Auberle - Estrope 1

Introduction
Over the course of the past century, more than one war has been started or funded
by one minor metal, tantalum (Lezhnev). Tantalum is one of the most corrosion resistant
materials on the periodic table, making it completely immune to all acids at room
temperature. It is a metal used in prosthesis, jet engines, and as a filament for
evaporating certain metals, such as aluminum, and is quite valuable in certain regions ().
In this experiment, the metal tantalum was taken as a source of comparison for another
metal, of which the true identity is unknown. The purpose of this experiment was to
accurately identify the unknown metal using its properties as compared to those of
tantalum.
In order to attempt to identify the unknown metal rod, the Specific Heats and
Linear Thermal Expansion (LTE) coefficients of both the known and unknown metal rods
were calculated. The Specific Heat and LTE coefficient are both intensive properties,
properties that do not rely on the quantity of a substance, and are unique to every
substance. The Specific Heat is the amount of heat that the metal absorbs. The LTE
coefficient shows the change in length of a metal when heat is applied. These two values
can be used to aid in identifying the identity of the unknown metal rod using statistical
tests and charts.
In this experiment, a two-sample t-test with an coefficient of 0.1 was used to
compare the data acquired from the known tantalum rod and the unknown metal rod. A
two-sample t-test is used to compare the means of two data sets, and gives two values.
The t-value is representative of how many standard deviations away the two means are
from each other, and in which direction. The p-value, correlating to the t-value, shows

Auberle - Estrope 2

how likely it would be for the results from the experiment to reoccur. For example, a tvalue closer to zero would indicate that the metals are the same, and a p-value smaller
than the coefficient would indicate that the metals are different.

Auberle - Estrope 3

Review of Literature
The purpose of this research experiment was to identify an unknown metal using
its specific heat and thermal linear expansion to compare it to the metal tantalum. The
identity of tantalum was found in an earlier experiment using density, and was used as a
basis for comparison.

Specific heat is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of a given
mass of a substance by one degree Celsius. It is measured using an isolated
system built specifically to find the specific heat or heat capacity of an object, the
calorimeter. This property is different for every element due to its density. The denser an
element is, the higher its specific heat. When there are more atoms in a system, the heat
has to travel between more atoms. This process is slower in elements with lower
densities, which have fewer atoms to travel through ("Physical, Earth, and Space
Science" 450-452).

Auberle - Estrope 4

Figure 1. Calorimeter
Shown on the previous page is a home-made calorimeter similar to the one used
in this experiment. The two nested cups and cover help insulate the metal and water
to provide a more accurate reading of the specific heat.

Specific heat can be calculated using the following formula, where Q, the heat
added to the system, is equal to c, the specific heat of the substance
(measured in Joules/gram C) multiplied by the mass, m, times the change in
temperature (Nave "Specific Heat").

Q=cm T

Auberle - Estrope 5

To calculate the specific heat of the unknown metal, the specific heat of
water is needed. The specific heat of water is 4.18 J/g C, while tantalum, the metal of
comparison in this experiment, has a specific heat of 0.14 J/g C (Metiu). In finding the
specific heat of the unknown metal, the metal is placed inside the calorimeter and heated
up, and the temperature of the water is taken. The heat in the water, since the experiment
is being run in a closed system, is equal to the heat given off by the metal.

The specific heat of water is used in the calculation because of the First Law of
Thermodynamics. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that energy is not created nor
destroyed, and that it is only transferred. All of the heat energy is transferred to the water
from the metal, allowing the thermometer in the calorimeter to indirectly measure the
temperature of the metal

This can be used to determine which material to use based on how resistant a
substance is to heat. Used practically, metals with a higher specific heat are used
in engines and high powered motors so that the system doesn't overheat.
Linear thermal expansion is the change in length of an object due to the
application of heat. This occurs because, when an object is heated up, its atoms speed up,
causing collisions with each other harder and more often, which then forces the object to
expand by a certain amount. This amount is found using the following formula, where

Auberle - Estrope 6

the change in length divided by the original length is equal to the specific heat, or ,
multiplied by the change in temperature (Nave "Thermal Expansion").
L
= T
LO

Thermal expansion is useful in industry because, for example, if a beam in the

infrastructure of a house expands too much when it gets hot, then the entire house could
collapse. Knowing the thermal expansion of an object allows architects to account for the
expansion and adjust plans accordingly.
This experiment is based off of two separate experiments, one focusing on finding
the specific heat of an unknown metal, and one on linear thermal expansion. In the
experiment on specific heat, a calorimeter full of water is used to find the amount of heat
gained/lost by the metal sample (Chemistry). For the experiment on linear thermal
expansion, a micrometer is used as a part of an apparatus to heat a metal rod and record
the change in length (Harrison).

