Experiment 21: EMF and Internal Resistance of a Power Supply

Aim: The aim of this experiment is to determine the EMF,

a dry cell.

(V) and Internal Resistance, () of

Design
Research Question:
How does total external load,
the power supply?

( ) on the electrical circuit affect the current, (A) drawn from

Hypothesis:
The reading on a voltmeter, when connected across a power supply such as a dry cell, is found
to be larger when it is passive, than when it is driving a current through an external load.
Theory suggests that the reason for this is the fact that the cell has an internal resistance, ,
which takes up part of the available EMF when current is flowing through the circuit. The
available EMF, , is therefore divided to the total external load, , and to the internal
resistance, of the power supply according to the equation;

, where

is the available EMF of the dry cell

is the current drawn from the power supply
is the total external load on the electrical circuit
is the internal resistance of the power supply (dry cell)

On comparing the above equation to an equation of a straight line, i.e.,

Hence, I believe that

is directly proportional to

we get,

, where and is a constant.

Variables:
Independent Variable
Total external load, ( ) on the
electrical circuit

Protocol Diagram:

Dependent Variable
Current, (A) drawn from the
power supply

Controlled Variable
Available EMF, (V) of the dry
cell
Internal resistance, () of
the power supply (dry cell)

Dry Cell

A
Multimeter
Resistor
Procedure:
The circuit was arranged as shown in the diagram above.
Connect one external load, of 1063 across the circuit.
The electrical circuit was switched on and the current, (A) flowing through the
electrical circuit was measured. This value was then recorded in the raw data table
under the heading current, (A) drawn from the power supply.
Three readings for total external load, ( ) on the electrical circuit were taken to
reduce random errors.
Different total external load, ( ) on the electrical circuit namely 2072 , 3060
4060 5090 6080 7070 and 8080 were used for each subsequent try and the
same procedure was repeated for the next 7 values of .
2

Data Collection and Processing

Raw Data Table
1. Table of Total external load,

( ) on the electrical circuit versus Current, (A) drawn

from the power supply

Total external load,

( ) on the
electrical circuit
1063
2072
3060
4060
5090
6080
7070
8080

Available EMF,

Current, (A) drawn from the

power supply 0.1 A
Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
1310.0
1309.0
1311.0
703.0
703.0
704.0
484.0
483.0
484.0
365.8
365.7
365.8
293.3
293.3
293.3
246.4
246.4
246.4
212.5
212.4
212.5
186.2
186.2
186.2

of the dry cell = 1.50 V

The true value of Internal resistance, () of the power supply (dry cell) was not known.
Data Processing
Statement of choice on uncertainties:
The smallest reading on the multimeter was 0.1 10-6 A. Since the instrument was digital,
therefore the absolute error was the smallest reading of the instrument.
Therefore,
Absolute error of the multimeter = The smallest reading on the instrument
= 1.00 10-7 A
However, the uncertainties used in the calculations were the residual effects of the average of
the 3 values of the current, (A) drawn from the power supply.

Overview:
Firstly, the average current,
(A) drawn from the power supply was calculated by dividing the
sum of the three readings of current, (A) drawn from the power supply by 3.
Then,

and

were calculated.

was then calculated by dividing 1 by

Then,

and

were calculated.

A graph of total external load,

as error bars was plotted.

() on the electrical circuit versus (A-1) with

and

Also, a line of best fit (black), line of maximum gradient (red) and the line of minimum gradient
(green) were also plotted, on the same graph, with their equation displayed.
Sample Calculations:
All the following calculations have been done using the value

A
4

The following graph was plotted:

() on the electrical circuit versus (A-1) with

Graph of total external load,

and

as error bars was plotted.

