Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Conclusion on specific heat capacity of solids
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Conclusion on specific heat capacity of solids
Specific heat capacity refers to the amount of energy that is required to change the temperature of 1 kg of a substance by 1°C. With that in mind, there are countless practical applications that exist, both in general life and in the workplace. For instance, knowing the specific heat capacity of a steel pan decreases the probability of burning the kitchen utensil. In a controlled environment, such as an engine production plant, the specific heat capacity of numerous metals and plastics can be utilized to understand the transfer of heat throughout the engine. This results in increased efficiency and improved cooling due to an even transfer of heat. Nevertheless, the specific heat capacities of substances are useful in multiple modern heat systems …show more content…
Assuming that they the metals are pure substances, it have the closest value of with Titanium, with a heat capacity of 540Jkg ⋅ ℃. This is also most likely not the metal because Titanium is have a silver color, while metal A have a gold color. Metal B, which has a grey color, was found to have a heat capacity of 528Jkg ⋅ ℃. This measurement is nearest to Wrought Iron, which has a capacity of 500Jkg ⋅ ℃. However, Wrought Iron is rough and have a dark brown color. This is most likely not the correct metal, due to the fact that metal B have a greyish color rather than a dark brown …show more content…
Throughout the lab, it was evident that the experiment was inaccurate as numerous errors were observed. Firstly, the entire system was open, allowing the escape of thermal energy. When heating the water on the hot plate, the beaker was not sealed, allowing heat to escape. In the end, when measuring the final temperature of the metals, there was a loss of heat from the styrofoam cup as there was no efficient way of sealing the cup, and the cup itself will also absorb heat from the water. Despite our efforts of sealing the cup by putting another styrofoam cup above, the hole that the thermometer goes through allowed heat to escape. The loss of heat, and the absorption of heat from the styrofoam cup will increase the heat capacities of the metals that were calculated from this experiment. This is due to the fact that the escaped heat and the heat absorbed by the styrofoam cups were calculated as if they were absorbed by the metal, while in reality, they were not. Secondly, numerous assumptions were made. When allowing the metal samples to sit in the cups of room temperature water, it was assumed that over a certain amount of time, the metal would have the same temperature of the water. However, the point at which this occurred was unknown, due to the fact that heat was constantly escaping, which decreased the accuracy of the initial temperature of the metals. Additionally, it was assumed that at some point, the
Thermodynamics is essentially how heat energy transfers from one substance to another. In “Joe Science vs. the Water Heater,” the temperature of water in a water heater must be found without measuring the water directly from the water heater. This problem was translated to the lab by providing heated water, fish bowl thermometers, styrofoam cups, and all other instruments found in the lab. The thermometer only reaches 45 degrees celsius; therefore, thermodynamic equations need to be applied in order to find the original temperature of the hot water. We also had access to deionized water that was approximately room temperature.
The purpose of this lab was to calculate the specific heat of a metal cylinder
The first step that I did to find the number of grams water can be produced when 11.7 moles of ethane that reacts with the excess oxygen gas was to balance the equation like this 2 C2H6 + 7 O2 ----> 4 CO2 + 6 H20. The second step that I did to find the number of grams water can be produced when 11.7 moles of ethane that reacts with the excess oxygen gas was to find the mole ratio which is 2 moles of C2H6 : 6 moles of H20. The third step that I did to find the number of grams water can be produced when 11.7 moles of ethane that reacts with the excess oxygen gas was to multiply this by the mole ratio like this 6 moles of water / 2 moles of ethane * 11.7 moles of ethane = 35.1 moles of water. The fourth step that I did to find the number of grams
The data which was collected in Procedure A was able to produce a relatively straight line. Even though this did have few straying points, there was a positive correlation. This lab was able to support Newton’s Law of Heating and Cooling.
...at from the metal was lost from the transfer of the metal from the test tube submerged in the boiling water to the water in the calorimeter. This loss of heat would have lowered the temperatures that were measured, and overall made it seem like the substances that were being observed were releasing less heat then they actually were capable of. Another more specific source of error that was encountered, was during the first snack trial. The chip that was used was curled and needed relighting several times. This addition of heat to the system of the water was not from the chip burning, but from the lighter that was used. This means that during the first trial in the snack burning portion of the lab the change in heat recorded was higher than it should have been. This means that it was recorded that the chip was outputting more energy than we could conceivably measure.
By adding fresh cold water it should cool the copper calorimeter. By making sure I do these checks before I do the experiment means that I should be able to get accurate results as the test will have been run fairly and hopefully successfully as there should not have been anything gone wrong. To make sure all the measurements are correct, I will also run checks. These checks when recording the data are. Make sure to check the thermometer to see what temperature the water is at the start, so I am able to see what it has to be when its been heated by 10 degrees.