Auberle - Estrope 7

Figure 2. Apparatus Used in Thermal Expansion Experiment

Since the metal in this experiment is unknown, the data collected may or may not
be expanding or building upon earlier research, but is an accurate way of discovering the
identity of an unknown metal.

Auberle - Estrope 8

Problem Statement and Hypothesis

Problem:
To confirm or deny the identity of an unknown metal as tantalum by comparing
the intensive properties of specific heat and linear thermal expansion.
Hypothesis:
The unknown metal will be identified as tantalum by its specific heat, measured

in

J
1 , within 2.86%
g , and the Linear Thermal Expansion, measured in

error.
Data Measured:
The identity of the unknown metal will be determined by calculating the specific
heat and coefficient of linear thermal expansion. To calculate the specific heat, it was
necessary to know the metal's mass in grams, change in temperature in degrees Celsius,

J
heat added to the metal, also in degrees Celsius, the specific heat of water (4.184 g
), and the change in temperature of the water. To calculate the Coefficient of Linear
Thermal Expansion, the length in millimeters and temperature of the rod in degrees
Celsius, both before and after the experiment was conducted was needed.

Auberle - Estrope 9

Experimental Design
Linear Thermal Expansion

Materials:
(2) Unknown Metal Rods

Linear Thermal Expansion Jig

(2) Tantalum Rods

Thermometer (0.01C)

Hot Plate

TESR Caliper 00530085 (0.01 mm

precision)

Loaf Pan
TI-nSpire Calculator
Tongs

Procedure:

Caution: Do not pick up loaf pan full of boiling water by hand. Some materials may be
harmful to certain people. Those with any type of metal allergy should not attempt this
experiment. Be sure to wear a lab coat and goggles for the duration of the experiment.

1.
Using the random integer function of a TI-nSpire calculator, randomly determine
the trial
order.

Auberle - Estrope 10

2.

Using the linear thermal expansion jig, record the length of the metal rod.

3.

Fill loaf pan with enough water to be able to cover the metal rod and record the
temperature using the thermometer.

4.

Turn on hot plate and set to high.

5.
hot

Once the hot plate has reached the desired temperature, place the loaf pan on the
plate.

6.

Once the water has reached 100C, place one of the metal rods into the loaf pan,
assuming that the metal and water come to the same temperature, but heat for no
longer than five minutes. Record this value as the final temperature for the metal.

7.
Once the metal has come to the correct temperature, move the rod from the
boiling
water.

8.

Place on the linear thermal expansion jig and record the length

9.

Find the linear thermal expansion using the table and record

10.

Repeat steps 2-8 for each trial.

Auberle - Estrope 11

Specific Heat Procedure

Materials:
(2) Calorimeters

Tongs

(2) Unknown Metal Rods

LabQuest Interface

(2) Tantalum Rods

Temperature probe (0.01degrees C)

Scout Pro Electronic Scale (0.000001 g

precision)

Linear Thermal Expansion Jig

100 ml graduated cylinder

Hot Plate
Thermometer (0.01 degrees C)
Loaf pan

Procedure:
Caution: Do not pick up loaf pan full of boiling water by hand. Some materials may be
harmful to certain people. Those with any type of metal allergy should not attempt this
experiment. Be sure to wear a lab coat and goggles for the duration of the experiment.

1.
Using the random integer function of a TI-nSpire calculator, randomly determine
the trial
order.
2.

Construct calorimeter as seen in Appendix A.

3.

Mass the metal using scale and record the result with 0.000001 g precision.

Auberle - Estrope 12

4.

Fill loaf pan with enough water to cover the metal rod.

5.

Turn on hot plate and set to high, placing the loaf pan full of water on top.

6.
the
but

Once the water has reached 100 degrees Celcius, place one of the metal rods into
beaker and assume that the metal and water are the same temperature once boiled,
leave for no longer than five minutes.

7.

Record initial metal temperature once metal comes to temperature.

8.
Attach the temperature probe to the LabQuest and turn on, then insert the probe
into the
lid of the calorimeter.

9.
Set the LabQuest to run for 300 seconds, recording at a rate of 2 data points per
second.

10.

Place the temperature probe, attached to the LabQuest, into the calorimeter.

11.

Fill 100 mL graduated cylinder with 50mL of water, then pour into calorimeter.

12.
the

Start the LabQuest and record the temperature of the water for 30 seconds without
metal.

Auberle - Estrope 13

13.
lid.

Move the rod from the boiling water to the calorimeter, taking care to replace the

14.

Record the temperature of the water with the LabQuest, making sure to note the
temperature of equilibrium.

15.

Repeat steps 3-14 for each trial.

