Edwards Hauer

Introduction
It is impossible to teach a man something, one can only help the man find
it himself. This applies to the research conducted throughout the paper and in
the conduction of experiments. The most direct purpose was to use the
processes of specific heat and linear thermal expansion to compare two pairs of
metal rods, one known and one unknown. The project puts two researchers
together in a real life group situation. The researchers used technology provided
and the physical properties to determine the unknown chemical properties of
either pair of metal rods. This experiment can be implemented into real life
mining projects because miners and field workers can use these properties to
identify different metals so the right or most valuable metal is found.
This experiment was about using chemical properties such as specific
heat and linear thermal expansion to determine if an unknown pair of metal rods
was the same as the known rods. The known pair of metal rods was identified as
tin. Experiments were done to determine the physical and chemical properties of
the tin rods. The identified experiments included measuring the change in length
of the rods and measuring the specific heat. These results were used as the
known variables to base the unknown metals off of. The same experiments were
conducted using the unknown metals. The results were compared and used to
determine if the metals were the same.
The objectives in the experiment were to successfully identify the
unknown metal by conducting specific heat and linear thermal expansion
experiments. Another objective was to conduct the experiments with a low

Edwards Hauer
percent error. To accomplish this, small changes were made in between tests to
lower the percent error. For specific heat, calorimeters were constructed and
used in the experiment. A logger pro was used to record the temperature and
equilibrium point. In linear thermal expansion, small jigs were used to measure
the change in length of a heated metal rod until it reached room temperature.
The final results would hopefully led to the correct determination of the pair of
unknown metal rods as being either the same or different as the pair of known
metal rods.

Edwards Hauer
Background
Evidence has been found that tin has been in use for around 5,500 years
(Gagnon). Tin comes from the Latin word stannum which is how its chemical
symbol, Sn, was derived (History of Tin). Early metal workers found that tin was
too soft to be used on its own to manufacture weapons. However, when mixed
with copper it made bronze swords and chest plates. Tin artifacts have been
discovered in ancient Egyptian tombs and tin was traded around the
Mediterranean by the Phoenicians. This made tin available to the African tribe
nations (History of Tin). Tin is mined through a process called open-pit mining
(Goodman). In this process, layers of land are removed and the miners continue
to go deeper in the ground. The rock layers are then processed for any valuable
metals (Hagemann). To extract tin from its raw state, known as cassiterite, it is
placed in a furnace with carbon and rotated. The chemical reaction to get
elemental tin is tin dioxide, two carbon produce elemental tin and two carbon
monoxide (Winter).
SnO2 + 2C

Sn + 2CO

Figure 1. Reaction to Produce Elemental Tin

Figure 1 shows the reaction to produce elemental tin. The tin dioxide and
carbon produce the elemental tin while the carbon monoxide is released.
Tin is largely used as a coating for other metal products or wires
(Gottfred). Tin resists corrosion and rust which makes it an ideal coating (History
of Tin). A good example of this is a tin can which is really made of steel. There is
a layer of tin coating around the inside of the can so the can will not oxidize and

Edwards Hauer
be protected from the acids in the food. Tin also is used to produce glass. The
molten glass is poured onto molten tin and the glass floats on top of the tin. The
molten glass cools and forms a flat surface making the glass of today (Winter).
Some of the basic properties for tin are density, specific heat, and thermal
expansion. The density of tin is 7.285 g/cm3, specific heat is 0.21 J/gK, and
thermal expansion is 22 K-1. Other properties for tin are melting point, boiling
point, and molar heat capacity. The melting point is 231.93C, the boiling point is
2586C, and the molar heat capacity is 26.99 J/molK (Emsley). Tin has a low
specific heat which means very little heat is needed to increase the temperature
one degree. Metals tend to have a high melting and boiling point but tin is one of
the few that has a low melting and boiling point. This means a low heat melts or
boils tin. The molar heat capacity means it takes 26.99 J to raise one mole of tin
to change the temperature (Emsley).
In comparing tin to other elements or metals, there are similarities and
differences. Tin has a heavier density than water, which is 1.000 g/cm 3, meaning
it will sink when placed in water. The element Indium, with a density 7.290 g/cm 3,
is within the same period of tin (Emsley). Although the densities are very close,
the characteristic properties of tin are mostly higher values. Indium has a melting
point of 156.6C which is about 75 degrees lower than tin. Indium has a boiling
point is 2072C which is about 514 degrees lower than tin. Also, indium has a
thermal expansion with 24.8 K-1 which is higher than tins value of 22 K-1.

[Kr] 5s2 4d10 5p2

Edwards Hauer
Figure 2. Electron Configuration of Tin
Tins electron configuration makes it paramagnetic as the last two atoms
on the end are unpaired. Figure 2 shows the electron configuration of an atom of
tin. This is important as it affects the magnetism, reactivity, and conductivity of
an element (Lefebvre). This will be useful in the experiment because if those
three properties can be identified, the unknown metal could be identified as
paramagnetic or diamagnetic. The atomic mass of tin is 118.710 amu (Emsley).
The electrons for the atoms are arranged with two around the innermost orbital,
eight in the next, then eighteen, followed by another eighteen, and finally four in
the last orbital. This layout attributes to Tins atomic radius. In the nucleus, there
are fifty protons and sixty-nine neutrons which attribute to the atomic mass of an
atom of tin.
One quality that makes tin special for making products is it is resistant
against corrosion and rust. This means quality materials can be made without
the risk of wear and tear. Another quality of tin is it is an excellent conductor of
electricity (Gagnon). Tin is also very malleable (Whitley). This allows
manufacturers to bend and shape the tin products in any way needed. The
temperature must be kept above 55F though, or it becomes very hard to shape
(MacIntosh). Even though tin is a weak metal, combining it with copper makes
bronze, a very strong metal. In ancient times, the strength of bronze allowed
ironsmiths to use tin and copper to make swords and other weapons.

