Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10

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,

(Ω) 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,

resistance,

, is therefore divided to the total external load, of the power supply according to the equation;

, and to the internal

, 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)

1

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

Hence, I believe that

Variables:

we get,

Independent Variable

Dependent Variable

Controlled Variable

(

Total external load, electrical circuit

) on the

Current,

(A) drawn from the power supply

Available EMF,

(V) of the dry

cell

   

Internal resistance,

() of

the power supply (dry cell)

Protocol Diagram:

Ω ) of the power supply (dry cell) Protocol Diagram: A Multimeter Dry Cell Resistor Procedure:
A
A

Multimeter

Dry Cell

supply (dry cell) Protocol Diagram: A Multimeter Dry Cell Resistor Procedure: The circuit was arranged as

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

same procedure was repeated for the next 7 values of

6080

7070

and 8080

were used for each subsequent try and the

.

2

is directly proportional to

, where

and

is a constant.

Data Collection and Processing

Raw Data Table

1. Table of Total external load,

) on the electrical circuit versus Current, from the power supply

(

(A) drawn

Total external load,

Current,

(A) drawn from the

(

) on the

power supply ± 0.1 A

 

electrical circuit

Trial 1

Trial 2

Trial 3

 

1063

1310.0

1309.0

1311.0

 

2072

703.0

703.0

704.0

 

3060

484.0

483.0

484.0

 

4060

365.8

365.7

365.8

 

5090

293.3

293.3

293.3

 

6080

246.4

246.4

246.4

 

7070

212.5

212.4

212.5

 

8080

186.2

186.2

186.2

Available EMF,

of the dry cell = 1.50 V

The true value of Internal resistance,

(Ω) 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

therefore the absolute error was the smallest reading of the instrument.

10 -6 A. Since the instrument was digital,

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.

3

Overview:

Firstly, the average current,

sum of the three readings of current,

(A) drawn from the power supply was calculated by dividing the

(A) drawn from the power supply by 3.

Then,

and

were calculated.

was then calculated by dividing 1 by

.

A graph of total external load, as error bars was plotted.

(Ω) 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

A

A

4

Then,

and

were calculated.

The following graph was plotted:

Graph of total external load, (Ω) on the electrical circuit versus (A -1 ) with

as error bars was plotted.

Presentation

Processed Data Table

2. Table of Total external load,

and

Total external load,

 

(A)

   

(A)

   

(A)

       

(

) on the

(

)

(

)

(

)

electrical circuit

     

(A

-1 )

(A

-1 )

(A

-1 )

 

1063

1310.000

1.000

 

1.000

 

763.359

0.5832

0.5823

 

2072

703.333

 

0.667

 

0.333

 

1421.801

0.6742

1.3464

 

3060

483.667

 

0.333

 

0.667

 

2067.540

2.8537

1.4239

 

4060

365.767

 

0.033

 

0.067

 

2733.983

0.4984

0.2491

 

5090

293.300

 

0.000

 

0.000

 

3409.478

0.0000

0.0000

 

6080

246.400

 

0.000

 

0.000

 

4058.442

0.0000

0.0000

 

7070

212.467

 

0.033

 

0.067

 

4706.621

1.4773

0.7383

 

8080

186.200

 

0.000

 

0.000

 

5370.569

0.0000

0.0000

5

(

) on the electrical circuit versus

(A -1 )

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 4000 3000 2000
6000
5000
y
= 0.6570x + 62.5281
y = 0.6567x + 64.745
4000
3000
2000
y
= 0.6565x
+ 66.087
1000
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
1/I (A -1 )

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

(Ω) on the electrical circuit versus

increased,

increased. This supports the hypothesis.

From the graph of total external load,

was

.

(Ω) on the electrical circuit versus

(A -1 ), it was

(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,

7

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,

intercept was

.

(Ω) on the electrical circuit versus

(A -1 ), the y-

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,

8

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 co‐relation. 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,

therefore, it was difficult to evaluate the value and existence of systematic error.

(Ω) of the power supply (dry cell) was not known

The literature value of

.

was

. But, the value of

found from the experiment was

Therefore the error in the reading of

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,

(Ω) of a

The EMF,

higher or lower than the value mentioned.

(V) of the dry cell may not be exactly the value mentioned on the dry cell. It may be

The temperature at which the experiment is carried out is not constant. This fluctuation affects the resistance because temperature and resistance are directly proportional.

(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.

The EMF,

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,

intervals. This will also stop the battery from running down.

(V) of the dry cell can be kept constant by switching off the battery at regular

The actual EMF,

mentioned on the cell. This, thus, influences the calculations done.

(V) of the dry cell was 1.535 V when measured. It was higher than the value

10