... possible was our thermometer that was used to measure the cold water temperature change. When it was set down for all of our experiments it was put near the hot plate which was making the counter quite hot. This could have given some skewed readings when it was used to measure the temperature. As stated in the hypothesis it was thought that all of the metals have a different makeup so the heat capacity was going to vary between metals. The findings in this lab prove this to be true. So if one is trying to determine what an unknown metal is made up of, this experiment would be an adequate solution. Once you find your values, compare them to a thermal conductivity chart and compare to find the metal. Based on the data collected throughout the lab, I can conclude that my hypothesis was correct. A metals heat capacity is determined by the makeup and density of a metal.
Specific heat capacity of aqueous solution (taken as water = 4.18 J.g-1.K-1). T = Temperature change (oK). We can thus determine the enthalpy changes of reaction 1 and reaction 2 using the mean (14) of the data obtained. Reaction 1: H = 50 x 4.18 x -2.12.
After figuring out the mass of the empty beaker to be 72.5 grams, 100 milliliters of water were heated using a hot plate. The water warmed just below boiling. Once the beaker of water was removed from the hot plate, 12.1 grams of copper (II) sulfate was added. Once the copper (II) sulfate was stirred, 1.5 grams of iron filling was added to the beaker and set to allow the copper to settle on the bottom of the beaker. Once the beaker was cool enough to touch and the copper was settled to the bottom, we began the decanting process. Decanting was used to remove the limiting reagent, the iron sulfate compound, to dry out the excess reagent, the copper. The copper was decanted twice again with water to clean off any left over iron sulfate compound. Then the copper was covered with acetone and put in an oven for 15 minutes to dry completely. Once the copper was dried, the electronic balance was used again to measure the mass of the beaker and the copper. Once this mass was calculated to be 75.2 grams, the empty beaker’s mass of 72.5 grams was subtracted from it to give us the total mass of the copper, which was 2.68 grams. We knew a reaction occurred when a solid formed at the bottom of the
The objective of this experiment was to identify a metal based on its specific heat using calorimetry. The unknown metals specific heat was measured in two different settings, room temperature water and cold water. Using two different temperatures of water would prove that the specific heat remained constant. The heated metal was placed into the two different water temperatures during two separate trials, and then the measurements were recorded. Through the measurements taken and plugged into the equation, two specific heats were found. Taking the two specific heats and averaging them, it was then that
The bottom of the capillary tube and the thermometer were submerged in a beaker of heating water. The water was stirred occasionally and heated very quickly. However, when the water reached 80 ˚C it was heated very slowly in order to not pass the melting point. 3. The temperature when alum melted was recorded in the data table.
First, a calorimeter was constructed with three standard styrofoam cups. One cup was stacked within the second for insulation, while the third cup was cut in half to be used as a lid. The lid was made to increase accuracy when recording the temperature. The temperature probe hooked up to Logger Pro software poked a hole in the top of the calorimeter by applied force with the end of the probe through the Styrofoam. Meanwhile, 40mL of deionized water were measured out in two clean 50 mL graduated cylinders, and poured into 100 mL beakers. The beakers and graduated cylinders were cleaned with deionized water to avoid contamination that may cause error. One of the beakers was placed onto a hot plate, which was used to heat the water in the beaker. The other beaker rested at room temperature. Once heated and at room temperature, the initial temperature was measured with the probe. Next, the two 40 mL of deionized water were poured into the calorimeter, quickly sealed with the lid, and the temperature probe emerged through the top of the calorimeter into the water to measure the temperature so the calorimeter constant would be determined. The equations used to determine the calorimeter constant were Δq = mCΔT and Δq =
In a 100ml beaker 30mls of water was placed the temperature of the water was recorded. 1 teaspoon of Ammonium Nitrate was added to the water and stirred until dissolved. The temperature was then recorded again. This was to see the difference between the initial temperature and the final temperature.
Introduction: A phase change is a result from the kinetic energy (heat) either decreasing or increasing to change the state of matter (i.e. water, liquid, or gas.) Thus saying, freezing is the phase change from a liquid to a solid which results from less kinetic energy/heat. Also, melting is the phase change from a solid to a liquid which results from adding kinetic energy/heat. So, the freezing and melting point of something is the temperature at which these phase changes occur. Therefore, a phase change will occur when a vial of 10 mL of water is placed into a cup of crushed ice mixed with four spoonfuls with 5 mL of sodium chloride for 30 minutes. If 10 mL of water is placed in an ice bath, it will then freeze at 5 degrees Celsius because the kinetic energy will leave quicker with the ice involved. The purpose of this lab is to observe what temperature the water must be to undergo a phase change.
The purpose of the experiment is to identify and understand reactions under kinetic and thermodynamic control. A reaction under kinetic and thermodynamic control can form two different types of products. A reaction under kinetic control is known to be irreversible and the product is formed quickly. A reaction under thermodynamic control is known to require rigorous conditions. It is also reversible. The final product is more stable than the product made by kinetic control. The chart below shows the two types of reaction coordinates: