Identifying an Unknown Metal with Specific Heat

Seth Fillar (FHS) - Ryan Jones (SHHS) - Jessica Rus (SHHS)

Macomb Mathematics Science Technology Center

Chemistry/IDS/FST

10B

Mrs. Hilliard/Mr. Supal/Mrs. Dewey

24 May 2016
 Table of Contents

Introduction.............................................................................................................1

Review of Literature...............................................................................................3

Problem Statement.................................................................................................6

Experimental Design...............................................................................................7

Data and Observations.........................................................................................10

Data Analysis and Interpretation...........................................................................16

Conclusion............................................................................................................23

Application.............................................................................................................26

Appendix A: Making a Calorimeter.......................................................................28

Appendix B: Randomizing the Trials.....................................................................29

Appendix C: Setting up the Lab Quest.................................................................30

Appendix D: Calculating Percent Error.................................................................31

Appendix E: Calculating Specific Heat.................................................................32

Works Cited...........................................................................................................33
 Introduction

With the trillions upon trillions of atoms that make up the world, identification is

key to understanding how things work, and how to use these elements. This is essential

since these elements are the sole reason for human survival (The Earth Forms). To

identify an object, one must know some variable of an object which is comparable to

another object having the same variable. In this experiment the researchers tested two

metal elements; a known metal, Zirconium, and an unknown metal, on their intensive

property of specific heat. This property is able to determine a metal without a specific

quantity of the substance being present.

This studys purpose was to determine if it was possible to decide if two metals

have the same identity based upon the measurements of their specific heat. In order to

identify the metal rods, the specific heat was needed to be found of both sets of metal

rods. If the specific heat of the Zirconium rods was the same as the unknown metal

rods, then the identity of the unknown metal could have been determined as Zirconium.

The specific heat of the metals were found by measuring the heat transferred between

the metal and H O (water). The metal was heated to the point of equilibrium with boiling
2

water and then removed and placed in a calorimeter containing water at room

temperature. The temperature change was used to calculate the specific heat of the

metal in the water.

Specific heat is a way to identify a material, in this case, using water, a

thermometer, and a homemade calorimeter. Specific heat can be readily used to identify

1
a material; it is unique to each element and because of this, is a suitable way to identify

an element. Apposed to other intensive properties like pressure and molecular weight,

specific heat is far simpler to identify. It also is more reliable in singling out an element

than other intensive properties. There is no mistaking specific heat for a different

element as it is a unique value.

Specific heat finds many uses and practical applications in the field of

engineering. One example of this is when engine parts constantly expand and contract

due to the fluctuation in heat within the engine. That is why it is imperative that metals

with similar specific heat capacities are put together, because if one metal heats up

faster than the other and theyre connected, and one expands faster than the other, then

cracking and splitting may occur. Intensive properties may not be important, but great

problems around the world would be caused if intensive properties were not observed.

2
 Review of Literature

The specific heat of a substance is the amount of heat required to raise the

temperature of one gram of the substance by one degree Celsius (Chang). It has the

units J/g*, Joules per grams Celsius. Specific heat is identified as an intensive

property since heat capacity is the same regardless of how much there is.

If the specific heat and the amount of a substance is known, then the change in

the samples temperature (T) will indicate the amount of heat (q) that has been

absorbed or released in a particular process. This process takes place in a system, or

the specific part of the universe that is of interest to the individual (Chang). There are

three types of systems, one of which includes an isolated system. This particular system

does not allow the transfer of either mass or energy. When the system gains energy, it is

considered an endothermic reaction. When the system loses energy, it is considered an

exothermic reaction (The Physics Classroom).

The specific heat is measured through the process of calorimetry; the science

associated with determining the changes in energy of a system by measuring the heat

exchanged with the surroundings (ChemPages, Thermodynamics: Thermochemical

Equations). This process is measured with a calorimeter as seen in Figure 1 below.

This device is device for measuring the heat developed during a mechanical, electrical,

or chemical reaction, and for calculating the heat capacity of materials (Encyclopedia

3
Britannica, Calorimetry). When calculating the temperatures, the First Law of

Thermodynamics helps accurately measure them. The First Law of Thermodynamics

states that heat energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can, however, be transferred

from one location to another and converted to and from other forms of energy (Lucas).