Auberle - Estrope 14

Data and Observations

Table 1

Trial

Calculating Linear Expansion Coefficient of Known Metal

Initial
Final
Change in
Linear
Initial Metal
Temperature
Temperature
Metal Length
Expansion
Length (mm)
(C)
(C)
(mm)
Coefficient C1

98.3

24.3

127.67

0.049

5.18651E-06

98.7

24.3

127.67

0.06125

6.44829E-06

97.6

24.3

127.96

0.0245

2.61209E-06

98

24.6

127.67

0.0245

2.61445E-06

97.8

24.3

127.96

0.0245

2.60498E-06

95.6

23.7

127.67

0.04

4.35755E-06

98.2

24

127.96

0.08

8.42581E-06

97.7

24.2

127.96

0.02

2.12651E-06

96.1

24.3

127.67

0.03

3.27271E-06

10

97.3

24.3

127.96

0.04

4.28216E-06

11

97.8

24.3

127.67

0.03

3.19702E-06

12

97.8

24.3

127.67

0.03

3.19702E-06

13

98.1

24.3

127.96

0.02

2.11787E-06

14

97.2

24.3

127.96

0.03

3.21603E-06

15
98
23.6
127.96
Linear Thermal Expansion Coefficient of Known Metal

0.0245

2.57347E-06

The table above, Table 1, contains all of the data used to calculate the specific
heat of the known metal. The temperatures for these trials remained relatively constant
throughout the experiment. However, there are inconsistencies in the observed change in
length of the metal.

Auberle - Estrope 15

Table 2
Linear Thermal Expansion Coefficient of Unknown Metal
Calculating Linear Expansion Coefficient of Unknown Metal
Initial
Temperature
(C)

Trial

Final
Temperature
(C)

Initial Metal
Length (mm)

Change in
Metal Length
(mm)

Linear
Expansion
Coefficient C1

98.1

24.3

127.3

0.049

5.21568E-06

99

22.7

127.3

0.049

5.04479E-06

97.9

24.4

127.94

0.06125

6.51347E-06

98

24.3

127.3

0.049

5.22276E-06

98.1

24.3

127.3

0.01

1.06443E-06

96

24.4

127.3

0.03

3.29139E-06

97

24.3

127.3

0.03

3.24159E-06

98.3

22.8

127.94

0.049

5.07274E-06

97.5

24.3

127.3

0.0245

2.62922E-06

10

96.4

23.8

127.94

0.03

3.22982E-06

11

97.7

24.3

127.94

0.03

3.19462E-06

12

98.1

24

127.3

0.0245

2.59728E-06

13

98.9

23.8

127.3

0.0245

2.5627E-06

14

98.7

23.7

127.3

0.0245

2.56612E-06

15

97.2

24.3

127.94

0.03

3.21653E-06

Above, in Table 2, the data used to calculate the Linear Thermal Expansion
Coefficient of the unknown metal is displayed. The temperatures during these trials vary
slightly more than those from the known trials, though the change in length is more
consistent.

Table 3
Specific Heat of Known Metal

Auberle - Estrope 16

Specific Heat of Known Metal

Initial
Final
Initial
Final
Water
Water
Metal
Water
Correction
Trial
Metal
Metal
Temp
Temp
Mass (g) Mass (g)
Factor
Temp
Temp
(C)
(C)
0.045368
1
20.2
22.5
98.7
22.5
67.8186
50
0.045368
2
19.2
21.9
98.9
21.9
67.8186
50
0.045368
3
20.4
21
97.2
21
67.9719
50
0.045368
4
19.4
21.7
97.3
21.7
67.9719
50
0.045368
5
20.1
23
98.7
23
67.9719
50
0.045368
6
20.1
23.1
98.2
23.1
67.8186
50
0.045368
7
19.3
21.9
98.8
21.9
67.8186
50
0.045368
8
20.3
22.7
98.7
22.7
67.8186
50
0.045368
9
22.2
24.4
99.1
24.4
67.8186
50
0.045368
10
22.3
25.2
98.7
25.2
67.8186
50
0.045368
11
22.2
24.6
98.1
23.6
67.8186
50
0.045368
12
21.2
25.8
98
25.8
67.8186
50
0.045368
13
19.6
23.7
98.3
23.7
67.8186
50
0.045368
14
20.3
23.3
99.3
23.3
67.9719
50
0.045368
15
21.2
23.6
99.6
23.6
67.9719
50
In Table 3, pictured above, the data used for calculating the specific heat is shown.
The initial temperatures of the water and the metal are fairly consistent, though the final
temperature seems to have shifted. A correction factor was used to account for the loss of
heat in the homemade calorimeters during the pre-trials.