Review of Specific Heat

Edwards Hauer
Specific heat is the amount of heat required to raise the
temperature of a substance by one degree Celsius. To calculate specific heat,
there needs to be an isolated system. One of the most useful isolated systems is
a calorimeter. A calorimeter is used to record the heat of an object, in this case
the unknown metal. To efficiently record the specific heat, boil water in a beaker
then suspend the unknown metal in the beaker for two to three minutes. Record
the temperature of the boiling water as the initial temperature. Next, record the
mass of an empty calorimeter cup and add just enough water to cover the
unknown metal. Record the combined mass. Keep a thermometer in the
calorimeter cup with the water. Finally, place the metal from the boiling water into
the calorimeter cup and record the change in temperature as the final
temperature (Bauck). Use the formula mass times delta T divided by the heat
energy to determine the specific heat in J/gC (Benson).
s=

mT
q

Figure 3. Specific Heat Formula

Figure 3 shows the formula used to calculate specific heat. Delta T is
the difference between the final temperature and the starting temperature. (See
Appendix G)
A second way to find the specific heat of an unknown metal is to use a
method similar to the first experiment. Only now instead of boiling water, cool
the water to freezing temperature. To begin, weigh the calorimeter, add water,
and find the sum of the two masses. As before keep two thermometers in two
separate calorimeters cups, each filled with water. The first calorimeter should
6

Edwards Hauer
be close to 0C and the second calorimeter at room temperature. Place a rod of
the unknown metal into the cold calorimeter for about ten minutes. Next remove
the metal rod from the cold water and transfer it to the room temperature water.
Record the change in temperature and use the formula (see Figure 3) to
determine the specific heat (Haag).
These methods apply to the given project in that they are legitimate
examples of how to find the identity of an unknown metal assigned to two
research partners. The design of this project is geared away from using given
information and instead allowing the research team to find the needed
information by other means. These experiments provided great examples to
accomplish the goal of identifying the metal with no prior knowledge of what it
may be. The first experiment deals with a calorimeter which can be used to find
the specific heat of the metal. Once the specific heat of the metal is determined,
pre-determined charts can be used as a way to assign the metal its correct
identity (engineeringtoolbox). The second experiment is an abstract way to find
specific heat. If heat to boil the water is not available, an alternative experiment
using ice water is very effective. The second experiment is closely related to the
first but can be useful for those with limited tools (Haag).
Specific heat on a molecular level is when the heat of a substance
increases; its total internal energy is also increased. The first law of
thermodynamics says the when heat is transferred no heat is lost. Specific heat
supports this because the heat is moved from one substance to another,
increasing the heat of that substance and no heat is lost. The total internal

Edwards Hauer
energy of a substance is defined as the sum of the potential and kinetic energies
of all the molecules in the substance. Temperature can be seen as the average
kinetic energy of the molecules in the unknown metal. The two are directly
proportional. The greater the average kinetic energy of the molecules, or the
faster the molecules move, the greater the temperature of the substance. So, as
the heat is transferred to a substance increases its total internal energy, or the
average kinetic energy of its molecules, and then its temperature. The change of
temperature in an object is therefore a measure of the heat flow to or from that
object. The amount of heat, q, is directly proportional to the temperature change
in an object (T), where units of temperature can be C (Climer). This also
supports the first law of thermodynamics because it is proportional and no heat is
lost.

Review of Linear Thermal Expansion

Edwards Hauer
Linear thermal expansion is the linear increase in length of an object due
to heat gain. Linear thermal expansion can be used to determine how much a
metal expands when heated up to its boiling point. Each metal has its own
individual temperature it needs to reach before it expands. Thermal energy, or
heat, has a tendency to move from a high temperature system to a low
temperature system. When the thermal energy transfers to the metal rod it heats
it up. The increase in heat makes the atoms within the rod vibrate faster and
create more distance between the individual atoms. The increase in space
between atoms also causes the metal rod to expand. In linear thermal expansion
the physical state is not changed when the metal rod is expanded, this allows the
researcher to identify the unknown metal rod based on its unique linear thermal
expansion coefficient. (Anostos) To calculate linear thermal expansion, use the
formula (see figure 4) where li is the initial length times , the linear expansion
coefficient, and times ti minus tf where ti is the initial temperature and tf is the final
temperature. Delta l is measured in millimeters times 10 -6. (engineeringtoolbox)
l = li (ti tf)
Figure 4. Linear Thermal Expansion Formula
Figure 4 shows the equation used to calculate linear thermal expansion.
The ti-tf could also be represented by the symbol t. (See Appendix H)
One experiment uses a thermal expansion apparatus to record this
expansion point. First record the initial length of the unknown metal rod. Keep the
rod at room temperature. Then add boiling water to the steam generator attached
to the apparatus. Turn the gauge dial as close to zero as possible. Start the

Edwards Hauer
steam generator and allow the metal to heat up for at least five minutes. Record
the final measurement on the gauge dial. (Burkhardt)
In another experiment a thermistor is used. This experiment is similar to
the first in most ways. In this, the thermal expansion apparatus is large and is run
for a longer period of time. The apparatus measures the metal rod length at
room temperature, then the temperature is changed and the apparatus remeasures the length of the rod. The steam generator can heat up faster and the
run for a longer time. The gauge dial is also more exact. These can help to
determine a more precise and accurate reading of the thermal expansion
coefficient which is unique to the unknown metal that the researchers are trying
to identify. (Cockman).
These methods apply to this research project because linear thermal
expansion is a useful way to identify an unknown metal based on how much it
expands when heated up. Although the method is very efficient, the apparatus
used to measure the thermal expansion is costly and not found in many
classrooms. The steam generator used within the apparatus is somewhat
dangerous but when done correctly can be a very effective way to determine the
metal for this research project.
It is important for architects and engineers to know about linear thermal
expansion and how it works. Metals used to build buildings and other structures
expand when heated and contract when cooled which can alter designs and
caused safety issues. This means they have to know how the metal for bridges
and buildings will be affected and put in special safety precautions. Linear

10

Edwards Hauer
thermal expansion is also used in appliances at home, specifically the bimetallic
strips in a thermostat. If a room is too cold or hot, the strip will bend and hit a
button that will turn the thermostat on or off. (Thermal Expansion)

11

Edwards Hauer
Problem Statement
Problem:
To identify an unknown metal as being tin or not being tin by testing the
specific heat and linear thermal expansion properties of the unknown metal.
Hypothesis:
After collecting the specific heat and linear thermal expansion data of the
unknown metal, it will be identified as being tin or not being tin within a 5% error.
Data:
For the measurements in Linear Thermal Expansion the change in length
(delta L or L) and initial length (Li) are measured in millimeters (mm). Initial
temperature and final temperature are measured in degrees Celsius (C). The
alpha coefficient is measured in nanometers (nm). It is also represented by
millimeters times ten to the negative sixth (mm X 10 -6). For the measurements of
Specific Heat the mass of the metal is measured in grams (g). The mass of the
water is measured in milliliters (mL). The initial temperature, the change of
temperature (T), and the equilibrium temperature is measured in degrees
Celsius (C). Specific heat is measured in joules per grams times degree Celsius
(J/g C).

12

Edwards Hauer
Experimental Design of Specific Heat

Materials:
Metal loaf pan (2.7 x 11.8x
6.7)
2) Unknown metal
Small beaker (75 mL)
(2) Tin rods
Hot plate
Logger Pro

Scale (0.01g)
Stopwatch
Calorimeter
TI-Nspire Calculator
Tongs
Coffee can stand
Thermometer (0.01C)

Procedure:
1)

Randomize the trials with TI-nspire calculator. (See Appendix B)

2)

Fill a loaf pan with 100 mL of water. Begin to boil water on a hot plate.

3)

Mass the metal rod on the scale.

4)

Mass the calorimeter cup (See Appendix A). Fill the calorimeter cup half
way with water and mass again.

5)

Transfer the unknown metal to the boiling water in the loaf pan. Place the
metal in the boiling water.

6)

After the metal is heated for three minutes, using clamps, place the metal
in the calorimeter.

7)

Cover the calorimeter cup.

8)

Record initial temperature of the calorimeter water after rod is placed in.

9)

Measure the temperature of the water in the calorimeter through a hole in

the cover for 5 minutes using the logger pro and temperature probe. (See
Appendix C)

13

Edwards Hauer
10)

Record equilibrium temperature.

11)

Take off the cover and remove the metal when the temperature has
reached equilibrium. Dry off the metal and dispose of the water.

12)

Repeat the experiment 15 times.

Diagram:

Calorimeters

Graduated Cylinders

Scale

Hot Plate
Loaf Pan

Tongs

Logger Pro

Metal Rod

Figure 5. Specific Heat Experiment Set Up

Figure 5 shows the materials for the specific heat trials.

14

Edwards Hauer
Linear Thermal Expansion Experimental Design
Materials:
Metal loaf pan (2.7 x 11.8 x
6.7)
(2) Unknown metal rods
Thermometer (0.1C)
(2) Tin rods
Hot plate

Spray bottle
Caliper
Ti-nspire Calculator
Liner Thermal Expansion jig
(0.01 mm)

15

Procedure:
1)

Randomize trials using the Ti-Nspire calculator. (See Appendix B)

2)

Fill metal loaf pan with 100 mL of water. Place the pan on the hot plate
and set it to six or seven. Bring the water in the pan to a boil.

3)

Before placing the metal rod in the pan, measure the initial length with
caliper.

4)

Check the water temperature with a digital thermometer. Add the metal rod
when the water reaches 100C. Assume the metal rod is the same
temperature and record.

5)

Wait 2 minutes for the metal to heat up.

6)

Using the tongs, transfer the rod from the loaf pan to the jig.

7)

Mark and record the starting point of the jig gauge.

8)

Wait for the metal to cool down. To speed up the cool down process, use a
spray bottle full of tap water and periodically spray the rod.

9)

Mark and record the final point on the jig gauge after the needle has
stopped.

10)

Subtract the final point from the initial point to find L.

11)

Assume final temperature of metal is room temperature, measure the

temperature of the room and record.

Diagram:

Figure 6. Linear Thermal Expansion Set Up

Figure 6 shows the materials for the linear thermal expansion trials.
Graduated Cylinders

Linear Jigs

Scale

Loaf Pan

Tongs

Hot Plate

Metal Rod

Data and Observations:

Table 1
Tin Linear Thermal Expansion Table
Change
Initial
in
Trial
Rod
Length
Length
(mm)
(mm)
1
B
0.20
116.81
2
A
0.15
118.00
3
A
0.23
118.00
4
B
0.13
116.81
5
B
0.20
116.81
6
A
0.13
118.00
7
B
0.15
116.47
8
A
0.12
118.00
9
B
0.18
116.47
10
A
0.16
118.00
11
A
0.18
118.00
12
B
0.15
116.47
13
A
0.20
118.00
14
A
0.13
118.00
15
B
0.18
116.47
Avera
ge
0.17
117.35

Initial
Temp
(C)

Final
Temp
(C)

Alpha
Coefficient
(C-1)

99.1
99.1
99.3
99.3
99.2
99.2
99.7
99.7
99.0
99.0
99.9
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0

26.0
26.0
27.0
27.0
25.9
25.9
25.3
25.3
26.1
26.1
26.3
26.3
26.2
23.3
26.2

2.380E-05
1.739E-05
2.661E-05
1.539E-05
2.373E-05
1.503E-05
1.759E-05
1.367E-05
2.094E-05
1.860E-05
2.047E-05
1.750E-05
2.333E-05
1.436E-05
2.094E-05

99.5

25.9

1.929E-05

Table 1 shows the data collected for linear thermal expansion of the tin
metal rod. The results are decent compared to tins actual linear thermal
expansion of 2.200x10-5 C-1. (See Appendix H)

Table 2
Tin Linear Thermal Expansion Observation Table
Tri Ro
Date
Observations
al
d
Researcher A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and
4/18/20
boiled water. Researcher B recorded results from jig and
1
B
13
placed into data tables. One inch jig and one millimeter jig
was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
2
A
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. One
13
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
3
A
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. One
13
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables.
4/18/20
4
B
Researchers worked slow and metals may have cooled
13
down while idle. One inch jig and one millimeter jig was
used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
5
B
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. One
13
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
6
A
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. One
13
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables.
7
B
13
Spray bottle fan died. One inch jig and one millimeter jig
was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
8
A
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. One
13
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
9
B
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. One
13
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables.
10
A
13
Starting marks were smudged and hard to determine. One
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
4/18/20
11
A
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. One
13
inch jig and one millimeter jig was used.
12
B
4/18/20 A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
13
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables.
Water temperatures stayed constant. One inch jig and one

millimeter jig was used.

Tri
al

Ro
d

Date

13

4/18/20
13

14

4/22/20
13

15

4/22/20
13

Observations
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. B
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables.
Completion of trials are consistent and fast. One inch jig
and one millimeter jig was used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. A
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. Two
millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled water. A
recorded results from jig and placed into data tables. Two
millimeter jigs were used.

