Bomb Calorimetry: Solve for Water Temp.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mitchtwitchita
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bomb Calorimetry
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the final temperature of water after a stainless steel ball bearing is placed in it. The initial calculations showed a final temperature of 21.27 degrees Celsius, but the book states it should be 21.19 degrees Celsius. The error is attributed to the assumption that the temperature change is simply the difference between the ball and water temperatures. A more accurate approach involves setting up the heat exchange equations for both the steel and water, leading to a final temperature of approximately 21.19 degrees Celsius when properly calculated. The discussion emphasizes the importance of considering the heat capacities of both materials in the calorimetry problem.
Mitchtwitchita
Messages
187
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, I'm having a real tough time with this question:

A 30.14-g stainless steel ball bearing at 117.82 degrees C is place in a constant pressure calorimeter containing 120.0 mL of water at 18.44 degrees C. If the specific heat of the ball bearing is 0.474 J/g x C, calculate the final temperature of the water. Assume the calorimeter to have negligible heat capacity.

qsteel +qwater = 0
qsteel = -qwater

qsteel = ms(deltaT)
=(30.14 g)(0.474 J/g x C)(18.44 degrees C - 117.82 degrees C)
=-1420 J

Therefore qwater =1420 J
1420 J = (120 g)(4.184 J/g x C)(Tfinal - 18.44 degree C)
Tfinal = 1420/502 + 18.44
=21.27

However, the answer in the book is 21.19 degrees celsius. I don't think that I'm doing this one properly. Can anybody set me straight?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think that going off the assumption that \Delta T = T_{ball} - T_{water} might be where the deviation is arising, remember, the ball is heating up a limited amount of water up until a point when T_{ball} = T_{water}, your case would be true if there was a massive amount of water relative to the ball, because the final temperature of the system would be pretty close to the waters original temperature anyway.

I would go about finding the final temperature as:
q_{steel} = mC(x-117.82)
q_{water} = mC(x-18.44)

Since the change in heat energy must be equal to zero as you stated you find:
q_{steel}= -q_{water}
which is what you stated

Therefore:
mC_{steel}(x-117.82) = -mC_{water}(x-18.44)

Rearranging:
mC_{steel}x - mC_{steel}\times 117.82 = mC_{water}\times 18.44 - mC_{water}x

mC_{steel}x+mC_{water}x = mC_{water}\times 18.44 + mC_{steel}\times 117.82

x(mC_{steel}+mC_{water}) = mC_{water}\times 18.44 + mC_{steel}\times 117.82

x = \frac{mC_{water}\times 18.44 + mC_{steel}\times 117.82}{mC_{steel}+mC_{water} }

Substituting:

x = \frac{120\times 4.184\times 18.44 + 30.14\times 0.474\times 117.82}{30.14\times 0.474+120\times 4.184} = 21.1896^{\circ}C
 
Thanks again AbedeuS!
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top