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.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top