplitudes
amplitudes. The wells would not travel
and large frequencies. Although these
far. If the well manages to reach the
waves will travel far, their position
coast,weak
it would
onlyofaffect
the would
means
that when
they
the tide
at
The
strength
the waves
The
strong
strength
of reach
the wind
would
create smaller wells, with small
create large swells, with large amplitudes
amplitudes. Because the wells are close
and large frequencies. Because the wells
to the shore, the effect of the weak waves are close to the shore, the effect of the
would be more immediate. However,
wells would be significant. When wells
Hence, the shift in data if strong winds hit the shore of Nova Scotia on 27 December 2003
(01.00-04.00) would be dependent on the source of the wind and the strength of the wind.
Weak winds from a distance would have little to no effect, and for a brief period of time,
whilst strong winds close to the shore would have significant effects that lasts for a long time.
If this were to happen strong winds, close range then neither the function nor the
sinusoidal regression would be appropriate to estimate the height of the tidal waves.
Besides strong winds at a close distance, other factors that would affect the accuracy of the
function against the data would be the day the data was recorded. For example, below is a
graph of the recorded data (red points), the m2 function (green line), and the recorded data of
the day after, 28 December 2003 (blue lines). Because the 28th follows after the 27th, the
numeric follows the 27th, so 00.00 on the 28th is 24.00 on the 28th, and so forth.
the shoreClose
the coast
to Far from

Source

Wells

Time
(AST)
Heigh
t (m)
Time
(AST)
Heigh
t (m)

24.0
0

25.0
0

26.00

27.0
0

28.0
0

29.00

30.0
0

31.00

32.0
0

33.00

34.0
0

35.00

5.0

7.9

10.2

11.6

11.6

10.5

8.5

6.0

3.5

1.7

1.2

2.2

36.00

37.0
0

38.00

39.00

40.00

41.00

42.00

43.00

44.00

45.00

46.00

47.00

4.4

7.2

9.7

11.3

11.8

11.1

9.4

7.0

4.4

2.2

1.0

1.3

Nadia Eliora 11

Time
00.00
01.00
02.00
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00

Height (m)
7.5
10.2
11.8
12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6
9.9
7.3
4.5

m2
7.5
10.1
11.9
12.3
11.2
9.0
6.1
3.4
1.4
0.7
1.5
3.5
6.3
9.1
11.3
12.3
11.8
10.0
7.3
4.4

Error (%) of m2
0.42
0.77
0.55
2.17
2.82
0.81
2.93
6.81
13.43
22.14
18.13
12.26
8.73
5.82
2.48
0.17
1.67
0.78
0.16
2.21

Nadia Eliora 12
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00
24.00
25.00
26.00
27.00
28.00
29.00
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00
35.00
36.00
37.00
38.00
39.00
40.00
41.00
42.00
43.00
44.00
45.00
46.00
47.00

2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4
5.0
7.9
10.2
11.6
11.6
10.5
8.5
6.0
3.5
1.7
1.2
2.2
4.4
7.2
9.7
11.3
11.8
11.1
9.4
7.0
4.4
2.2
1.0
1.3

2.0
2.84
0.8
14.44
1.0
24.25
2.6
7.11
5.1
2.69
8.0
1.80
10.6
3.55
12.1
3.97
12.2
4.85
10.8
3.25
8.4
0.84
5.5
7.81
2.9
17.77
1.1
33.25
0.7
38.36
1.8
18.53
4.0
8.46
6.9
4.38
9.6
0.57
11.6
2.79
12.3
4.23
11.5
3.84
9.5
0.96
6.7
4.25
3.9
12.18
1.7
23.27
0.7
27.88
1.2
7.18
Average Error
(%)
8.14
th
It is visibly apparent that the function is not appropriate for the data on the 28 . The error has
increased, from 6.41% when applied to the 27th data to 8.14% when applied to the 27th-28th
data. In the percentage error, it is also visible that the largest errors are in the regions where
the data concaves up and concaves down, where the errors are larger near the vertices. Hence,
the amplitude (a) parameter of the function must be changed to be more appropriate to the
data. To change this, we must reconsider finding the amplitude and make it appropriate to the
new data, while still maintaining the accuracy of the previous data
maximumminimum
a=
2
11.81
a=
2
10.8
a=
2
a=5. 4
We discover that the amplitude for the 28th is 5.4. Keeping in mind that the function for the
first day is 5.8, we should find the average between the two.

