{"id":118,"date":"2015-07-21T20:31:19","date_gmt":"2015-07-21T20:31:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.candelalearning.com\/styleforstudents\/?post_type=chapter&p=118"},"modified":"2015-07-21T20:31:19","modified_gmt":"2015-07-21T20:31:19","slug":"sample-tables","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/suny-hccc-styleforstudents-1\/chapter\/sample-tables\/","title":{"raw":"Sample Tables","rendered":"Sample Tables"},"content":{"raw":"
\r\n
\r\n\r\nTables used in papers can be so simple that they are \u201cinformal\u201d enough to be a sentence member and not require a caption, or they can be complex enough that they require spreadsheets spanning several pages. A table\u2019s fundamental purpose should always be to visually simplify complex material, in particular when the table is designed to help the reader identify trends. Here, a simple table and a complex table are used to demonstrate how tables help writers to record and \u201cvisualize\u201d information and data.\r\n

Simple Table<\/h2>\r\nThe simple table that follows, from a student\u2019s progress report to his advisor, represents how tables need not always be about data presentation. Here the rows and columns simply make it easy for the writer to present the necessary information with efficiency. This unnumbered and\u00a0informal\u00a0table, in effect, explains itself.\r\n\r\nPlan for Weekly Progress for the Remainder of the Semester<\/strong>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
Week of 11\/28<\/td>\r\n\n\nContact Dr. Berinni for relevant literature suggestions.\r\n\r\nRead lit reviews from Vibrational Spectroscopy<\/em>.\r\n\r\nResearch experimental methods used to test polyurethanes, including\r\n\r\ninfrared (IR) spectroscopy and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR).<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
Week of 12\/5<\/td>\r\n\n\nDefine specific ways that polyurethanes can be improved.\r\n\r\nDevelop experimental plan.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
Week of 12\/12<\/td>\r\n\n\nCreate visual aids, depicting chemical reactions and experimental setups.\r\n\r\nPrepare draft of analytical report.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
Week of 12\/18<\/td>\r\nTurn in copy of preliminary analytical report, to be expanded upon next semester.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\n

Complex Table<\/h2>\r\nThe following sample table is excerpted from a student\u2019s senior thesis about tests conducted on Pennsylvania coal. Note the specificity of the table\u2019s caption. Also note the level of discussion following the table, and how the writer uses the data from the table to move toward an explanation of the trends that the table reveals.\r\n

Table 1 summarizes the results of borehole dilution testing and slug testing on wells B2, B3, and B4. The hydraulic conductivities computed from the borehole dilution test velocities for these wells range over an order of magnitude\u2014a reasonable spread for hydraulic properties of close, but varying, test sites.<\/p>\r\n

Table 1<\/strong>. Water velocities and hydraulic conductivities of the Lower Kittanning coal at the Kaufmann site in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania, from slug tests, November 1991, and borehole dilution (BD) tests, November 1992.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
\u00a0Well #<\/td>\r\n\n\nVelocity:\r\n\r\nBD tests<\/td>\r\n\n\nHydraulic\r\n\r\nConductivity:\r\n\r\nBD tests (pe<\/sub> = 0.01)<\/td>\r\n\n\nHydraulic\r\n\r\nConductivity:\r\n\r\nBD tests (pe<\/sub> = 0.05)<\/td>\r\n\n\nHydraulic\r\n\r\nConductivity:\r\n\r\nslug tests<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
B2<\/td>\r\n0.054 ft\/d<\/td>\r\n1.1 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\r\n0.054 ft\/d<\/td>\r\n0.19 ft\/d<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
B3<\/td>\r\n0.32 ft\/d<\/td>\r\n0.07 ft\/d<\/td>\r\n0.32 ft\/d<\/td>\r\n8.9 x 10-3<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
B4<\/td>\r\n0.06 ft\/d<\/td>\r\n1.2 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\r\n6.0 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\r\n2.8 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\n

The hydraulic conductivities computed from the borehole dilution test velocities are significantly lower than those predicted by Huang and Sheltons' core analysis of Middle Kittanning coal. As shown in Table 1, the borehole dilution hydraulic conductivity values for wells B2 and B4 agree reasonably well with their corresponding slug test values, assuming an effective porosity between 0.01 and 0.05. This effective porosity seems high, but the dip of bedding in the study area is opposite the regional dip. This implies slumping, which could increase the effective porosity significantly.<\/p>\r\nAbove, we see how the table caption and supporting text are tightly intertwined, with the aim of describing a trend. In this case, the writer compares her table data to the work of other authors and extracts key test results and quantities from the table to discuss in the paper\u2019s text. Here, we learn that \u201cwells B2 and B4 agree reasonably well with their corresponding slug test values,\u201d and we can retreat to the table for verification if we wish. Put simply, the table records the facts; the writer selects from the facts to interpret the trend.\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