Table 2 shows the observations collected from each trial that linear
thermal expansion was ran for the tin rod. Each trial was run fairly consistently
and the inch jig generally produced results closer to tin than the millimeter jig.
Table 3
Unknown Metal Linear Thermal Expansion Data Table
Change
Initial
Initial
in
Trial
Rod
Length
Temp
Length(
(mm)
(C)
mm)
1
B
0.13
128.55
99.3
2
A
0.16
128.98
99.3
3
A
0.14
128.98
99.3
4
B
0.14
128.55
99.3
5
B
0.16
128.55
100.1
6
A
0.17
128.89
100.1
7
B
0.15
128.55
99.7
8
A
0.17
128.89
99.7
9
B
0.16
128.55
99.8
10
A
0.15
128.89
99.8
11
A
0.14
128.89
99.5
12
B
0.16
128.55
99.5
13
A
0.16
128.89
100.2
14
A
0.20
128.89
98.3
15
B
0.13
128.55
100.2
Avera
ge
0.15
128.74
99.6

Final
Temp
(C)

Alpha
Coefficient
(C-1)

26.7
26.7
27.0
27.0
25.2
25.2
23.8
23.8
25.0
25.0
25.6
25.6
26.6
21.8
26.6

1.393E-05
1.709E-05
1.501E-05
1.506E-05
1.662E-05
1.761E-05
1.537E-05
1.738E-05
1.664E-05
1.556E-05
1.470E-05
1.684E-05
1.687E-05
2.061E-05
1.374E-05

25.4

1.622E-05

Table 3 shows the data collected for linear thermal expansion of the
unknown metal rod. The unknown metal has similar results to the tin metal rod
but the average alpha coefficient for the unknown metal is about 0.300x10 -5 C-1
lower. (See Appendix H)
Table 4
Unknown Metal Linear Thermal Expansion Observation Table
Tri Ro
Date
Observations
al
d
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
1
B
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
13
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
2
A
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
13
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
3
A
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
13
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
4
B
13
tables. Thermometer may have been faulty. A new one
was used in its place. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
5
B
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
13
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
6
A
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
13
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
7
B
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
13
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
4/22/20
8
A
tables. Metal rods may have cooled in between the
13
process of transferring from water to jig. Two millimeter
jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
4/22/20
9
B
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
13
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.

Tri
al

Ro
d

Date

10

4/22/20
13

11

4/22/20
13

12

4/22/20
13

13

4/22/20
13

14

4/22/20
13

15

4/23/20
13

Observations
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
tables. Researcher B burned finger. Two millimeter jigs
were used.
B set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
water. A recorded results from jig and placed into data
tables. Two millimeter jigs were used.
A set up Linear Thermal Expansion jigs and boiled
water. B recorded results from jig and placed into data
tables. Linear Thermal Expansion was completed along
with trials. One inch jig and one millimeter jig was
used.

Table 4 shows the observations collected from each trial that linear
thermal expansion was ran for the unknown metal rod. All the trials were run
pretty consistent.

Table 5
Tin Specific Heat Data Table
Trial

Ro
d

Initial
Temp (C)
Wat
er

Met
al

Equilibr
ium
Temp
(C)

Change in
Temp (C)

Mass (g)

Wat
er

Metal

Wat
er

33.6

99.0

34.6

1.0

-64.4

24.3

30.3

99.0

35.2

4.9

-63.8

24.3

34.7

98.3

37.5

2.8

-60.8

24.3

34.5

98.3

40.2

5.7

-58.1

24.3

26.6

99.3

34.6

8.0

-64.7

24.3

29.7

99.3

39.6

9.9

-59.7

24.3

30.5

99.5

38.0

7.5

-61.5

24.3

31.0

99.5

36.5

5.5

-63.0

24.3

30.0

99.4

36.2

6.2

-63.2

24.3

10

30.2

99.4

37.8

7.6

-61.6

24.3

11

22.3

98.0

31.6

9.3

-66.4

24.3

12

20.4

98.0

29.7

9.3

-68.3

24.3

13

27.7

98.4

37.7

10.0

-60.7

24.3

14

26.2

98.3

35.1

8.9

-63.2

24.3

15
Avera
ge

22.5

98.4

32.5

10.0

-65.9

24.3

28.7

98.8

35.8

7.1

-63.0

24.3

Specific
Heat
(J/g C)

Met
al
110.
35
113.
78
113.
78
110.
35
110.
35
113.
78
110.
35
113.
78
110.
35
113.
78
113.
78
110.
60
113.
78
113.
78
110.
60
112.
21

Table 5 shows the data collected for the specific heat of the tin rod.
Results for specific heat were not as expected since tins specific heat is 0.213
J/gC and the average results are much lower at 0.102 J/gC. (See Appendix G)

0.014
0.069
0.041
0.090
0.114
0.148
0.112
0.078
0.090
0.110
0.125
0.125
0.147
0.126
0.139
0.102

Table 6
Tin Specific Heat Observation Table
Tri Ro
Date
Observations
al
d
Researcher A boiled the water and set up the
calorimeters. Researcher B set up the Logger Pro. A
4/17/20
1
B
placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
13
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 2 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
4/17/20
2
A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables.

Tri
al

Ro
d

Date

4/17/20
13

4/17/20
13

4/17/20
13

4/17/20
13

4/17/20
13

4/17/20
13

4/17/20
13

10

4/17/20
13

11

4/19/20
13

12

4/19/20
13

13

4/19/20
13

14

4/19/20
13

Observations
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Temperatures stayed consistent. Calorimeters 1
and 2 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeters 2 and 3 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeters 2 and 3 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Rods were not wiped dry after use. Calorimeters
2 and 3 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Thermometer may have been faulty.
Calorimeters 2 and 3 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeter holders were loose and needed to be
adjusted. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Trial was performed smoothly. Calorimeters 1
and 3 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 2 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Water temperature was lower then usual.
Calorimeters 1 and 2 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. The thermometer probe may have touched the
hot metal causing a fluctuation in the data. Calorimeters
1 and 2 were used.
A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data

tables. Calorimeters 2 and 3 were used.

15

4/19/20
13

A placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and B

recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeters 2 and 3 were used.

Table 6 shows the observations collected from each trial that specific
heat was run for the tin rod. Calorimeters were switched up in some trial to see
the results that each calorimeter would produce.
Table 7
Unknown Metal Specific Heat Data Table
Initial
Equilibr
Temp
(C)
Ro
ium
Trial
d
Temp
Wat Met
(C)
er
al

Change in
Temp (C)
Wat
Metal
er

24.1

98.3

34.6

10.5

-63.7

27.3

98.3

32.9

5.6

-65.4

26.3

99.0

35.4

9.1

-63.6

23.2

99.0

31.3

8.1

-67.7

31.3

99.0

41.1

9.8

-57.9

26.0

99.0

35.3

9.3

-63.7

22.5

98.5

32.8

10.3

-65.7

22.9

98.5

33.1

10.2

-65.4

34.1

99.0

41.3

7.2

-57.7

10

28.0

99.0

41.2

13.2

-57.8

11

32.4

99.3

40.5

8.1

-58.8

12

31.5

99.3

39.6

8.1

-59.7

13
14

A
A

34.4
22.8

98.5
98.0

43.3
31.8

8.9
9.0

-55.2
-66.2

Mass (g)
Wat
er
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3
0
24.3

Met
al
114.
40
114.
50
114.
50
114.
40
114.
40
114.
50
114.
40
114.
50
114.
40
114.
50
114.
50
114.
40
114.
50
114.

Specific
Heat (J/g
C)
0.146
0.076
0.127
0.106
0.150
0.130
0.139
0.138
0.111
0.203
0.122
0.121
0.143
0.121

15
Avera
ge

31.8

98.5

41.6

9.8

-56.9

27.9

98.7

37.1

9.1

-61.7

0
24.3
0
24.3
0

50
114.
40
114.
45

Table 7 shows the data collected for the specific heat of the unknown
metal rod. The unknown metal averaged about a 0.030 J/gC higher specific
heat than the tin metal rod. (See Appendix G)

0.153
0.132

Table 8
Unknown Metal Specific Heat Observation Table
Tri Ro
Date
Observations
al
d
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20
1
B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 2 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20
2
A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 2 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20
3
A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20
4
B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20
5
B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20
6
A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20 recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
7
B
13
tables. Metals may have cooled before placed in the
calorimeters. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20
8
A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/19/20 recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
9
B
13
tables. Water evaporated and did not cover the metals
while they boiled. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/23/20
10
A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/23/20
11
A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
4/23/20
12
B
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
13
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 3 were used.

Tri
al

Ro
d

Date

13

4/23/20
13

14

4/23/20
13

15

4/23/20
13

Observations
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Very fast and efficient trial. Calorimeters 1 and
2 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Calorimeters 1 and 2 were used.
B placed the boiling rods in the calorimeters and A
recorded the results from the Logger Pro onto the data
tables. Final trial completed with joy. Calorimeters 1
and 2 were used.

Table 8 shows the observations collected from each trial that specific
heat was run for the unknown metal rod. Trials were consistently run and
calorimeters were switched in and out.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

The data being looked at comes from the specific heat and linear thermal
expansion tests during the trials for the tin metal rod and unknown metal rod.
The tin specific heat and linear thermal expansion values will be compared to
the unknown metals specific heat values to determine if the unknown metal is
tin. The data was collected by running 15 trials using both tests procedure. The
data being compared is the 15 specific heat values from the two metals and the
15 linear thermal expansion values from the two metals. To determine if the data
is valid, the percent error of each trial is calculated. This was calculated using
the percent error formula which is the collected value minus the actual value
divided by the actual value, then multiplied by 100. (See Appendix F)
error =

collected0.213
0.213

As, the experiment was happening, the percent error was being calculated. This
allowed the experimentors to make minor changes throughout the process that
lowered the percent error gradually. Overall, the high percent error shows that
the data collected is not the most valid, but since the percent error is consistently
around the negative 30 to 50 percent range with the average error being
-52.098% (see Table 9), there was probably an error in equipment or something
small. For linear thermal expansion, the percent error seemed to move from a
low percent error to a moderate percent from trial to trial with the average being
-17.562% (see Table 11). This was probably caused by the use of two different
measuring jigs.

Table 9
Tin Specific Heat Percent Error Table
Trial

Ro
d

10

11

12

13

14

15
Avera
ge

Percent
Error
93.283%
67.780%
80.680%
57.563%
46.515%
30.431%
47.249%
63.375%
57.565%
48.241%
41.242%
41.234%
30.886%
40.922%
34.510%
52.098%

Table 9 shows the percent error for the data collected during the 15 trials
run for the specifc heat of tin. The percent error started out high but small
changes in the procedure gradually lowered it. The percent error ranged from

-30.886% to -93.283%. The negative percents mean the value was lower than
the actual. (See Appendix F)

Table 10
Unknown Metal Specific Heat Percent Error Table
Ro
Percent
Trial
d
Error
1
B
-31.223%
2
A
-64.304%
3
A
-40.352%
4
B
-50.078%
5
B
-29.378%
6
A
-39.137%
7
B
-34.587%
8
A
-34.982%
9
B
-47.935%
10
A
-4.795%
11
A
-42.572%
12
B
-43.389%
13
A
-32.785%
14
A
-43.324%
15
B
-28.137%
Avera
ge
-37.799%
Table 10 shows the percent error for the data collected during the 15 trials
run for the specifc heat of the unknown metal. The percent error remained
consitent around 30 to 40 percent error except for the one outlier of 4.795%.
(See Appendix F)

The type of statistical test that will be done is a two sample t-test. This
type of test was chosen because two different treatments are being compared
from two independent samples. Before the two sample t-test can be ran, the
assumptions have to be checked. There are two simple random samples from
two distinct populations. The random integer feature on the calculator
randomized the trials creating the simple random sample. The samples are
independent from each other since all the tin specific heat trials were ran first,
then the unknown metal specific heat trials were ran. Both specific heat values
sample appear to be normally distributed since there is no pattern (Figure 7 and
Figure 8). In Figure 8, there appears to be outliers, but those are considered
minor since the data is not affected greatly by them. This is also shown in Figure
9. The last assumption is that the population mean and population standard
deviations are not known. This is true since the mean and standard deviation of
all tin rods and unknown metal rods are not known.

Figure 7. Normal Probability Plot for the Specific Heat of the Tin Rods.

Figure 7 shows the normal probability plot for the data collected during the
specific heat trials of the tin rods. This shows the data is normal because no
patterns are shown and there are no outliers on the graph.

Figure 8. Normal Probability Plot for the Specific Heat of the Unknown Metal
Figure 8 shows the normal probability plot for the data collected during the
specific heat trials of the tin rods. This shows outliers in the data but the outliers
are minor because the values do not greatly affect the overall data.

