Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Chemistry/IDS/FST
10B
24 May 2016
Table of Contents
Introduction.............................................................................................................1
Review of Literature...............................................................................................3
Problem Statement.................................................................................................6
Experimental Design...............................................................................................7
Conclusion............................................................................................................23
Application.............................................................................................................26
Works Cited...........................................................................................................33
Introduction
With the trillions upon trillions of atoms that make up the world, identification is
key to understanding how things work, and how to use these elements. This is essential
since these elements are the sole reason for human survival (The Earth Forms). To
identify an object, one must know some variable of an object which is comparable to
another object having the same variable. In this experiment the researchers tested two
metal elements; a known metal, Zirconium, and an unknown metal, on their intensive
property of specific heat. This property is able to determine a metal without a specific
This studys purpose was to determine if it was possible to decide if two metals
have the same identity based upon the measurements of their specific heat. In order to
identify the metal rods, the specific heat was needed to be found of both sets of metal
rods. If the specific heat of the Zirconium rods was the same as the unknown metal
rods, then the identity of the unknown metal could have been determined as Zirconium.
The specific heat of the metals were found by measuring the heat transferred between
the metal and H O (water). The metal was heated to the point of equilibrium with boiling
2
water and then removed and placed in a calorimeter containing water at room
temperature. The temperature change was used to calculate the specific heat of the
thermometer, and a homemade calorimeter. Specific heat can be readily used to identify
1
a material; it is unique to each element and because of this, is a suitable way to identify
an element. Apposed to other intensive properties like pressure and molecular weight,
specific heat is far simpler to identify. It also is more reliable in singling out an element
than other intensive properties. There is no mistaking specific heat for a different
Specific heat finds many uses and practical applications in the field of
engineering. One example of this is when engine parts constantly expand and contract
due to the fluctuation in heat within the engine. That is why it is imperative that metals
with similar specific heat capacities are put together, because if one metal heats up
faster than the other and theyre connected, and one expands faster than the other, then
cracking and splitting may occur. Intensive properties may not be important, but great
problems around the world would be caused if intensive properties were not observed.
2
Review of Literature
The specific heat of a substance is the amount of heat required to raise the
temperature of one gram of the substance by one degree Celsius (Chang). It has the
units J/g*, Joules per grams Celsius. Specific heat is identified as an intensive
property since heat capacity is the same regardless of how much there is.
If the specific heat and the amount of a substance is known, then the change in
the samples temperature (T) will indicate the amount of heat (q) that has been
the specific part of the universe that is of interest to the individual (Chang). There are
three types of systems, one of which includes an isolated system. This particular system
does not allow the transfer of either mass or energy. When the system gains energy, it is
The specific heat is measured through the process of calorimetry; the science
associated with determining the changes in energy of a system by measuring the heat
This device is device for measuring the heat developed during a mechanical, electrical,
or chemical reaction, and for calculating the heat capacity of materials (Encyclopedia
3
Britannica, Calorimetry). When calculating the temperatures, the First Law of
states that heat energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can, however, be transferred
from one location to another and converted to and from other forms of energy (Lucas).
The specific heat of Zirconium is 0.278 J/g*C, and the density is 6.49 g/cm (The
3
Physics Room). That specific heat means that it takes Zirconium 0.278 J/g*c to heat up
one gram of a substance, in this case, water. Water has a specific heat of 4.186 J/g*C,
which is way higher than that of Zirconiums. That means it might take longer than
crafted calorimeter; therefore it will resemble a simpler one. The calorimeter that will be
used in the experiment will be an isolated system so no energy can release. It will be
designed to keep the heat in, and to be able to be the most efficient in finding the
specific heat.
4
-smt = +smt.
Since specific heat is an intensive property, on one side of the equation, the variables
apply to water in the calorimeter and on the other side, they apply to the known or
unknown metal. Referring to the equation, s stands for specific heat (J/g*). The m
stands for mass (grams) which will be measured with a scale. The change in
water, to calculate the unknown elements specific heat. Past experiments in this field of
chemistry were reflected on and modeled to better understand how to conduct the
experiment done. In a published experiment, water was used to measure the heat
transferred from an unknown metal. A calorimeter was filled with a set amount of water.