Nadia Eliora 13
a27+ a28
2
a=5.6
Hence, the function becomes:

350
y=5.6 sin
x
+6.5
6.2
29
Below, the function is applied to the graph (magenta line):
a=

( (

Time

))

Height (m)
00.00
01.00
02.00
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00

7.5
10.2
11.8
12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0

m3
7.4
10.0
11.7
12.1
11.0
8.9
6.1
3.5
1.6
0.9
1.6
3.6

Error (%) of m3
0.87
1.99
1.01
0.51
1.33
0.15
2.72
3.79
2.40
0.08
8.50
9.68

Nadia Eliora 14
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00
24.00
25.00
26.00
27.00
28.00
29.00
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00
35.00
36.00
37.00
38.00
39.00
40.00
41.00
42.00
43.00
44.00
45.00
46.00
47.00

6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6
9.9
7.3
4.5
2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4
5.0
7.9
10.2
11.6
11.6
10.5
8.5
6.0
3.5
1.7
1.2
2.2
4.4
7.2
9.7
11.3
11.8
11.1
9.4
7.0
4.4
2.2
1.0
1.3

6.3
9.0
11.1
12.1
11.6
9.9
7.3
4.5
2.2
1.0
1.2
2.7
5.2
8.0
10.4
11.9
12.0
10.7
8.4
5.6
3.0
1.3
0.9
2.0
4.1
6.9
9.5
11.4
12.1
11.4
9.4
6.7
4.0
1.9
0.9
1.4
Average
Error(%)

8.63
6.75
3.91
1.79
0.09
0.43
0.54
0.61
4.48
42.51
47.98
12.75
3.64
1.12
2.17
2.32
3.16
1.82
1.62
7.25
14.20
22.37
21.81
11.15
6.52
4.56
1.68
1.23
2.54
2.28
0.14
4.35
10.11
15.73
7.95
6.86
6.67

In the graph, it is visible that the modification has made the function more appropriate for the
data between the 27th-28th. The average error has also decreased 1.47% (from 8.14% to
6.67%), meaning that the function has become more accurate.
Using a graphical software, the suggested sinusoidal regression for the 28ths recorded data is:
y=5.525 sin ( 0.5052 x+ 0.2037 ) +6.57 4 4
On the graph below, the blue line represents the sinusoidal regression.

Nadia Eliora 15

Time
00.00
01.00
02.00
03.00
04.00
05.00
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00

Height (m)
7.5
10.2
11.8
12.0
10.9
8.9
6.3
3.6
1.6
0.9
1.8
4.0
6.9
9.7
11.6
12.3
11.6

m3
7.4
10.0
11.7
12.1
11.0
8.9
6.1
3.5
1.6
0.9
1.6
3.6
6.3
9.0
11.1
12.1
11.6

Error (%)
of m3
0.87
1.99
1.01
0.51
1.33
0.15
2.72
3.79
2.40
0.08
8.50
9.68
8.63
6.75
3.91
1.79
0.09

Sinusoidal
Regressio
n
7.7
10.2
11.8
12.0
11.0
8.8
6.1
3.5
1.6
1.1
1.8
3.8
6.5
9.2
11.2
12.1
11.6

Error (%)
of
Sinusoidal
Regressio
n
2.56
0.28
0.41
0.32
0.55
1.28
3.82
3.85
2.58
17.05
2.50
4.55
6.09
5.51
3.42
1.75
0.09

Nadia Eliora 16
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00
24.00
25.00
26.00
27.00
28.00
29.00
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00
35.00
36.00
37.00
38.00
39.00
40.00
41.00
42.00
43.00
44.00
45.00
46.00
47.00

9.9
7.3
4.5
2.1
0.7
0.8
2.4
5.0
7.9
10.2
11.6
11.6
10.5
8.5
6.0
3.5
1.7
1.2
2.2
4.4
7.2
9.7
11.3
11.8
11.1
9.4
7.0
4.4
2.2
1.0
1.3

9.9
7.3
4.5
2.2
1.0
1.2
2.7
5.2
8.0
10.4
11.9
12.0
10.7
8.4
5.6
3.0
1.3
0.9
2.0
4.1
6.9
9.5
11.4
12.1
11.4
9.4
6.7
4.0
1.9
0.9
1.4
Average
Error (%)