Table 4
Calculating Specific Heat of Unknown Metal
Specific Heat of Unknown Metal

Specific
Heat
(J/g C)
0.138476
0.153533
0.06960
0.139003
0.163274
0.168592
0.149662
0.14278
0.136216
0.167077
0.144741
0.241900
0.214902
0.166858
0.142560

Auberle - Estrope 17

Initial
Water
Temp
(C)
22.8
25.3
22.6
20.3
21.8
20.8
20.8
22.8
25.3
22.6
20.3
21.8
20.8
20.8
22.8

Trial
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Final
Water
Temp
(C)
24.9
27.1
24.5
23.9
24.8
23.9
24.2
24.9
27.1
24.5
23.9
24.8
23.9
24.2
24.9

Initial
Metal
Temp

Final
Metal
Temp

Metal
Mass (g)

Water
Mass (g)

Correction
Factor

24.9
27.1
24.2
23.9
24.8
23.9
24.2
24.9
27.1
24.2
23.9
24.8
23.9
24.2
24.9

67.8046
67.8046
67.612
67.612
67.612
67.612
67.8046
67.8046
67.8046
67.612
67.612
67.612
67.612
67.8046
67.8046

50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50

0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368
0.045368

98.8
98.8
97.6
97.6
99
98.6
98.6
98.8
98.8
97.6
97.6
99
98.6
98.6
98.8

Pictured above in Table 4 are the calculations for the specific heat and the data
used to calculate it. The initial temperatures of the water seem to be more inconsistent
than those from the known trials. The final water temperature and metal temperatures are
much more consistent. As for the specific heat, it would seem that the results are fairly
constant, with a few variance in between.

Table 5.
Observations of Tantalum Specific Heat Trials
Trial

Observations

Specific
Heat
(J/g C)
0.133043
0.122824
0.125461
0.196506
0.170467
0.165488
0.186365
0.159791
0.163723
0.149618
0.128543
0.123634
0.156628
0.138495
0.161068

Auberle - Estrope 18

Number
1
Rod B Calorimeter B, only one calorimeter used
2
Rod B Calorimeter B, only one calorimeter used
3
Rod A Calorimeter A, metal inserted late
4
Rod A Calorimeter A, trial redone because metal touched temperature probe
5
Rod A Calorimeter A, water took a long time to boil
6
Rod B Calorimeter B, New calorimeter configuration from this point forward
7
Rod B Calorimeter A, trial redone due to loss of data
8
Rod B Calorimeter A, trial redone due to loss of data
9
Rod B Calorimeter A, trial redone due to loss of data
10
Rod B Calorimeter A, trial redone due to loss of data
11
Rod B Calorimeter A, trial redone due to loss of data
12
Rod B Calorimeter A, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached
13
Rod B Calorimeter A, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached
14
Rod A Calorimeter A, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached
15
Rod A Calorimeter A, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached
Table 5, above, shows the observations taken over the duration of the experiment.
Trials 7-11 had to be conducted again to a computer error resulting in the loss of that
days data. From trial 6 and on, the same calorimeters were used as in the first 5 trials, but
aluminum foil was added to the exterior.

Table 6.
Observations of Unknown Metal Specific Heat Trials
Trial
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Observations
Rod B Calorimeter B, only one calorimeter used
Rod B Calorimeter B, only one calorimeter used
Rod A Calorimeter A, water took more than 5 minutes to boil
Rod A Calorimeter A, temperature on the thermometer was inconsistent
Rod A Calorimeter New calorimeter configuration from this point forward
Rod A Calorimeter, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod B Calorimeter, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod B Calorimeter, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod A Calorimeter, trial redone because metal touched temperature probe
Rod A Calorimeter, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod A Calorimeter, metal inserted late, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached
Rod B Calorimeter, metal inserted late, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached

Auberle - Estrope 19

13
14
15

Rod B Calorimeter, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached

Rod B Calorimeter, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached
Rod B Calorimeter, stopped trial once equilibrium was reached
Table 6, above, shows the observations taken over the duration of the experiment.

Some of the trials had to be redone due to loss of data, and a days worth of experiments.
On the last day, marked by the start of trial 11, the recording of data was stopped once the
metal had reached an obvious point of equilibrium, usually around 2-3 minutes into the
trial.
Table 7.
Observations of Tantalum Linear Thermal Expansion Trials
Trial
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Observations
Rod B measured in inches, rod was measured with caliper afterwards instead of

beforehand
Rod B measured in inches, trial went smoothly
Rod A measured in inches, water took more than 5 minutes to boil
Rod B measured in inches, thermometer stopped working and was replaced
Rod A measured in inches, changed type of tongs used
Rod B measured in millimeters, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod A measured in millimeters, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod A measured in millimeters, jig was moved to make more room for other trials
Rod B measured in millimeters, used aluminum loaf pan
Rod A measured in millimeters, water took more than 5 minutes to boil
Rod B measured in millimeters, trial redone because rod was dropped
Rod B measured in millimeters, trial went smoothly
Rod A measured in millimeters, jig got stuck
Rod A measured in millimeters, thermometer readings inconsistent
Rod A measured in inches, trial redone due to skewed results
Table 7 displays the observations taken over the duration of the experiment.