The unknown element was then placed in the water. After that, the temperature of the
water was measured again and the difference was recorded (Matanuska-Susitna
heat transfer between the water and the unknown element. This is helpful to this
experiment because the set-up is very similar to the experiment done here. The
calorimeter will also be filled with water, and then the hot Zirconium rod will be placed
In a similar experiment, the experimenter started with cold water and added a
room temperature metal into it. They recorded the temperature increase of the water
from the room temperature metal (Barth and Moran). The two experiments are
5
applicable because a metal rod of a known element will be put into boiling water until
they reach equilibrium. Once they do, the rod will be put into the calorimeter and the
temperature will be recorded. The First Law of Thermodynamics comes into play
because in the isolated calorimeter, the energy will stay constant, meaning it will
Problem Statement
Problem Statement:
Hypothesis:
If the specific heat of the unknown element is within the alpha level of 0.10 and a
Data Measured:
The dependent variables in this situation are the unknown and known metal. The
independent variables are amount of water put into the calorimeter, and the initial
temperature of the water. To acquire the values required to calculate the specific heat of
the unknown metal, the metal and water were measured in uniform units: grams and
milliliters. The mass of the metal was measured in grams every time, and the initial and
final temperature of both the metal and the water were measured in Celsius. When
conducting the experiment, it was assumed that the metal had reached equilibrium with
6
the boiling water it was placed in after a set time. The initial temperature of the water
was also assumed to have come to equilibrium with the surrounding air of the lab
environment before recording it. The known specific heats of water and the Zirconium
sample were recorded with the units of joules per gram Celsius (J/gC). To determine if
the sample falls below the alpha level of 0.10, a two sample t-test was utilized. The t-
test compared the means of the Zirconium sample and the unknown metal sample.
Experimental Design
Materials:
Procedure:
1. Randomize the order of the 30 trials for the Zirconium rods (appendix B).
2. Place the first randomized rod on the scale and record the mass.
3. Repeat step 2 until the mass of every rod has been recorded.
5. Measure the initial temperature of the water in the calorimeter with the use of the
Vernier Temperature Probe.
6. Allow the water to reach equilibrium with the probe by leaving it in the calorimeter
for 45 seconds, and then record the temperature. (See appendix C to operate
Lab Quest)
7
8. Place the loaf pan on the hot plate until the water is between 97 - 100 Celsius.
9. Place a Zirconium rod in the loaf pan for 160 seconds (based on a graph), so it
can reach equilibrium with the water.
10. Record the temperature of the water after equilibrium has been reached. Assume
the temperature of the metal is equal to the temperature of the water. Record this
as the initial temperature of the metal.
11. Using tongs, remove the rod from the loaf pan and immediately place into the
calorimeter.
12. Allow the rod to sit for 120 seconds in the calorimeter to reach equilibrium.
13. Once there the graph has reached a flat plateau, record the final temperature of
15. Insert the mass and change in temperature into the equation as seen in the
equation in appendix a.
Diagram:
8
Figure 2. Materials
Figure 2 shows all of the materials that are required to conduct the experiment.
9
Figure 3. Recording the Temperature
Figure 3 shows the setup for recording the heat exchange of the rods after they
have been removed from the boiling water. The rods go inside and the temperature
probe goes through the hole on the top of the cap. This measures the temperature of
the water.