Figure 9. Box Plots for the Specific Heat Data

Figure 9 shows the box plot for the specific heat data collected from the tin
metal rods and unknown metal rods. This can be useful in determining if the
unknown metal is tin because it appears around half the unknown metal values
are greater than 75% for tin likely indicating a difference in metals.
The Ho of this problem is that 1 = 2. Tin is represented by 1 and the
unknown metal is represented by 2. The Ho means that the unknown metal is tin.
The Ha of the problem is that 1 2. This means the unknown metal is not tin.
The equation to run a two sample t-test is the mean of sample one minus the
mean of sample two divided by the square root of the sample standard deviation
of sample one squared divided by the number of samples in sample one plus the
sample standard deviation of sample two squared divided by the number of
samples in sample two. (See Appendix D)
t=

( x1 x2 )
s2 s2
1 + 2
n1 n 2

The equation finds the t-value of the data. The t-value is then compared to the
degrees of freedom table. The table is used to find the p-value range.

Figure 10. Density Curve for the Specific Heat Trials

Figure 10 shows the density curve for the specific heat data collected in
the trials. This finds that the p-value is 0.0199 and where the p-value is located.

Figure 11. Result Screen for the 2 Sample t Test for Specific Heat
Figure 11 shows the result screen of the 2 sample t test from the
calculator. This confirms the results found from the density curve in Figure 10.
The t-value of the problem was found to be -2.4852 (Figure 10 and 11).
Using the degrees of freedom chart and the calculator program, the p-value was
found to be 0.0199 (Figure 10 and 11). The H o that 1= 2 is rejected because
the p-value of 0.0199 is less than alpha level of 0.1. There is convincing
evidence that the specific heat mean of the unknown metal rod is not equal to the

specific heat mean of the known sample of tin. There is a 1.99% by chance
alone of getting sample standard deviations of 0.0386 and 0.0278 if we assume
Ho is true, that 1 = 2.

Table 11
Tin Linear Thermal Expansion Percent Error Table
Percent
Trial
Rod
Error
1
B
1.698%
2
A
-25.685%
3
A
13.708%
4
B
-34.218%
5
B
1.420%
6
A
-35.769%
7
B
-24.841%
8
A
-41.587%
9
B
-10.510%
10
A
-20.513%
11
A
-12.510%
12
B
-25.220%
13
A
-0.283%
14
A
-38.617%
15
B
-10.508%
Avera
ge
-17.562%
Table 11 shows the percent error for the data collected during the 15 trials
run for the linear thermal expansion of tin. The percent error ranged from

-0.283% to -41.587%. This could be due to the fact that one jig measured in
milimeters and the other in inches.

Table 12
Unknown Metal Specific Heat Percent Error Table
Ro
Percent
Trial
d
Error
1
B
-31.223%
2
A
-64.304%
3
A
-40.352%
4
B
-50.078%
5
B
-29.378%
6
A
-39.137%
7
B
-34.587%
8
A
-34.982%
9
B
-47.935%
10
A
-4.795%
11
A
-42.572%
12
B
-43.389%
13
A
-32.785%
14
A
-43.324%
15
B
-28.137%
Avera
ge
-37.799%
Table 12 shows the percent error for the data collected during the 15 trials
run for the linear thermal expansion of the unknown metal. The percent error
was relatively high except for the one trial that produced a -4.795% error.
The type of statistical test that will be done is a two sample t-test. This
test was chosen because two different treatments are being compared from two
independent samples. Before the two sample t-test the assumptions have to be
checked. There are two simple random samples from two distinct populations.
The random integer feature on the calculator randomized the trials creating the
simple random sample. The samples are independent from each other since all
the tin linear thermal expansion trials were ran first, then the unknown metal
linear thermal expansion trials were ran. There appears to be no pattern so both

values appear to be normally distributed (Figure 6 and Figure 7). Figure 8, shows
the outliers of the unknown metal trials. The last assumption is that the
population mean and population standard deviations are not known. This is true
since the mean and standard deviation of all tin rods and unknown metal rods
are not known.

Figure 12. Normal Probability Plot for the Linear Thermal Expansion of Tin
Figure 12 shows the normal probability plot for the data collected during
the linear thermal expansion trials of the tin rods. From this graph, the data
appears to be normal because there are no patterns or major outliers.

Figure 13. Probability Plot for Linear Thermal Expansion of the Unknown Metal
Figure 13 shows the normal probability plot for the data collected during
the linear thermal expansion trials of the tin rods. There appears to be an outlier
but it isnt considered significant since it doesnt affect the overall data by much.

Figure 14. Box Plots for the Linear Thermal ExpansionData

Figure 14 shows the box plot for the linear thermal expansion data
collected from the tin metal rods and unknown metal rods. It appears that about
90% of the unknown metal linear thermal expansion data is below half the values
for the tin rod. This suggests the metals are different.

The Ho of this problem is that 1 = 2. Tin is represented by 1 and the

unknown metal is represented by 2. The Ho means that the unknown metal is tin.
The Ha of the problem is that 1 2. If this is found to be true, it means the
unknown metal is not tin. The same equation from earlier is used to calculate the
t-value. From the t-value, the p-value is found using the degrees of freedom
chart and that p-value helps determine is H o is rejected or failed to be rejected.
(See Appendix E)

Figure 15. Density Curve for the Linear Thermal Expansion Trials
Figure 15 shows the density curve for the linear thermal expansion data
collected in the trials. This finds that the p-value is 0.0117 and shows where the
p-value is located.

Figure 16. Result Screen for the 2 Sample t Test for Linear Thermal Expansion

Figure 16 shows the result screen of the 2 sample t test from the
calculator. This confirms the results found from the density curve in Figure 11.
The t-value of the problem was found to be 2.7841(Figure 15 and 16).
Using the degrees of freedom chart and the calculator program, the p-value was
found to be 0.0117 (Figure 15 and 16). The H o that 1= 2 is rejected because
the p-value of 0.0117 is less than alpha level of 0.1. There is convincing
evidence that the unknown metal rods linear thermal expansion mean is not
equal to the linear thermal expansion mean of the known tin sample. There is a
1.17% by chance alone of getting sample standard deviations of 0.3930 and
0.1734 if we assume Ho is true, that 1 = 2.

