Final Temperature of Copper and Water in Insulated Vessel

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the final temperature of a system consisting of heated copper tubing and water in an insulated vessel. The user is attempting to set up the heat transfer equation but is confused about organizing the terms correctly, particularly regarding the heat capacity of the vessel. It is clarified that all heat exchanges should be on one side of the equation, ensuring that the signs are consistent. The importance of sticking to one convention for heat transfer calculations is emphasized to avoid errors. Ultimately, the user is guided to solve the equation for the final temperature, ensuring the result is logical.
John Ker
Messages
16
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


A 529 g piece of copper tubing is heated to 89.5°C and placed in an insulated vessel containing 159 g of water at 22.8°C. Assuming no loss of water and a heat capacity for the vessel of 10.0 J/°C, what is the final temperature of the system [c of copper = 0.387 J/g · K]?

Homework Equations


q = q1 + q2 + q3 + ... = 0

Where q = (Tf - Ti) m c

The Attempt at a Solution



This is the part where I am stuck, knowing how to organize the equation.

Ive gotten this so far,

529 * .387 (Tf - 89.5) = 159 * 4.18 * (Tf - 22.8) + 10(Tf - Ti)

Im not sure how the vessel comes into this.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Assume initial temperature of the vessel to be that of water it contained.
 
Borek said:
Assume initial temperature of the vessel to be that of water it contained.

SO the fomula would become:
529 * .387 (Tf - 89.5) = 159 * 4.18 * (Tf - 22.8) + 10(Tf - 22.8)

Where I then distribute everything out and solve for Tf?
Are the signs correct on both sides, I recall seeing that one side needs to be negative, but I am not sure that is relavent here.
 
No, signs are not OK. As your ΔT is defined as final-initial all heats (lost and gain) should be on one side of the equation, just like you wrote in your opening post.

It is also possible to solve such problems using a different convention, one in which we combine things that get colder (lose heat) on one side of the equation and things the gain heat (get hotter) on another side, then all changes in the temperature are assumed to be positive. Mathematically it is equivalent, can be sometimes easier conceptually. The only thing that really matters is that you stick to one convention and not mix them both.

In this particular case the error would be easy to spot - solve the equation you have listed for Tf, does the result make sense?
 
  • Like
Likes John Ker
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
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