10
Data and Observations
Data:
Table 1
Zirconium Rod Specific Heat Data
Zirconium Rods
Equilibriu Change in Specifi
Initial Temp. Mass
m Temp. Temp. c Heat
Trial Rod (C)
(C)
(g)
(C) (J/g C)
Water Metal Water Metal Metal Water
26.73
1 B
22.7 97.7 25.6 2.9 -72.1 1 43 0.271
26.00
2 B
23.0 98.3 22.3 -0.7 -76.0 0 43 -0.064
26.74
3 B
22.9 98.7 25.7 2.8 -73.0 5 43 0.258
26.74
4 A
26.1 98.3 28.8 2.7 -69.5 3 43 0.261
26.74
5 A
22.2 98.2 24.9 2.7 -73.3 3 43 0.248
26.74
6 B
23.1 98.3 26.3 3.2 -72.0 5 43 0.299
26.74
7 A
22.3 97.6 25.2 2.9 -72.4 5 43 0.269
26.74
8 B
21.9 97.7 24.9 3.0 -72.8 4 43 0.277
26.74
9 A
22.5 97.6 25.5 3.0 -72.1 2 43 0.280
26.74
10 A
22.9 97.5 25.7 2.8 -71.8 2 43 0.262
26.74
11 A
23.0 97.7 25.8 2.8 -71.9 3 43 0.262
26.74
12 B
22.4 97.8 25.7 3.3 -72.1 3 43 0.308
26.74
13 A
22.9 97.9 25.8 2.9 -72.1 3 43 0.271
26.74
14 A
22.9 97.9 25.7 2.8 -72.2 3 43 0.261
26.74
15 A
22.8 97.7 26.0 3.2 -71.7 3 43 0.300
26.74
16 A
22.6 98.3 25.4 2.8 -72.9 3 43 0.258
26.74
17 B
22.9 97.7 25.7 2.8 -72.0 3 43 0.262
18 B 23.2 97.8 26.0 2.8 -71.8 26.74 43 0.262
11
5
26.74
19 B
23.2 98.1 26.0 2.8 -72.1 3 43 0.261
26.74
20 B
23.1 97.6 26.2 3.1 -71.4 5 43 0.292
26.74
21 A
23.4 97.5 26.5 3.1 -71.0 3 43 0.294
26.74
22 B
23.1 98.1 26.1 3.0 -72.0 3 43 0.280
26.74
23 A
23.5 98.4 26.3 2.8 -72.1 3 43 0.261
26.74
24 A
23.1 97.6 26.3 3.2 -71.3 3 43 0.302
26.74
25 A
23.4 98.0 26.3 2.9 -71.7 3 43 0.272
26.74
26 B
23.1 98.1 26.0 2.9 -72.1 4 43 0.271
26.74
27 B
23.0 97.3 25.8 2.8 -71.5 3 43 0.263
26.74
28 B
23.3 97.5 26.2 2.9 -71.3 3 43 0.274
26.74
29 A
22.9 97.9 25.8 2.9 -72.1 3 43 0.271
26.74
30 B
23.0 98.0 25.9 2.9 -72.1 4 43 0.271
26.71
Average: 23.0 97.9 25.8 2.8 -72.2 2 43 0.260
Table 1 is shows the specific heat data results from the 30 Zirconium rod trials.
For every trial, the initial temperature of water and metal, equilibrium, change in
temperature of water and metal, mass of water and metal, and specific heat is displayed
Table 2
Unknown Metal Rod Specific Heat Data
Unknown Metal Rods
Trial Rod Initial Temp. Change in
(C) Equilibrium Temp. (C) Specific
Mass
Temp. Heat
(C) (g) (J/g C)
12
Water Metal Water Metal Metal Water
22.50 99.40 69.80 42.90
1 B 29.600 7.100 43 0.427
0 0 0 4
21.20 99.23 70.23 42.90
2 B 29.000 7.800 43 0.466
0 0 0 3
21.70 99.10 69.70 42.69
3 A 29.400 7.700 43 0.465
0 0 0 8
23.00 99.30 68.70 42.90
4 B 30.600 7.600 43 0.464
0 0 0 4
21.70 97.80 69.30 42.69
5 A 28.500 6.800 43 0.413
0 0 0 8
22.90 98.20 68.20 42.90
6 B 30.000 7.100 43 0.437
0 0 0 3
22.00 98.30 69.30 42.90
7 B 29.000 7.000 43 0.424
0 0 0 4
22.80 98.70 68.70 42.90
8 B 30.000 7.200 43 0.439
0 0 0 4
22.00 98.40 69.44 42.69
9 A 28.960 6.960 43 0.422
0 0 0 8
22.30 98.40 69.00 42.69
10 A 29.400 7.100 43 0.434
0 0 0 8
22.70 98.10 68.00 42.90
11 B 30.100 7.400 43 0.456
0 0 0 3
22.40 98.40 68.90 42.69
12 A 29.500 7.100 43 0.434
0 0 0 7
23.00 99.20 69.20 42.90
13 B 30.000 7.000 43 0.424
0 0 0 4
21.90 98.50 69.30 42.69
14 A 29.200 7.300 43 0.444
0 0 0 8
23.00 98.90 69.80 42.69
15 A 29.100 6.100 43 0.368
0 0 0 7
22.50 98.70 69.80 42.69
16 A 28.900 6.400 43 0.386
0 0 0 8
22.40 98.60 68.40 42.90
17 B 30.200 7.800 43 0.478
0 0 0 3
23.00 98.90 68.90 42.90
18 B 30.000 7.000 43 0.426
0 0 0 3
23.50 98.90 67.60 42.69
19 A 31.300 7.800 43 0.486
0 0 0 8
23.60 98.50 67.60 42.90
20 B 30.900 7.300 43 0.453
0 0 0 4
22.70 98.70 69.20 42.69
21 A 29.500 6.800 43 0.414
0 0 0 7
23.60 98.50 68.30 42.90
22 B 30.200 6.600 43 0.405
0 0 0 4
13
22.40 98.60 69.70 42.69
23 A 28.900 6.500 43 0.393
0 0 0 8
23.50 98.40 68.10 42.90
24 B 30.300 6.800 43 0.419
0 0 0 3
22.30 98.50 69.10 42.69
25 A 29.400 7.100 43 0.433
0 0 0 8
Equilibriu Specifi
Trial Rod Water Metal Water Metal Water Metal
m Temp. c Heat
22.70 98.90 69.30 42.69
26 A 29.600 6.900 43 0.420
0 0 0 8
23.30 98.40 67.80 42.90
27 B 30.600 7.300 43 0.451
0 0 0 4
22.90 99.00 69.60 42.69
28 A 29.400 6.500 43 0.394
0 0 0 8
23.00 99.30 69.20 42.69
29 A 30.100 7.100 43 0.432
0 0 0 8
23.30 99.10 68.70 42.90
30 B 30.400 7.100 43 0.433
0 0 0 4
22.66 98.69 68.96 42.80
Average: 29.735 7.075 43 0.431
0 8 2 1
Table 2 is shows the specific heat data results from the 30 Zirconium rod trials.
For every trial, the initial temperature of water and metal, equilibrium, change in
