You are on page 1of 6

MAPUA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Department of Physics
E301: LINEAR EXPANSION
GONZALES, Gabriel R.

Gabriel200841@gmail.com/2014151884/CE-2
PHY12L-B2 Group 4

SCORE
Signed Data Sheet
(5)

=

Observations & Results
(15)

=

Graphs
(10)

=

Conclusion (15)

=

References
(5)

=

Photos (10)

=

Performance
(40)

=

TOTAL
(100)

MAY 3, 2016

=

____
____
____
____
____
____

____
____

5546E-05 0. Mapúa Institute of Technology 658 Muralla St.0000238 39.4320E-05 2.89 13050 77 53 3. ?? Initial Resistance of thermistor at Room Temperature. the experimental coefficient of linear expansion was calculated using the equation (1): ?= ∆? (1) ?? ∆? The results gathered from the experiment are given in the table below: Table 1: Determination of Coefficient of Linear Expansion Trial/Type of Tube Initial Length of Tube. Intramuros.com OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS After gathering enough data such as the initial length of the tube.0000168 50.88 13230 75 74 50 49 2. Philippines gabriel200841@gmail.13% 25 0.06% Sample Computations Using the data gathered and substituting them to equation (1). For the Aluminium Tube ∆? = ?? − ?? ∆? = 705.8825E-05 0.24 12100 25 1. ∆? Resistance of Thermistor at Final Temperature. ?ℎ?? Final Temperature of the Tube. ∆? Experimental Coefficient of Linear expansion.24?? − 704?? ∆? = 1.64% 63.71% 52. Gabriel R. Manila City. ??????? Percentage of error Aluminium Tube Trial 1 Trial 2 704 104100 100900 Copper Tube Trial 1 Trial 2 703 100100 99300 24 1.E301: LINEAR EXPANSION 1 Gonzales. ??? Initial Temperature.24?? . School of CEGE. ??? Change in Length of Tube. the experimental coefficient of linear expansion can be computed. final temperature and the change in length of the tube. ????????????? Actual Coefficient of Linear Expansion..3233E-05 70 45 3. ?ℎ?? Change in temperature of the Tube.23 15040 25 0. initial resistance of the thermistor at room temperature. initial temperature.

4320E − 05| %????? = ? 100 0. we let the tube cooldown enough for the second trial to start. .3233E-05 ??????? = 0.∆? = ?? − ?? ∆? = 77℃ − 24℃ ∆? = 53 ∁° Using equation (1) ∆? ????????????? = ? ∆? ? 1.89?? ????????????? = (703??)(50°∁) ????????????? = 2.89?? − 703?? ∆? = 0.71 Graphs For the Aluminium tube There is much more percent error in the second trial because the metal was not cooled down efficiently after the first trial.24?? ????????????? = (704??)(53°∁) ????????????? = 3.3233E − 05| %????? = ? 100 0.0000238 |??????? − ????????????? | %????? = ? 100 ??????? |0.0000168 − 2.64% For the Copper Tube ∆? = ?? − ?? ∆? = 703.0000238 %????? = 39.0000238 − 3. but to eradicate so much difference between the data and percent error.89?? ∆? = ?? − ?? ∆? = 75℃ − 25℃ ∆? = 50 ∁° Using equation (1) ∆? ????????????? = ? ∆? ? 0.0000168 |??????? − ????????????? | %????? = ? 100 ??????? |0.4320E-05 ??????? = 0. For the Copper Tube Almost the same data gathered.0000168 %????? = 50.

Since the room temperature. although they have a greater percent error when it come to the experimental and actual coefficient of thermal expansion. The Thermal Expansion of Solids. it can be concluded that the experimental and actual value of the thermal coefficient have so much percent error because of the room temperature when the experiment was made. it was then compared to the actual coefficient of thermal expansion. and the computed results. the atoms and ions on each solid material vibrates with greater strength and that causes the ions to have a greater distance to each other thus leading to the expansion of the solid. the percentage error is so huge and it is because of several factors. Thermal Expansion. This is because there is such an error when it comes to the room temperature. Reference Yates. doi:10. was so low that it affects the resistance of the metal therefore affecting its temperature. when the experiment was made. (1972). measurement.1007/978-1-4899-5448-0_4 . In this experiment. Since the resistance is inaccurate. Therefore. the results fall in the expected range of values. B. temperature is the measurement of energy from the vibration of each atoms. 51-71. Other errors such as computing error. there may have been a lesser percentage error between the actual coefficient and the experimental coefficient of thermal expansion. The main purpose of this experiment is to understand how does and how much does the metal expand in a given temperature. Understanding the data that are gathered. this will result into inaccurate reading of temperature and this is because the temperature is based on the resistance of the metal.Conclusion After gathering the data from the experiment and the experimental coefficient of thermal expansion was computed. If it was only done in the outside where the room temperature is normal. The main source of error in this experiment is that the room where the experiment is being held has a cold temperature which can affect the temperature of the metal. it will continue to increase therefore giving no accurate measurement in the resistance of the metal. initial and final resistance of the thermistor may be the problem since it when it starts increasing. When it comes to solid materials. When the temperature increases.

This equipment is called digital multi-tester and it measures the resistance and other needed values for a metal. Excel is needed in this experiment to graph the given data and results for the group to understand better. .Photos Sample of the measurement we got from the resistance of the metal. A photo of me doing the excel work.

the digital multi tester at my hand and the copper metal at the front (not seen in this photo) Before going out the room. This is because to lighten ourselves up after a tiring experiment. . a little selfie was made. a steam generator at the left side. the aluminium rod on the top of the expansion base.Thermistor on my hard.