Several of the trials were redone due to computer error, as stated above, and others
because of human error.
Table 8.
Observations of Unknown Metal Linear Thermal Expansion Trials

Auberle - Estrope 20

Trial
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Observations
Rod A measured in inches, put rod in late
Rod A measured in inches, trial redone due to high percent error
Rod B measured in inches, water took more than 5 minutes to boil
Rod A measured in inches, jig was too close to hot plate, so measurement was

recorded at 6 minutes instead

Rod A measured in millimeters, jig was moved out of the way of other trials
Rod A measured in millimeters, started using multiple loaf pans to boil water
Rod A measured in millimeters, jig got stuck
Rod B measured in inches, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod A measured in inches, trial redone due to loss of data
Rod B measured in millimeters, changed type of tongs used
Rod B measured in millimeters, thermometer readings inconsistent
Rod A measured in inches, trial stopped once metal reached room temperature
Rod A measured in inches, trial stopped once metal reached room temperature
Rod A measured in inches, trial stopped once metal reached room temperature
Rod B measured in millimeters, temperature on thermometer wasnt consistent
Table 8 shows the observations taken by the experimenters during the experiment.

On the last day of recording, the rods were cooled quickly using a damp, room
temperature paper towel, and results were recorded once the rods reached room
temperature.

Auberle - Estrope 21

Data Analysis and Interpretation

This experiment was conducted to determine whether or not the identity of an
unknown metal could be tantalum by comparing the specific heat and Linear Thermal
Expansion (LTE) coefficient of two metal rods whose identities were known to be
tantalum to those of the unknown metal rods. To calculate the LTE coefficient, it is
necessary to obtain the change in length, initial length, initial temperature, and final
temperature of the metal rod. For specific heat, the mass of the metal rods, volume of
water, and the initial and final temperatures are needed for both the water and the metal
rod.
To compare the two sets of metal rods, a two-sample t-test will be conducted. In
order for the results of this test to be considered valid, however, outliers and inconsistent
data patterns must be taken into consideration. Below are various figures that were used
to help in determining the validity of the data collected.

Figure 1. Normal Probability Plot of Linear Thermal Expansion Coefficient of Tantalum

Figure 1, pictured above, shows the normal probability plot of the LTE
coefficients of the tantalum rods. When the points are closer to the line, it indicates more

Auberle - Estrope 22

normality in the data. The trend appears to be nearly linear, with most of the data being
close to the line.

Figure 2. Normal Probability Plot of Linear Thermal Expansion of Unknown Metal

In the figure above, Figure 2, the normal probability plot of the LTE coefficients
of the unknown metal is displayed. It can be observed that the data here is behaving
strangely, in that they form three clusters of lines. This behavior is not normal, and as
such, could mean that the results from the two-sample t-test may be inaccurate because of
this abnormality.

Figure 3. Normal Probability Plot of Specific Heat of Tantalum Metal

Auberle - Estrope 23

On the previous page, Figure 3 is shown. This figure displays the specific heat of
the tantalum rods. Looking at this data, it can be seen that the data, forming a seemingly
cubic shape, may not be reliable in conducting the two-sample t-test, and could cause it to
give inaccurate results. However, there are three data points that indicate otherwise, and
help to indicate a non-cubic progression of the data.

Figure 4. Normal Probability Plot of Specific Heat of Unknown Metal

The above figure, Figure 4, is a normal probability plot of the specific heat of the
unknown metal. It appears to be fairly consistently on the line, and seems to be indicative
of a very normal set of data. This data set seems to be fairly reliable, and would result in a
more accurate two-sample t-test.

Auberle - Estrope 24

EV: .
0000063

Figure 5. Box Plot of Linear Thermal Expansion Coefficient of Metal Rods

Above, in Figure 5, the box plots of the LTE coefficients of the tantalum and
unknown metal rods are shown, along with the known LTE coefficient of tantalum, and
are compared to the published coefficient for tantalum, represented by EV (expected
value) on the graph. As seen in this side-by-side comparison, the trials of both the known
tantalum rod and the unknown rod are varying with the known value. However, when
examining the medians and quartiles of each, it can be seen that they are relatively similar
in that aspect. This seems to indicate a consistent inaccuracy in the trials that could not be
accounted for. There is also one outlier for the known LTE coefficient.