temperature of water and metal, mass of water and metal, and specific heat is
displayed.
Observations:
Table 3
Zirconium Rod Specific Heat Observations
Zirconium Rods
1 B 1
Rod slipped into loaf pan when placed
2 B 2
Everything went according to procedure
3 B 1 Everything went according to procedure
4 A 2
Everything went according to procedure
14
5 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
6 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
7 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
8 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
9 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
When rod was being placed into loaf pan,
10 A 2 it did not fit and was only partially
submitted for 3 seconds
11 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
12 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
Calorimete
Trial Rod Observation
r
15
Table 3 shows the observations made for the Zirconium rods. Most of the trials
went according to the procedure, but anything that would have a notable effect on the
Table 4
Unknown Metal Rod Observations
Unknown Metal Rods
10 A 2
Everything went according to procedure
11 B 1 Everything went according to procedure
12 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
13 B 1
Everything went according to procedure
14 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
16
15 A 1 Rod took longer to put into calorimeter
16 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
17 B 1
Everything went according to procedure
18 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
19 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
20 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
21 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
22 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
23 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
Water boiled vigorously when metal was
24 B 2
placed
25 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
Calorimete
Trial Rod Observation
r
26 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
27 B 1
Everything went according to procedure
28 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
29 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
30 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
Table 4 shows all of the observations made for the unknown metal rods.
Most of the trials went according to the procedure, but anything that would have a
17
Data Analysis and Interpretation
The purpose of this experiment was to determine if an unknown metal was the
same as a known metal, Zirconium, with the use of specific heat. To acquire the values
required to calculate the specific heat of the metals, the metal and water were
measured in uniform units such as grams and milliliters. The mass of the metal was
measured in grams every time. The initial and final temperature of both the metal and
the water were measured in Celsius. When conducting the experiment, it was assumed
that the metal had reached equilibrium with the boiling water it was placed after a set
time. The initial temperature of the water was also assumed to have come to equilibrium
with the surrounding air of the lab environment before recording it. The known specific
heats of water and the Zirconium sample were recorded with the units of joules per
gram Celsius (J/gC). To determine if the sample falls below the alpha level of 0.10, a
two sample t-test was utilized. The t-test compared the means of the Zirconium sample
trials for the Zirconium rods and the unknown rods. Since there are 30 trials, it meets
18
the Central Limit Theorem (n30). Also, with each trial there is a general repetition for
Upon completing the experiment, the validity of the data could be determined. To
do this, each trial of the Zirconiums specific heat would have to fall below the previously
determined percent error of 7.5%. If the percent error of the Zirconium was greater than
7.5, it would because of a lurking variable. This is because any value above or below
the 7.5 percent belonged to a different element. Since the average of the values
recorded was within the parameters set before the experiment, the data can be
considered valid.
Table 5
Percent Error of Zirconium and Unknown Metal
Table 5 displays the calculated percent error for each trial of the Zirconium and
unknown metal rods. The percent errors were calculated using the percent error formula
(see appendix D). The calculated average of the Zirconium was -1.367%, while the
average for the unknown metal was 55.171%. When calculating the averages, the
19
absolute value of the calculated percent error was not taken. This is because there was
a need to account for whether the calculated percent error fell above or below the actual
value used for Zirconium, that being 0.278. Falling above or below this value by more
than 7.5% would be the value of a different element. Comparing the average of the
Zirconiums percent error to the unknown metals, there is a clear distinction between
them. The difference between these averages is 56.538, a very large value reinforcing
the possible difference between the materials. Moreover, the average percent error for
the unknown metal far exceeds the 7.5% percent error allowed for the material to still be
Zirconium. The range of percent error for the Zirconium rods is 21.622%. The value is
so high because of the negative numbers that were taken into account. The range of
percent error for the unknown metal rods is 42.424%. Compared to the range for
In order to once again check the reliability, a normal probability plot was made for
both metals.
20
Figure 4. Normal Probability Plots for
Specific Heat of Zirconium and Unknown Metal
Figure 4, above, shows a normal probability plot for the data of the unknown
metals specific heat to the left and a normal probability plot for the data of Zirconiums
specific heat to the right. The unknown metal data is scattered very closely to the line
which means there is a normal distribution. That means that that set of data can be
seen as reliable in the stats test. On the contrary, the Zirconium data follows a vertical
shape which forms a diagonal pattern with the line. Although this data does not seem to
follow a normal distribution, the data of Zirconiums specific heat is between a close
21
range, which is fairly close to that of the actual value. The reliability in the stat test
Another method of analyzing the data is the form of a box plot, as shown below.
Figure 5, above, shows two box plots of specific heat, one for Zirconium on the
bottom and one for the unknown metal on the top. From how close the data of the
Zirconium specific heat is to the true value, it supports that the data is reliable.
Both of the boxes are plotted on the same the axis, allowing them to be easily
compared. It is evident that the Zirconium specific heats were less than the unknown
metal. The clear difference between the specific heats are seen with the help of the
statistical values: minimum, median, and max. Each of the values in the Zirconium plot
are less than when compared to the unknown metals value. This demonstrates the
potential difference in the identity of the metals. In both of the box plots, the data has no
22
notable skewness, but contains one outlier. This could be a result of a trial performed
with an error. In some trials, the metal was overexposed for too long, which caused it
Another way to note any trends in the data would be to make a histogram.
Figure 6, above, shows two histograms of specific heat, one for Zirconium on the
bottom and one for the unknown metal on the top. The specific heats of Zirconium is
close to the true value of 0.278, with the exception of one outlier to the left. The data is
partly skewed to the right. The specific heats of the unknown metal appears to have a
normal distribution with no outliers, but it is visible that all the data from the unknown
metal is far from the true value of Zirconiums specific heat. This could mean that the
unknown metal is not Zirconium since the specific heats are so different from that of
Zirconium.
23
The statistical analysis that was used for the experiment was a two-sample t test.
The test is appropriate because two samples from independent populations are being
compared, and a sample standard deviation is being used. The results can be stated as
valid because all of the conditions and assumptions for the test was met. The metal
rods were chosen randomly and were independent of each other because the
occurrence of one metal did not affect the occurrence of the other metal. The unknown
metal rod population is normally distributed, but the Zirconium population is not.