Presentation
Processed Data Table
2. Table of Total external load,
Total external load,
( ) on the
electrical circuit
1063
2072
3060
4060
5090
6080
7070
8080

(A)
(

( ) on the electrical circuit versus (A-1)

(A)

1310.000
703.333
483.667
365.767
293.300
246.400
212.467
186.200

)
1.000
0.667
0.333
0.033
0.000
0.000
0.033
0.000

(A)
)
1.000
0.333
0.667
0.067
0.000
0.000
0.067
0.000

(A-1)

(A-1)

(A-1)

763.359
1421.801
2067.540
2733.983
3409.478
4058.442
4706.621
5370.569

0.5832
0.6742
2.8537
0.4984
0.0000
0.0000
1.4773
0.0000

0.5823
1.3464
1.4239
0.2491
0.0000
0.0000
0.7383
0.0000

Graphs:

1. Graph of total external load, R ( ) on the electrical circuit

versus 1/I (A-1)
6000

5000

y = 0.6570x + 62.5281
y = 0.6567x + 64.745

1/I (A-1)

4000

3000

2000
y = 0.6565x + 66.087

1000

0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Total external load, R ( ) on the electrical circuit

Note:
The vertical error bars were really small as compared to the value of
The y-intercept of the line of best fit, rather than being a value between the y-intercept of line
of minimum gradient and the y-intercept of line of maximum gradient, was outside the range.
The gradient of the line of best fit, rather than being a value between the gradient of line of
minimum gradient and the gradient of line of maximum gradient, was outside the range.
6

Conclusion and Evaluation

Conclusion:
From the graph of total external load,
concluded that as

increased, increased. This supports the hypothesis.

From the graph of total external load,

was

() on the electrical circuit versus (A-1), it was

() on the electrical circuit versus (A-1) , the gradient

From the graph, the equation of the line of best fit (black) was y = 0.6570x + 62.5281
The value of

was determined.

From the graph, the gradient was 0.6570

Therefore,

The equation of the line of maximum gradient (red) was y = 0.6567x + 64.745
The value of

was determined.

From the graph, the gradient was 0.6567

Therefore,

The equation of the line of minimum gradient (green) was y = 0.6565x + 66.087
The value of

was determined.

From the graph, the gradient was 0.6565

Therefore,

The range of

found from the experiment was

The value of found from the line of best fit did not lie in the range however, for calculation
purposes this value was used.
From the graph of total external load,

() on the electrical circuit versus (A-1), the y-

intercept was .
From the graph, the equation of the line of best fit (black) was y = 0.6570x + 62.5281
The value of internal resistance, () of the power supply (dry cell) was determined.
From the graph, the y-intercept was 62.5281
Therefore,

From the graph, the equation of the line of maximum gradient (red) was y = 0.6567x + 64.745
The value of internal resistance, () of the power supply (dry cell) was determined.
From the graph, the y-intercept was 64.745
Therefore,

From the graph, the equation of the line of minimum gradient (green) was y = 0.6565x + 66.087
The value of internal resistance, () of the power supply (dry cell) was determined.
From the graph, the y-intercept was 66.087
Therefore,

The range of found from the experiment was

The value of found from the line of best fit did not lie in the range however, for calculation
purposes this value was used.
The plotted points were in strong positive corelation. The error bars were quite small which
shows that there was a really small random error in the readings. Since the value of the random
error was so small, they were not visible in the graph.
9

Since the true value of Internal resistance, () of the power supply (dry cell) was not known
therefore, it was difficult to evaluate the value and existence of systematic error.
The literature value of
.

was

. But, the value of

Therefore the error in the reading of

found from the experiment was

was,

= 1.4733 %

This showed that there was a really small error in the value of
This showed that the experiment was precise.
Limitations of the Experimental Design:
The experiment was designed to determine the EMF,
dry cell.

(V) and Internal Resistance, () of a

The EMF, (V) of the dry cell may not be exactly the value mentioned on the dry cell. It may be
higher or lower than the value mentioned.
The temperature at which the experiment is carried out is not constant. This fluctuation affects
the resistance because temperature and resistance are directly proportional.
The EMF, (V) of the dry cell is not constant because the cell is run down (Since it is switched
on for the whole experiment.) This influences the readings of the variables of the experiment.
Suggestions for Improvement:
The systematic error can be prevented from occurring by ensuring the multimeter did not have
a zero error.
The temperature can be kept constant by keeping the AC switched off and the windows shut.
The EMF, (V) of the dry cell can be kept constant by switching off the battery at regular
intervals. This will also stop the battery from running down.
The actual EMF, (V) of the dry cell was 1.535 V when measured. It was higher than the value
mentioned on the cell. This, thus, influences the calculations done.

10