Auberle - Estrope 25

EV: 0.14

Figure 6. Box Plot of Specific Heat of Metal Rods

Figure 6 above is a box plot of the specific heats of the metal rods. Looking at this
figure, a kind of skew seen in the box plot of LTE coefficients can also be observed.
Again, both of the data sets seem to be slightly varying with the published values (EV).
However, the medians are approximately the same in their variance, indicating another
factor at work.
Table 5
Percent Error of Linear Thermal Expansion of Known Metal
Trial Number Percent Error
1
17.67%
2
-2.35%
3
58.54%
4
58.50%
5
58.65%
6
30.83%
7
-33.74%
8
66.25%
9
48.05%
10
32.03%
11
49.25%
12
49.25%
13
66.38%
14
48.95%
15
59.15%

Auberle - Estrope 26

Table 5 shows the calculated percent error of the linear thermal expansion of the
known metal. It would seem that the results of trials 3, 4, and 5 had been affected by an
outside factor, observing that the linear thermal expansion of the known metal should
have a low percent error.
Table 6
Percent Error of Linear Thermal Expansion of Unknown Metal
Trial Number Percent Error
1
17.21%
2
19.92%
3
-3.39%
4
17.10%
5
83.10%
6
47.76%
7
48.55%
8
19.48%
9
58.27%
10
48.73%
11
49.29%
12
58.77%
13
59.32%
14
59.27%
15
48.94%
Above in Table 6 are the calculated percent errors of the linear thermal expansion
of the unknown metal. The percent errors are semi-consistent around 17%, although this
is not enough to conclude the unknown metal to be the same.

Auberle - Estrope 27

Table 7
Percent Error of Specific Heat of Known Metal
Trial Number Percent Error
1
-1.08877
2
9.666276
3
-50.2841
4
-0.71213
5
16.62399
6
20.42263
7
6.901522
8
1.985402
9
-2.70292
10
19.34088
11
3.386335
12
72.78579
13
53.50173
14
19.18417
15
1.828476
Pictured above in Table 7 are the percent errors of the specific heat of the known
metal. The results are consistent in showing the accuracy of the experiment, seeing as
how the percent errors calculated are all fewer than 10%.
Table 8
Percent Error of Specific Heat of Unknown Metal
Trial Number Percent Error
1
-4.96905
2
-12.2685
3
-10.3849
4
40.36124
5
21.76243
6
18.20571
7
33.11754
8
14.13648
9
16.94466
10
6.869646
11
-8.18328
12
-11.6898
13
11.87743

Auberle - Estrope 28

14
15

-1.07503
15.04865
In Table 8 the calculated percent errors of the specific heats of the unknown metal

are shown. Based on this data being consistently under 15%, it would seem that the data
indicates the known and unknown metals could have close, if not the same specific heats.

A Two Sample t-test was used for these experiments in order to determine

whether or not the metals were the same. The null hypothesis for the test is

H 0 :t k =t u

which means the known and unknown means are the same, and the alternate hypothesis is
H a : t 1 t 2

, which means that the known and unknown values are different, with tk

being the known trial and tu representing the unknown trial. Using the data from the
experiments, barring the five outliers, the p-value was determined to be 0.881517
for the specific heat and trials and 0.649623 for the linear thermal expansion trials.
Because of these results, the null hypothesis was rejected, meaning that the
metals are statistically not the same.

t=

xx 1xx 2

s 12 s 22
+
n1 n2

Auberle - Estrope 29

x
x

n
2

s=

n1

Figure 7. Statistics Tests

Figure 7 shows the statistical tests used for the data of the experiment in order to
determine the identity of the unknown metal.

Auberle - Estrope 30

Figure 8. Specific Heat 2 Sample t-test

Figure 8 above shows the 2 Sample t-test for the specific heat trials in the
experiment. According to the graph, the two metals seem to be the same, but the p-value
was too large for them to be the same according to our alpha level of 0.1.

Figure 9. Specific Heat 2 Sample t-test

Figure 9 shows the 2 Sample t-test for the linear thermal expansion trials in the
experiment. Again, in the graph, the two metals look the same, but the p-value was too
large for them to be the same according to our alpha level of 0.1.