Because of the central limit theorem though, the test can still be performed because
To begin the two-sample t test, a null and alternate hypothesis was made.
H o :1 =2
Ha: 1 2
Figure 7 shows the two hypotheses that were made for the analysis. The first
one, the null hypothesis, is what was being tested. The symbol stands for the
population parameter of the means of the specific heat. The numbers 1 and 2 stand for
the two population; 1 is the Zirconium rods, and 2 is the unknown metal rods. The first
statement is stating that the two populations are equal to each other, or that the
unknown metal is Zirconium. The second hypothesis, the alternate, is the opposite of
what is being tested. It states that the two populations are not equal, or the unknown
After analyzing the statistical test, the t-value and p-value were taken into
account.
24
Table 6
Two-Sample t Test Results
Table 6 shows the two-sample t test results. The t-value is -14.0656, which
creates a p-value that is close to 6.655610 -17. The t-value is the specific statistic, and
means little by itself. The p-value states the statistical significance of the difference. In
the analysis, it can be concluded as to reject Ho , the two samples are the same,
because the p-value is far lesser than the alpha level of 0.10. There is no convincing
25
evidence that the means of the specific heat of both samples are similar. If the null
hypothesis was true, there would be a 6.655610 -17% of the unknown metal being
Zirconium by chance alone. Figure 7 shows the normal distribution of the p-value. Since
Conclusion
metal is Zirconium by comparing the intensive property of specific heat of the unknown
metal to that of the known metal, Zirconium. The hypothesis of the experiment was, if
the specific heat of the unknown element is within the alpha level of 0.10 and a percent
error of 7.5%, the unknown metal will be identified as Zirconium. The hypothesis was
accepted because the unknown metal did not meet the requirements necessary to be
The statistical test stated that the two metals were not the same, and were in fact
different. Every element has a unique specific heat, and if the unknown metal had the
same specific heat as Zirconium, it could be identified as that metal. The unknown metal
had an average specific heat of 0.431, which is not close to the specific heat of
Zirconium, 0.278.
Since the specific heat of the unknown rods yielded a different specific heat when
compared to the known Zirconium, the conclusion of deeming the metals as different is
26
possible due to the unique, intensive properties of specific heat. Because the specific
heat of a substance is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one gram
of the substance by one degree Celsius (Chang), it differs from element to element
across the periodic table. The heat capacity of a material will always be the same no
matter the size, shape, or quantity. The unknown material must have had a larger
specific heat capacity as it averaged to be greater than that of Zirconium. This means
that it took more heat energy to raise the temperature of the unknown metal. Specific
heat is a unique, intensive property, so the differing values mean that the metals are of
different elements.
eliminate lurking variable, distilled water was brought to equilibrium with the room prior
to conducting the experiment. The use of tap water could bring lurking variables such as
differing initial temperatures. One problem was that the rods were taken out of the
boiling water with metal tongs. When the tongs would touch the rods, it would transfer
heat away because metal is such a good conductor. Depending on how long the tongs
were touching the rods, enough heat could have been transferred away to affect the
data. To fix that, plastic or a different type of tongs could have been used. Something
else that could have potentially affected the data was the rods exposure to the air.
When the rod was transferred from the boiling water to the calorimeter, it briefly came in
contact with the air surrounding the experiment. This would allow some of the heat held
within the rod to escape, changing the data results. It also could cause variability in the
data. The transfer time was not recorded but could affect the results and cause the data
to be misrepresented if the time exposed to the air varied. It was noted in the
27
observations table when there was a notable difference in transfer time. To help correct
this, the transfer time could be recorded and a correction factor would be utilized.
Another error was that sometimes water would splash out of the calorimeter
when the metal was placed in it. Less water could have affected the data because there
be less water to heat up. One last error was that sometimes the calorimeter was faulty.
If the cap was on too hard, it would be harder to take off which created timing issues. If
better materials were available, a better calorimeter could have been made to prevent
any problems. A change would be to get a better material that would not lose as much
heat. Easier caps would have also been able to make with better materials, so they do
attempted, but with many more trials. Since it just meets the requirement of the central
limit theorem for 30 trials, data could be claimed as significant and reliable, but if there
were more trials done, it could have greatly improved. Better equipment to help
eliminate any lurking variables would benefit the results. A more effective way to transfer
the rod from the boiling water to the calorimeter can minimize or eliminate the rods
exposure to the surrounding air. Another experiment that could be conducted to ID the
element, is using the linear thermal expansion. This is another intensive property that
construct of any objects; be them parts, frames, or foundations. The research would
especially benefit mechanical and electrical engineers, as long with those who work with
construction because they have to make sure metals are the same for different objects.