Conclusion
The purpose of the experiment was to identify unknown metal rods using
data collected during the specific heat and linear thermal expansion trials. With
the data collected during the experiment, it showed that the original hypothesis is
rejected. The hypothesis predicted that the unknown metal will be correctly
identified and within a five percent error. The metal was not correctly identified.
It was thought to be a different metal based on the data collected and the twosample t-tests conducted, but the unknown metal was the same as the tin. This
could be due to faulty data or equipment collected or used during the trials. Also,
the metal was not identified in a five percent error range with the average ranging
between -52% and -17%.
The data collected differed with what was predicted in the hypothesis. The
data overwhelmingly favored that the metals were different. The unknown metal
had an average of 0.030 J/gC specific heat higher than the tin rods and an
average of 0.300 C-1 lower linear thermal expansion than the tin rods. The two
sample t-tests both rejected the Ho that said the metals were the same. Also, the
box plots comparing the samples did not align up and the means were way off.
The data also did not support a five percent error during the trials. In the specific
heat trials, the data collected was an average of 52 and 37 percent lower than
the expected value. In the linear thermal expansion trials, the data collected was
an average of 17% and 37% lower than the expected value.
The rejection of the hypothesis could be due to a flawed experiment
design. Overall, the experiment was well designed. Several procedures and set

ups for specific heat and linear thermal expansion experiments were looked at.
The procedures were then combined and made into the procedure and set up for
the trials. Problems encountered in making the measurements were that the
calorimeters were too long and thin. The lengths of the calorimeters were cut to
a suitable length, but the width could not be changed. Making the diameter of
the colorimeters wider would have allowed more room for the temperature probe.
This would allow the molecules to move around more and give the temperature
probe more room and to avoid possible errors such as the probe touching the
metal rod. Another problem was the time of the trials. In the given time allotted,
the procedure was rushed. More time given could result in better results for the
measurements recorded.
To make the experiment better, it is suggested that professionally made
calorimeters are used. This would possibly eliminate any bad data from
handmade calorimeters. Additional experiments that could help identify the metal
would a flame test and a magnetic test. The flame test would only involve a
Bunsen burner and a small sample of the metal. This could help identify the
metal based on flame color. All the magnet test would need is a sample of both
metals and a magnet. This would distinguish between metals that are magnetic
and not.

Appendix A: Calorimeter Construction

To conduct experiments of specific heat on the metal rods a calorimeter
had to be created. This was a crucial part in the data collection because if the
calorimeter was constructed poorly then the data would reflect it.
Materials:
(4) 3/4 PVC Caps
(4) 3/4 x 1 PVC Pipe
(4) 3/4 PVC Stopper
(1) 2 x 15 Foam and Foil Pipe Wrap Insulation
(4) Folgers 28.7 Oz.
Coffee can

Battery Operated Drill

Scissors
9/64 Drill Bit
Newspaper
Towel

Construction Procedure:
1)

Clean the inside of the PVC pipe.

2)

Using the battery drill and 9/64 drill bit drill a hole into the center of the
PVC cap.

3)

Hammer in the 3/4" PVC stopper into one end of the pipe. Slide the cap
onto the other end.

4)

Wrap the pipe in the insulation wrap until it is completely covered. Leave
enough space at the top so the cap can slide on and off. Cut the wrap and
press tightly against the pipe to hold it in place.

5)

Using an old coffee can, empty and contents within.

6)

Tear a newspaper into strips and line the coffee can.

7)

Place the calorimeter into the coffee can to assure it is a tight fit.

8)

Repeat steps 1-8 to create 3 more calorimeters and holders.

Appendix B: Randomizing Using the TI-Nspire CX

To make sure that data collection is efficient, the order in which trials are
conducted must be randomized. The order in which the rods are used must also
be randomized. Since there are 15 trials and two rods in this experiment, each
rod will not be tested the same amount of times. For this purpose the TI-Nspire
CX random integer function is needed.
Procedure:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)

7)
8)

Turn on calculator.
Create a new calculator page from the home screen.
Press the menu key on the TI-Nspire Cx.
Choose probability, random, integer.
Enter 1,2 into the function.
Because two rods are being tested at a time each rod will be assigned a
variable name. The first rod will be rod A and the

second, rod B.

When the number one occurs, rod A will be used

and when two

occurs, rod B will be used.

Repeat steps 3 6 for the randomization of the next pair of rods.
Repeat step 4 and enter 1,15,8 into the function. The number that is
received will be the trial number that the rod will be used in. Other trial

9)

numbers will be performed on the other rod.

Repeat step 4 and enter 1,15,15 into the function. This will give
order in which trials will be performed.

Appendix C: Logger Pro Setup

Before testing for specific heat, the logger pro must first be set up.
Procedure for Logger Pro Setup:
1)

Turn on Logger Pro.

the

2)

Insert the Thermal Probe into USB port 1.

3)

Select New from the File menu.

4)

Tap Rate on the screen. Change the data-collection rate to 1

sample per second and the time to 300 seconds. When completed
tap OK.

5)

Start data collection.

6)

Stop data collection when equilibrium has been reached or when 5

minutes has passed.

7)

If necessary, save data in the File menu.

Appendix D: Specific Heat Two Sample T-test

t=

( x1 x2 )

s 21 s 22
+
n n
(0.1020.132)

59.04872 58.99972
+
15
15

0.001392
Figure 1. Two Sample T-test Calculations of Specific Heat
Figure 1 shows the step by step process of solving a two sample t-test for
specific heat. X1 is the mean of the known metal rod data and X2 is the mean of
the unknown metal rod data. S12 is the standard deviation of the known metal rod
data squared. S22 is the standard deviation of the unknown metal rod data
squared. N is the number of trails for each separate data. The next step is the
formula with the numbers plugged in and the final step is the t-value.

Appendix E: Linear Thermal Expansion Two Sample T-test

t=

( x1 x2 )

s 21 s 22
+
n n

(1.929 1051.622 105)

56.23382 60.23022
+
15
15

1.44
Figure 2. Two Sample T-test Calculations of Linear Thermal Expansion
Figure 1 shows the step by step process of solving a two sample t-test for
specific heat. X1 is the mean of the known metal rod data and X2 is the mean of
the unknown metal rod data. S12 is the standard deviation of the known metal rod
data squared. S22 is the standard deviation of the unknown metal rod data
squared. N is the number of trails for each separate data. The next step is the
formula with the numbers plugged in and the final step is the t-value.

Appendix F: Percent Error Calculation

error =

collectedactual
100
actual

0.2030.213
100
0.213

4.795
Figure 3. Sample Percent Error Calculation
Figure 3 shows a sample calculation of an unknown metal percent error.
The percent error formula is the collected value received after running the data
through a trial, subtracted by the actual value, the number that is considered the
official result of the specific heat formula as accepted by the chemistry world. All
this is divided by the actual number. The next step is to plug in the data. To find
the percent error, multiply the results of the formula by 100. This percent
represents how far from the actual number the results of the trial were.

