How Can You Identify the Contents of Unlabeled Gas Cylinders Using Basic Tools?

AI Thread Summary
To identify the contents of unlabeled gas cylinders, a practical approach involves using a scale, pressure gauge, and water to establish a controlled environment. Submerging the cylinders in water allows for consistent temperature measurements, while monitoring pressure and fugacity at various temperatures can yield insights into the gas types. Adding ice to lower the temperature and then heating with firewood provides additional data points for analysis. Utilizing the fugacity meter and applying Maxwell relations can further refine the identification process. This method combines basic tools and thermodynamic principles to effectively distinguish between gases like oxygen, helium, xenon, and uranium hexafluoride.
soccerkid830
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello, I have been given the following problem and am hoping for some help...

You have 1000 unlabeled gas cylinders, each are 0.25m3 and need to be able to identify the contents. They mostly contain oxygen and helium, but some contain xenon and uranium hexafluoride. You are given a scale, pressure gauge, unlimited water, bubble gum, duct tape, ice, firewood and matches. You are also given a "fugacity meter" and use of a thermodynamics textbook..

So, using just those items, how can you determine what the cylinders contain?

For bonus points, any use of the Maxwell relations are to be used.

So, if anyone's got any ideas, please help me out :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
soccerkid830 said:
Hello, I have been given the following problem and am hoping for some help...

You have 1000 unlabeled gas cylinders, each are 0.25m3 and need to be able to identify the contents. They mostly contain oxygen and helium, but some contain xenon and uranium hexafluoride. You are given a scale, pressure gauge, unlimited water, bubble gum, duct tape, ice, firewood and matches. You are also given a "fugacity meter" and use of a thermodynamics textbook..

So, using just those items, how can you determine what the cylinders contain?

For bonus points, any use of the Maxwell relations are to be used.

So, if anyone's got any ideas, please help me out :)

Yoiks. It seems the scale is the most practical device...?
 
soccerkid830 said:
Hello, I have been given the following problem and am hoping for some help...

You have 1000 unlabeled gas cylinders, each are 0.25m3 and need to be able to identify the contents. They mostly contain oxygen and helium, but some contain xenon and uranium hexafluoride. You are given a scale, pressure gauge, unlimited water, bubble gum, duct tape, ice, firewood and matches. You are also given a "fugacity meter" and use of a thermodynamics textbook..

So, using just those items, how can you determine what the cylinders contain?

For bonus points, any use of the Maxwell relations are to be used.

So, if anyone's got any ideas, please help me out :)

Do you have any ideas?
 
I was thinking something along the lines of placing all the cylinders in the water, since that'll make sure they're all the same temp. Then measure the pressure, and fugacity at this point. Then you could add ice until the ice stops melting, but before the whole thing crystallizes, which will be around 0 C and measure the pressure and fugacity again. Then you could heat it up using the firewood until the water begins to boil, which will be 100C obviously... Measuring the pressure and fugacity here again. Then you could do something with the partial derivatives of fugacity relating to temperature. But I'm not sure exactly where to go with that.. Or likewise, partial derivatives of pressure relating to temperature..
 
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