28
Failure to do so could risk whatever is made to malfunction if not made with the correct
Application
The metal Zirconium does find many uses in the real world. It is very strong and
resistant to acids and saltwater. Due to its toughness, it is used in ultra-strong ceramics.
29
Figure 8. Isometric View of Blade and Drawing
The sketch above is a blade made out of Zirconia Ceramic. This product
demonstrates a ceramic knife. The hardness of the ceramic gives these knives their
long-lasting good looks, as well as a razor sharp edge that does not require sharpening
for years. That is why many chefs love using ceramic knives. This sharpness makes
The material used to make the knife was Zirconium. This is an appropriate metal
to use since the ceramic knife is made out of strong materials, usually Zirconium oxide.
The Zirconium causes the blade to be very tough, which it allows to cut difficult, tough
items. To make this particular blade out of pure Zirconium, it would cost about $35.61.
30
Appendix A: Making a Calorimeter
2. Spread glue around the inside of the cap and one end of the pipe.
3. Place cap on the end with the glue. Press tightly to ensure it is sealed.
5. Place the cap with the hole on the other end of the pipe.
6. Wrap the pipe between the caps with the insulation tape.
31
Appendix B: Randomizing the Trials
On a TI-Nspire calculator, create a lists and spreadsheet page. In the equation bar, type
in randint(1,30,30) for the known metals. It should be repeated for the unknown metals
as well. The values may repeat, but ensure that each trial gets assigned its own unique
32
Appendix C: Setting Up the Lab Quest
6. Click the Okay once the information from steps 3-5 has been put in.
7. Along the top of the screen, select the Graph Analyze page.
8. When ready to begin, click the play button at the bottom left of the screen to start
recording data.
33
Appendix D: Calculating Percent Error
To determine if data recorded can be used, a percent error test was used. The validity of
the data would be accepted if the percent error fell below the absolute value 7.5%.
Figure 1 shows a sample calculation solving for the percent error. The
experimental value is the specific heat that is found during the experiment. The true
value is the specific heat of the known metal, Zirconium. It is multiplied by 100 to get it
into a percent.
34
Appendix E: Calculating Specific Heat
S M (T -T ) = S M (T -T )
M F I H2O F I
The left side of the equation represents heat lost from the metal and the right is the heat
gained in the water. Where S is the specific heat of Zirconium or the unknown metal, M
M
is mass, (T -T ) is the difference in initial and final temperatures of their respective sides,
F I
and S H2O is the specific heat of water. Shown in Figure 1 below is a sample calculation for
specific heat.
S (26.731)(-72.100) = 4.184(43)(2.900)
M
S = -0.271
M
This a sample calculation for the specific heat of a Zirconium rod. This used data that
was collected during a trial in the experiment. From left to right, the mass of the rod was
26.731 (g), the change in temperature for the rod was -72.100(), the specific heat of
the water was 4.184 (J/g x ), the mass of the water was 43 (g), and the change in
35
Works Cited
Barth, Roger, and Michael J. Moran. "Improved Method for Determining the Heat
<http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ed500466m>.
<http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/thermalP/Lesson- 2/Calorimeters-and-
Calorimetry>.
Chang, Raymond. Chemistry. 9th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007. Print.
<http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~jparadis/chem2045/chapter05.html>.
Law of Dulong and Petit." 10 (2008): n. pag. ACS Publications. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.
<http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ed085p109>.
36
Herrington, Deborah G. "The Heat Is On: An Inquiry-Based Investigation for
<http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ed200109j>.
first-law- thermodynamics.html>.
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/earth/earth_timeline/earth_formed>.
<http://www.britannica.com/technology/calorimeter>.
Apr. 2016.
<https://www.chem.wisc.edu/deptfiles/genchem/netorial/modules/thermodynamic
s/chemical/chemical2.htm>.
37