Appendix G: Specific Heat Sample Calculation

sm T =sm T

4.184

J
24.3 g 13.2=s 114.5 g (57.8 )
g

(114.5 g (57.8 ) )

J
4.184
24.3 g 13.2
g

0.203

J
g

Figure 4. Sample Calculation of Specific Heat

Figure 4 shows the formula for finding the specific heat of the known or
unknown metal. The first s in the formula is the specific heat of water. This
specific heat is always known as 4.184. The second specific heat is the variable
that is being solved for. The first m is the mass of the water and the second m is
the mass of the known or unknown metal rod. The delta T in the first equation is
the change in temperature of the water. The second delta T is the change in
temperature of the metal rods. After plugging in the data and calculating s, the
answer will be the metals specific heat.

Appendix H: Linear Thermal Expansion Sample Calculation

=

L
L0 T

0.20 mm
116.81 mm (99.126.0 )
5

2.380 10 C

Figure 5. Sample Calculation of Linear Thermal Expansion

Figure 5 shows the formula used to find the alpha coefficient of linear
thermal expansion. In the initial equation delta L represents the change, just after
placing it in the linear thermal expansion jig and after the rod has cooled within
the jig, in length of the known or unknown metal rods. L 0 is the initial length of the
rod before any testing was conducted. This measurement was found with the use
of the caliper tool. The delta T is the change of the temperature of the water used
in the test. The initial temperature was the temperature of the boiling water the
metal rod sat in and the final temperature was the temperature of the room which
the metal rod cooled to after the testing was completed. The next step is to plug
in the results of the testing and to find the alpha coefficient.

Works Cited
Anastos, John. "Thermal Expansion." Thermal Expansion. Olympus NDT, 2012.
Web. 07 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.ndted.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/Materials/
Physical_Chemical/ ThermalExpansion.htm>.
Bauck, Lori. "CHEMISTRY LAB: SPECIFIC HEAT OF A METAL." "YOURS FOR
BETTER EDUCATION" Mrs. Lori Bauck, 24 Mar. 2013. Web. 25 Mar.
2013. <http://www.kwanga.net/chemnotes/specific-heat-lab.pdf>.
Burkhardt, Charles E. "Coefficient of Thermal Linear Expansion." St. Louis
Community College. St. Louis Community College, 2 June 2011. Web. 8
Apr. 2013.

<http://users.stlcc.edu/cburkhardt/sum/lab/thermal.pdf>.

Climer, Harold A. "MEASUREMENT OF SPECIFIC HEAT." University of

Tennesse.

N.p., Jan. 2013. Web. 25 Mar. 2013.

<http://www.utc.edu/Faculty/Harold-

Climer/sheatlab.pdf>.

Cockman, John. "Appalachian State University Undergraduate Physics

Laboratory." Physics Laboratory. Appalachian State University, 2010.
Web. 07 Apr. 2013.
<http://www1.appstate.edu/dept/physics/labs/QuickGuides/11031104/thermal_expansion1104.htm>.
Emsley, John. "Tin." Visual Elements Periodic Table. Royal Society of Chemistry,
2011. Web. 24 Mar. 2013. <http://www.rsc.org/periodictable/element/50/tin>.

Gagnon, Steve. "The Element Tin." It's Elemental. Jefferson Lab, n.d. Web. 24
Mar. 2013.

<http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/ele050.html>.

Goodman, Ron. "Tin Mining and Processing Methods." ITRI Briefing 1.1 (2012):
1-2. Directory. 2012. Web. 24 Mar. 2013.
<https://www.itri.co.uk/index.php?option=com_mtree>.
Gottfred, J. "Tinsmithing." Basic Tinsmithing 4.1 (2000): 1. Basic Tinsmithing.
Sept. 2006. Web. 24 Mar. 2013.
<http://www.northwestjournal.ca/XIV122.htm>.
Hagemann, Judy. "Open-Pit Mining." ThinkQuest. Oracle Foundation, 9 Aug.
2005. Web. 24 Mar. 2013.
<http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00461/open.htm>.
Haag, Brooke, Dr. "Specific Heat of an Unknown Metal." Hartnell College.
Western Association of Schools and Colleges, 2010. Web. 25 Mar. 2013.
<http://www.hartnell.edu/physics/labs/4c/6specificheatofanunkownmetal.p
df>.
"History of Tin." The Human Touch of Chemistry. WATConsult, n.d. Web. 24 Mar.
2013. <http://www.humantouchofchemistry.com/history-of-tin.htm>.
Lefebvre, I., M. Szymanski, J. Oliver-Fourcade, and J. Jumas. "Electronic
Structure of Tin

Monochalcogenides." Mendeley 58.4 (1998): 1896-

906. Electronic Structure of Tin Monoc... Preview & Related Info.

Mendeley Ltd, 2011. Web. 24 Mar. 2013.
MacIntosh, R.M. "Tin and Its Alloys." Chemical Engineering Reviews 48.9 (1956):
1788-793. - Industrial & Engineering Chemistry (ACS Publications).

American Chemical Society, 2013. Web. 24 Mar. 2013.

<http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ie51401a022>.
"Metals - Specific Heats." Metals - Specific Heats. Engineering Standards, n.d.
Web. 25 Mar. 2013. <http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-heatmetals-d_152.html>.
"Specific Heats." Specific Heats. Ed. Tom Benson. NASA, 11 July 2009. Web. 25
Mar. 2013. <http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/specheat.html>.
"Thermal Expansion." Science Clarified. Advameg Inc, 10 May 2009. Web. 14
Apr. 2013. <http://www.scienceclarified.com/El-Ex/ExpansionThermal.html>.
"Thermal Expansion - Linear." Thermal Expansion - Linear. Engineering
Standards, n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2013.
<http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/linear-thermal-expansiond_1379.html>.
Whitley, J.H. "The Tin Commandments: Guidelines For the Use of Tin." AMP
Incorporated 11.2 (2004): 1-10. About.com Metals. 31 July 1996. Web. 24
Mar. 2013.
<http://www.te.com/documentation/whitepapers/pdf/sncomrep.pdf>.
Winter, Mark. "Tin: The Essentials." WebElements. The University of Sheffield,
n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2013. <http://www.webelements.com/tin/>.