Thermal Expansion - Both rule and rod

AI Thread Summary
A brass rod's length is measured at two temperatures, 20.0 degrees C and 61.6 degrees C, with a steel ruler, leading to a calculation of thermal expansion for both materials. The coefficients of linear expansion for brass and steel are 19.0 x 10^-6 K-1 and 11.0 x 10^-6 K-1, respectively. Initial calculations for the new length of the rod and ruler were performed, but the final answer was deemed incorrect. A key point discussed is that as the ruler expands, it affects the measured length of the rod, suggesting the need to adjust the final calculation accordingly. The correct approach involves dividing the new length of the rod by the new length of the ruler to obtain an accurate measurement.
nrb93
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A brass rod's length is measured at 20.0 degrees C with a metre steel rule. The length of the rod is determined to be 0.5260 m. The measurement is repeated at 61.6 degrees C. Taking into account the expansion of the rule and rod, what is the new measured length in metres? Coefficients of linear expansion: Brass: 19.0 X 10-6 K-1; Steel: 11.0 X 10-6 K-1. Express answer to five (5) significant figures.


Homework Equations



ΔL = coefficient of linear expansion * ΔT * L

(rearranged original equation)

The Attempt at a Solution



change in length for rod (brass)
ΔL = (19*10^-6) * 41.6 * 0.5260
= 0.00041575
∴ new length (assuming rule is 1m still) is ΔL + L(original)
= 0.52641575

change in length for rule (steel)
ΔL = (11*10^-6) * 41.6 * 1
= 0.0004576
∴new length = 1.0004576


so new length of rod (after both expanded) in my mind should be;
= 1.0004576 * 0.52641575
= 0.526656637
= 0.52666 (5 sig figs)

I do not have the answer to this question - it is marked online (either correct or incorrect, not giving the answer if incorrect). This answer is apparently incorrect so i must be doing something wrong.

Any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hinrb93! welcome to pf! :smile:
nrb93 said:
∴ new length (assuming rule is 1m still) is ΔL + L(original)
= 0.52641575

so new length of rod (after both expanded) in my mind should be;
… = 0.52666 (5 sig figs)

if the ruler is expanding, shouldn't the length measured by it be shorter? :wink:
 


tiny-tim said:
hinrb93! welcome to pf! :smile:if the ruler is expanding, shouldn't the length measured by it be shorter? :wink:

ah, thanks a lot ;) hehe, for further reference for anyone else; you can simply do the new length of the rod divided by the new length of the ruler (as calculated above) OR instead; can do (1 - (ΔL of the ruler)) * rod.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top