0.43
0.54
0.61
4.48
42.51
47.98
12.75
3.64
1.12
2.17
2.32
3.16
1.82
1.62
7.25
14.20
22.37
21.81
11.15
6.52
4.56
1.68
1.23
2.54
2.28
0.14
4.35
10.11
15.73
7.95
6.86
6.67

9.8
7.3
4.5
2.3
1.1
1.3
2.8
5.3
8.0
10.4
11.9
12.0
10.7
8.5
5.7
3.2
1.5
1.1
2.0
4.1
6.8
9.5
11.4
12.1
11.4
9.6
6.9
4.2
2.1
1.1
1.5
Average
Error (%)

0.59
0.32
0.82
9.80
63.05
66.79
18.19
5.45
1.69
2.26
2.27
3.24
2.27
0.47
4.82
9.21
12.18
10.17
7.45
6.18
5.12
2.37
0.76
2.54
2.99
1.61
1.04
4.22
4.94
8.85
12.02
6.88

In the graph, the sinusoidal regression has a smaller period than m3, however it is visible that
they have different amplitudes. In the data, it is proven that m3 is 0.21% more accurate than
the graphic program derived sinusoidal regression. Unlike the m2 function against the data of
the 27th, the m3 function and the sinusoidal regression have equal times of being more
accurate than the other when applied to the 27th-28th data. Hence, the higher accuracy of m3 is
because the figures are generally more accurate. Because of the 6.67% accuracy of m3, the
function fits the data (as it is also visibly observable in the graph).
The reason such alterations had to be made from the original function (m2) into a function
appropriate to both days (m3) are because of external factors that impact tides. Aside from
strong winds that are capable of changing tidal heights and periods, the lunar cycle is also a
significant external factor. Depending on the position of the moon, tidal heights change,
through tractive forces created by the moons gravity heightens water surfaces, making for

Nadia Eliora 17
higher tides. Rather than revolve around the earth, the moon and the earth share a system that
orbits the center mass of gravity. Hence, the earth rotates on its axis, and the moon seemingly
revolves around the earth. This system allows the moon to change its position against he
equator, and it regularly shifts 28 degrees above and below it. Different coordinates will
receive different amounts of exposure to the moons gravity forces daily, increasing or
decreasing tractive forces and therefore changing tidal height patterns. The sun, which has its
own gravitational force, also affects tidal heights. The moon-earth system revolves around the
sun, which causes another variety in tidal heights. The tilting degree of the earth as it rotates
around its axis is also something to consider (Garrison). For these reasons, it is difficult to
determine an absolute function that can predict tidal heights in certain locations, as there the
external factors of wind and gravitational forces of other orbitals.
Reflection
The results are relevant to discovering a function that is applicable to predict the tidal heights
of Grindstone Island on the 27th December 2003, as the recorded data is an isolated
recollection. Because of its exclusive nature, it is possible to discover a function to predict
this. Modifying the function to predict the tidal heights between the 27th-28th of December is
also possible because the recorded data is also isolated. The method used to discover these
functions (m2, m3) are effective to their purpose, because it considers the given information
and makes slight modification according to visual observations. These methods are also
accurate because they have percentage errors of 6.41% and 6.67%, both relatively low
figures. Because of that, the method of discovering the functions is appropriate and relevant
to predict the tidal heights in the isolated data recorded between 27th-28th December. Hence,
the results achieve an acceptable degree of accuracy, as they have an overall percentage error
lower than 10%, as well as achieve the goal of predicting tidal heights for those two days.
However, in the future, besides overall average, the accuracy of each individual figure should
also be more attended to receive even more accurate results, which will require further
investigation on sinusoidal functions and the manipulation of. In real life, the sinusoidal
functions are useful in predicting tidal heights. However, it must be remembered that the
figures are only predictions, and can only provide accuracy if the external factors (like wind)
are not involved or if those external factors are considered (like lunar cycles). When this is
achieved, sinusoidal functions is a practical way of predicting tidal heights, therefore useful
for preventing natural catastrophes like tsunamis or floods. For this, I will need to do more
research on sinusoidal functions, to receive a higher degree of accuracy.
Works Cited
Garrison, Tom S. Tides. Essentials of Oceanography. Brooks Cole: 2012. Print.
Sea Waves, Swells and Other Effects. The Weather Window. Malasail. Web. 25 October
2015. <http://weather.mailasail.com/Franks-Weather/How-Waves-And-Swell-Form>