Auberle - Estrope 31

Auberle - Estrope 32

Conclusion
This experiment was conducted in order to determine whether or not the identity
of an unknown metal rod could be tantalum. It was hypothesized that the metal would be
found to be tantalum if the Linear Thermal Expansion (LTE) coefficients and Specific
heats were found to be within a 2.86% error.
According to the data in the experiment and the researchers own observations, the
two metals were both tantalum. Both had the same physical properties, as well as similar
enough linear thermal expansion coefficients and specific heats to be seen as statistically
significant.
All of the results in the experiment were true to the published value within a 66%
error rate, which is relatively high, but the percent errors were consistent between both
the known and unknown throughout the experiment. Despite the statistical test stating
that the means were not the same, if the outliers were included in the test, then the results
would have been much closer to the same than without them. An advantage, however, to
using a 2 sample t-test was the comparison of the means and to see exactly how big the
difference between the data points was.
Because specific heat is an intensive property, every substance's specific heat
must be different. Since both metals were the element, their specific heats were also the
same, to a certain percent error. The specific heat was measured through the temperature
of the surrounding water, the system, because, according to the First Law of
Thermodynamics, heat cannot be created nor destroyed; only transferred. All of the heat
originally transferred to the metal by the boiling water has to be transferred into the water
of the calorimeter, until the point of equilibrium. At that point, the amount of heat

Auberle - Estrope 33

absorbed by the metal can be accurately measured, due to the transfer of heat and the
high specific heat of water, allowing it to absorb a large amount of heat.
Linear Thermal Expansion is also an intensive property, measured by length.
When a substance is heated, the heat transforms into energy transferred from atom to
atom inside the substance, causing the individual atoms to convert the heat into kinetic
energy, which in turn causes the atoms to move faster. When the atoms begin to move
faster, more collisions with the outside boundary of the substance occur, and with more
energy, so the boundary expands, causing a notable difference in length, width, and
height.
A number of errors were made in the execution of this experiment. For
example, metal tongs were used to transfer the metal rods from the loaf pan to either a
calorimeter or a linear thermal expansion jig. Since the tongs are made of metal, they
readily absorb heat, and may have skewed the results significantly. Also, the linear
thermal expansion jigs were not kept near enough to the loaf pan to ensure an accurate
reading of the change in length, and some amount of large percent errors may be
accounted to that. Another error was the loss of data for specific heat trials 6 through 11
and linear thermal expansion trials 6 through 9 due to a technical computer error.
The LTE coefficients and Specific Heat were useful in determining the identity of
the unknown metal rod.

Auberle - Estrope 34

Application
The product made was a ligating clip, used mainly in laparoscopic living-donor
nephrectomy (minimally invasive live-donor kidney transplants) to permanently close
bleeding vessels or tissue structures. These clips are primarily made of tantalum, due to
its non-toxic tendencies, resistance to acid, and biochemical compatibility with humans.
The cost of tantalum is $4.50 per gram, and $18.09 for one clip.

Figure 1. Ligation Clip

Figure 1 above shows an isometric view of the ligation clip

Figure 2. SolidWorks Drawing.

Figure 2 shows the dimensions of the ligation clip in three different views

Auberle - Estrope 35

Works Cited
Barbalace, Kenneth. "Periodic Table of Elements." Enviromental Chemistry. N.p., n.d.
Web. 8 May 2014.
<http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/periodic/Ta.html#Names>.
Bradshaw, Larry. Specific Heat of Metals. TeacherTECH. Web. 26 Mar 2014.
<http://teachertech.rice.edu/Participants/bradshaw/lessons/elements/specificheat.h
tml>.
Brucat, PJ. "Calorimetry." . University of Florida. Web. 26 Mar 2014.
<http://www.chem.ufl.edu/~itl/2045/lectures/lec_9.html>.
"Chemistry Lab: Specific Heat of a Metal." . N.p.. Web. 26 Mar 2014.
<http://www.kwanga.net/chemnotes/specific-heat-lab.pdf>.
Harrison, David M. "Thermal Expansion Experiment."Faraday Physics. N.p.. Web. 26
Mar 2014. <http://faraday.physics.utoronto.ca/IYearLab/Intros/ThermalExpans/
ThermalExpans.html>.
Gagnon, Steve. "The Element Tantalum." It's Elemental -. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 May 2014.
<http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/ele073.html>.
Lezhnev, Sasha and John Prendergast. "From Mine to Mobile Phone: The Conflict
Minerals Supply Chain | Enough Project." From Mine to Mobile Phone: The
Conflict Minerals Supply Chain. Center for American Progress, 10 Nov. 2009.

Auberle - Estrope 36

Web. 8 May 2014. <http://www.enoughproject.org/publications/mine-mobilephone>.

Metiu, H. Physical Chemistry: Thermodynamics. Taylor & Francis, 2006.
Mital, Deepak M.D.. "Donor Nephrectomy ." Donor Nephrectomy. Medscape, 21 June
2013. Web. 14 May 2014. <http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1830221overview>.

Nave, Carl R. "Specific Heat." HyperPhysics. N.p.. Web. 26 Mar 2014.