<\/div>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"
\n
\n

Tables used in papers can be so simple that they are \u201cinformal\u201d enough to be a sentence member and not require a caption, or they can be complex enough that they require spreadsheets spanning several pages. A table\u2019s fundamental purpose should always be to visually simplify complex material, in particular when the table is designed to help the reader identify trends. Here, a simple table and a complex table are used to demonstrate how tables help writers to record and \u201cvisualize\u201d information and data.<\/p>\n

Simple Table<\/h2>\n

The simple table that follows, from a student\u2019s progress report to his advisor, represents how tables need not always be about data presentation. Here the rows and columns simply make it easy for the writer to present the necessary information with efficiency. This unnumbered and\u00a0informal\u00a0table, in effect, explains itself.<\/p>\n

Plan for Weekly Progress for the Remainder of the Semester<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Week of 11\/28<\/td>\n\n

Contact Dr. Berinni for relevant literature suggestions.<\/p>\n

Read lit reviews from Vibrational Spectroscopy<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Research experimental methods used to test polyurethanes, including<\/p>\n

infrared (IR) spectroscopy and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR).<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Week of 12\/5<\/td>\n\n

Define specific ways that polyurethanes can be improved.<\/p>\n

Develop experimental plan.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Week of 12\/12<\/td>\n\n

Create visual aids, depicting chemical reactions and experimental setups.<\/p>\n

Prepare draft of analytical report.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Week of 12\/18<\/td>\nTurn in copy of preliminary analytical report, to be expanded upon next semester.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Complex Table<\/h2>\n

The following sample table is excerpted from a student\u2019s senior thesis about tests conducted on Pennsylvania coal. Note the specificity of the table\u2019s caption. Also note the level of discussion following the table, and how the writer uses the data from the table to move toward an explanation of the trends that the table reveals.<\/p>\n

Table 1 summarizes the results of borehole dilution testing and slug testing on wells B2, B3, and B4. The hydraulic conductivities computed from the borehole dilution test velocities for these wells range over an order of magnitude\u2014a reasonable spread for hydraulic properties of close, but varying, test sites.<\/p>\n

Table 1<\/strong>. Water velocities and hydraulic conductivities of the Lower Kittanning coal at the Kaufmann site in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania, from slug tests, November 1991, and borehole dilution (BD) tests, November 1992.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\u00a0Well #<\/td>\n\n

Velocity:<\/p>\n

BD tests<\/td>\n

\n

Hydraulic<\/p>\n

Conductivity:<\/p>\n

BD tests (pe<\/sub> = 0.01)<\/td>\n

\n

Hydraulic<\/p>\n

Conductivity:<\/p>\n

BD tests (pe<\/sub> = 0.05)<\/td>\n

\n

Hydraulic<\/p>\n

Conductivity:<\/p>\n

slug tests<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

B2<\/td>\n0.054 ft\/d<\/td>\n1.1 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\n0.054 ft\/d<\/td>\n0.19 ft\/d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
B3<\/td>\n0.32 ft\/d<\/td>\n0.07 ft\/d<\/td>\n0.32 ft\/d<\/td>\n8.9 x 10-3<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
B4<\/td>\n0.06 ft\/d<\/td>\n1.2 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\n6.0 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\n2.8 x 10-2<\/sup> ft\/d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The hydraulic conductivities computed from the borehole dilution test velocities are significantly lower than those predicted by Huang and Sheltons’ core analysis of Middle Kittanning coal. As shown in Table 1, the borehole dilution hydraulic conductivity values for wells B2 and B4 agree reasonably well with their corresponding slug test values, assuming an effective porosity between 0.01 and 0.05. This effective porosity seems high, but the dip of bedding in the study area is opposite the regional dip. This implies slumping, which could increase the effective porosity significantly.<\/p>\n

Above, we see how the table caption and supporting text are tightly intertwined, with the aim of describing a trend. In this case, the writer compares her table data to the work of other authors and extracts key test results and quantities from the table to discuss in the paper\u2019s text. Here, we learn that \u201cwells B2 and B4 agree reasonably well with their corresponding slug test values,\u201d and we can retreat to the table for verification if we wish. Put simply, the table records the facts; the writer selects from the facts to interpret the trend.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Candela Citations<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
CC licensed content, Shared previously<\/div>