Recent content by tempneff

I should have mentioned, that this is a low fidelity simulation for university undergraduates to play with online.

Thanks @Baluncore, that is the oldest pdf I've seen in some time! I think my initial approach was complicating an easy problem. The lab assumes that the paper is lossless and that the charge distribution matches the electric field created by the electrodes. For the Point-source case (circular...

I'm writing a physics simulation to mimic the old equipotential mapping experiment like this one. I can't find much information on how the voltage across this semi-conducting sheet relates to the E-field. Before I start heading down the path sheet resistance and the resistivity of thin-film...

Hi all! Like everyone else, our university physics department is prepping for online labs. We are utilizing great simulations from several sites, check them out below if you haven't already. We are able to rewrite many of our labs 1:1 conversion to online! Colorado PhETs...of course ...

Well I'll be darned... Superposition is a lot to ask in the real world, but I say this is getting close. Thanks for working through this with me, now I can sleep at night.

Catching up.. Yes the number from Quartz #1 was wrong, an accident. Quartz #2 is back, also an accident. A new plot and a table of ratios are both below. Yes, it makes sense. Is it fair to say that the resistance on the nitrogen side of the boundary functionally determines the rate of transfer.

Yes, I corrected that delta T error. Here is the shifted plot you asked for.

Here is the plot after correction. I think your assessment makes sense. Do you think that the dependence of boiling regimes (specifically Transition Boiling) on surface area and roughness could explain why the rough quartz is less restricted. Do we agree that, from the data, there is a trend in...

So does that just become a plot of ##\frac{\Delta N2-0.033}{MC}## versus time?

We certainly do have background evaporation. The lab intends to observe the background for some time, then add the solid, then wait until the system returns to just the background. I have ~.033 g/s for background evaporation, from the data. Why are we including MC in the background correction?

I get a plot that looks like this (if I did it right). I'm not sure what to make of it though. Kinda looks like some the quartz samples were not completely cooled by the time I stopped taking data. What am I missing?

Several thoughts. Foremost, my measurements approximate the rock into a rectangular cross section which is a big assumption. I did take some care in this estimation but there is a lot of room for error. Second, these are loose grained rocks, I suppose the measured density must depend also on...

Wow, thanks for helping! I'm attaching a spreadsheet and I think it has everything you need. The quartz samples have approximations on dimensions because they are raw chunks, not single crystal. Measuring their surface area is certainly impractical without sophisticated equipment. Please let...

I'm an EE in charge of the instruments for a university physics dept. I make sure their labs work, but I leave the modeling for the students. In this case I am interested because the data was counter intuitive to me.

Sure, but the thermal diffusivity of iron is an order of magnitude greater than quartz. This is why it doesn't make sense to me. I think there must be some dependence on the energy available. Below is a plot of the data that has been normalized. I thought maybe I'd try and match the amount of...