<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/spht.html>.
Nave, Carl R. "Thermal Expansion." HyperPhysics. C.R. Nave, 2012. Web. 26
Mar 2014. <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/thexp.html>.
Physical, Earth, and Space Science. CPO Science Teaching and Learning Systems, 450452. eBook. <http://www.cpo.com/ipcres/pdfs/unit9/Ch26Sec3.pdf>.
"Specific Heat of an Unknown Metal, Latent Heat of Fusion of Ice, and Thermal
Conductivity." . N.p.. Web. 26 Mar 2014. <http://dtc.pima.edu/~hacker/physicslabs/physics221-lab/physics221-lab/physics221-lab4.pdf>.
"Tantalum." - Element information, properties and uses. Royal Society of Chemistry, 1
Jan. 2011. Web. 8 May 2014. <http://www.rsc.org/periodictable/element/73/tantalum>.
"Tantalum Facts." Tantalum Facts. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 May 2014.
<http://www.softschools.com/facts/periodic_table/tantalum_facts/234/>.

Auberle - Estrope 37

"Weck Hem-o-Lock Ligating Clips." Weck Hem-o-Lok Ligating Clips: Contraindicated

for Ligation of Renal Artery During Laparoscopic Living-Donor Nephrectomy.
Food and Drug Administration, 5 May 2011. Web. 14 May 2014.
<http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHuman
MedicalProducts/ucm254363.htm>.

"What is Tantalum?." What is Tantalum?. Element Matter, 1 Jan. 2012. Web. 8 May
2014. <http://www.elementalmatter.info/element-tantalum.htm>.

Auberle - Estrope 38

Appendix A: Calorimeter Construction

Materials:
inch diameter PVC pipe

Recycled Paper

PVC glue

(2) CDs

Drill Press with a 1/8 inch drill bit

Duct Tape

(4) inch PVC pipe caps

Aluminum foil

(2) Empty Toilet Paper Rolls

Caution: Do not use a drill press without adult supervision if you are unfamiliar with the
equipment.
Procedure:
1. Cut the PVC pipe into 2 LENGTH segments
2. Drill a hole into one of the caps, making sure the hole is slightly offset from center
3. Glue a cap without a hole onto the PVC pipe segment, making sure to twist the cap as
it is put on to ensure waterproofness. Place a cap with a hole on the other end,
without gluing.
4. Duct tape one toilet paper roll to one of the CDs, centering the openings.
5. Place the PVC pipe segment inside the roll, the side without the hole facing
downwards.
6. Fill the remaining space in the roll with small scraps of paper until the PVC pipe
cannot move inside the roll.
7. Cover the apparatus with aluminum foil, making sure to keep the cap uncovered for
easy removal.
8. Repeat steps 2-7 with the opposite PVC pipe segment and other materials.

Appendix B: Sample Calculations

In the experiments, equations were needed to calculate the values of specific heat,
linear thermal expansion, percent error, and the statistical tests. In calculating specific
heat, the equation below was used, in which masswater represents the water in grams used,
tempwater is the change in temperature of the water, tempmetal is the change in
temperature of the metal, and massmetal represents the mass of the metal in grams.
4.184 masswater tempwater
temp metal mass metal

4.184 50 g 2.3
=0.093108 J / g
77.2 67.8186

Figure 1. Specific Heat Sample Calculation

Figure 1 above shows a sample calculation for specific heat using data from the
experiments.
In the equation for linear thermal expansion, shown below, the variables are
represented by lengthfinal which is the final length of the metal, lengthinitial, which is the
initial length of the metal, and temp, which is the change in temperature of the metal
length finallengthinitial
lengthinitial temp

127.719 mm127.67 mm
=5.1865 106 1
127.67 mm 74.0

Figure 2. Linear Thermal Expansion Coefficient Sample Calculation

In Figure 2 a sample calculation to find the linear thermal expansion coefficient

was computed using data from the experiments.
During the experiment, it was helpful to see the percent difference between the
experiment results and the published values for tantalum, not only as a basis for the
correction factor and efficiency of the materials and experiment, but also as a basis for
comparison of the two metals. To find the percent error, the expected value was
subtracted from the true value, then was divided by the expected value and multiplied by
one hundred.

percent error=

valueexpected valuetrue
100
value expected

6.3 1066.44829 106

100=2.35
6.3 106

Figure 3. Percent Error Sample Calculation

Figure 3, above, shows a sample calculation for percent error using data from a
linear thermal coefficient experiment.
Another strategy used in determining the unknown metals true identity was the
use of a two sample t-test. In the test, the means of the two experiments were taken and
the difference was found. That difference was then divided by the square root of the sum
of both standard deviations squared, then divided by the number of trials run.

t=

t=

xx 1xx 2

s 12 s 22
+
n1 n2

0.151060.15211

0.0001732 0.000112
+
12
15

=0.150772

Figure 4. Two Sample t-test Sample Calculation

Figure 4 shows the equation for using a two sample t-test as well as displays a
sample calculation of the data.