What is the unknown metal? (specific heat problems)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ritzycat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Heat Metal
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the specific heat of an unknown metal using water as a heat transfer medium. Initial calculations yielded a specific heat of 2.69 J/g°C, but this value did not correspond to known metals. It was later suggested that the initial temperature of the metal should be assumed at 100°C, leading to a revised calculation of 0.102 J/g°C, which still did not match any known metals closely. Participants emphasized the importance of replicating trials to ensure accurate data and suggested that discussing potential errors in the experiment could be more valuable than simply obtaining the correct answer. Overall, the conversation highlights the challenges of experimental accuracy in specific heat calculations.
Ritzycat
Messages
170
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


Determine the specific heat of the unknown metal in the trial.

This is for a lab, when we put a 167.10 g piece of an unknown metal into a Styrofoam cup that had 107.93g of water in it. Recorded the temperature of the water every 30 seconds until it was the same for two trials in a row. The original temperature of the water was 23°C. (The purpose was to find what element the metal is)

Here is the table of our data. We did two other trials but in both something went horribly wrong.

seconds - °C
0 - 23.0
30 - 23.9
60 - 25.4
90 - 25.8
120 - 25.8

Homework Equations


Q=MCΔT

The Attempt at a Solution



ΔT = 25.8°C - 23.0°C = 2.80°C

This equation is finding the specific heat of water... I think...
Q = (107.93 g)(4.184 J/g°C)(2.80°C) = 1260 J

Now, to find the unknown metal... (our teacher says the possibilities are lead, copper, iron, aluminum, zinc)

1260 J = (167.10g)(x J/g°C)(2.80°C)

1260 J / (167.10g)(2.80°C) = x J/g°C

x J/g°C = 2.69 J/g°C

If I did everything right... 2.69 J/g°C SHOULD be the specific heat value of the unknown metal (since the energy lost by the water is the energy gained by the metal, and vice versa). But none of the values on the PT for heat capacity are 2.69J/g°C.

Did I do something wrong in my calculations, am I interpreting my result wrong, or is there something really bad with my data? I'm starting to think its the latter...

This might help...
http://www2.ucdsb.on.ca/tiss/stretton/Database/Specific_Heat_Capacity_Table.html

All answers & help are appreciated.. This is due tomorrow and I'm completely stumped.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What was the initial temperature of the metal you used? You used the same delta T in both expressions, this may have been your oversight which led to such a discrepancy.
 
Darn it! Yes, I think you got me. We did this lab a few days ago so I was having some trouble recalling the figures of the lab.

The metal was put in water, and the water was heated up until it started to boil. Then we moved the metal into the styrofoam cup and the temperature of the water was recorded every 30 seconds...
Our teacher told us to assume the temperature of the metal would be 100°C in this case since that is when the water boils...

What would be my Delta T in this situation then? The initial temp of the metal (100) and then the final temperature after it has stabilized in the water? Assuming this is so, the Delta T would be 74.2°C and it'd be

1260 J = (167.10g)(x)(74.2°C)

x = .102 J/g°C

A more viable answer but it doesn't really match up with the values for any of them. Closest is gold which is about .27 off. Is there anything else I have to do?
 
Yes, the final temperature is the temperature at which the system stabilized.

Everything else looks more or less okay to me but I didn't do the calculations myself so you may have an arithmetic error somewhere. Otherwise it looks like your data is just not great. In the future you should re-do trials where things have gone "horribly wrong", for this very reason. Replicates would have helped you make a decision. At this point you may want to just include a good discussion about error and such, showing that you can think about experiments and sources of error is infinitely more important (IMO) than just getting the answer.
 
Thanks for the response. I agree, it probably was something with the error in trial itself, I'll have to recall exactly what it was all about...
 
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