The specific heat of Zirconium is 0.278 J/g*C, and the density is 6.49 g/cm (The
3

Physics Room). That specific heat means that it takes Zirconium 0.278 J/g*c to heat up

one gram of a substance, in this case, water. Water has a specific heat of 4.186 J/g*C,

which is way higher than that of Zirconiums. That means it might take longer than

another metal to heat up the water.

Figure 1. An Example Calorimeter (Pegasus)

Figure 1 is showing an example calorimeter. The researchers made a hand

crafted calorimeter; therefore it will resemble a simpler one. The calorimeter that will be

used in the experiment will be an isolated system so no energy can release. It will be

designed to keep the heat in, and to be able to be the most efficient in finding the

specific heat.

To calculate specific heat, a certain equation needs to be used.

4
 -smt = +smt.

Since specific heat is an intensive property, on one side of the equation, the variables

apply to water in the calorimeter and on the other side, they apply to the known or

unknown metal. Referring to the equation, s stands for specific heat (J/g*). The m

stands for mass (grams) which will be measured with a scale. The change in

temperature, or t, is the final temperature subtracted by the initial temperature

(Celsius) (D'Amelia and Stracuzzi and Nirode).

The specific heat of an element can be compared to a known substance, such as

water, to calculate the unknown elements specific heat. Past experiments in this field of

chemistry were reflected on and modeled to better understand how to conduct the

experiment done. In a published experiment, water was used to measure the heat

transferred from an unknown metal. A calorimeter was filled with a set amount of water.

The unknown element was then placed in the water. After that, the temperature of the

water was measured again and the difference was recorded (Matanuska-Susitna

Borough School District)(Herrington). The change in temperature was a result of the

heat transfer between the water and the unknown element. This is helpful to this

experiment because the set-up is very similar to the experiment done here. The

calorimeter will also be filled with water, and then the hot Zirconium rod will be placed

into it to get the change in temperature.

In a similar experiment, the experimenter started with cold water and added a

room temperature metal into it. They recorded the temperature increase of the water

from the room temperature metal (Barth and Moran). The two experiments are

5
applicable because a metal rod of a known element will be put into boiling water until

they reach equilibrium. Once they do, the rod will be put into the calorimeter and the

temperature will be recorded. The First Law of Thermodynamics comes into play

because in the isolated calorimeter, the energy will stay constant, meaning it will

transfer from the hot rod to the room temperature water.

Problem Statement

Problem Statement:

To determine if an unknown metal is Zirconium by comparing the intensive

property of specific heat of an unknown metal to the known metal Zirconium.

Hypothesis:

If the specific heat of the unknown element is within the alpha level of 0.10 and a

percent of 7.5%, the unknown metal will be identified as Zirconium.

Data Measured:

The dependent variables in this situation are the unknown and known metal. The

independent variables are amount of water put into the calorimeter, and the initial

temperature of the water. To acquire the values required to calculate the specific heat of

the unknown metal, the metal and water were measured in uniform units: grams and

milliliters. The mass of the metal was measured in grams every time, and the initial and

final temperature of both the metal and the water were measured in Celsius. When

conducting the experiment, it was assumed that the metal had reached equilibrium with

6
the boiling water it was placed in after a set time. The initial temperature of the water

was also assumed to have come to equilibrium with the surrounding air of the lab

environment before recording it. The known specific heats of water and the Zirconium

sample were recorded with the units of joules per gram Celsius (J/gC). To determine if

the sample falls below the alpha level of 0.10, a two sample t-test was utilized. The t-

test compared the means of the Zirconium sample and the unknown metal sample.

Experimental Design

Materials:

50 ml Graduated cylinder Loaf pan

(4) Calorimeter Thermometer (0.1)
(2) Zirconium rods Scale (0.0001g precision)
(2) Unknown metal rods Hot plate
Hot mitt Tongs
TI Nspire Lab Quest Vernier
Vernier temperature probe (prec) Stop watch

Procedure:

1. Randomize the order of the 30 trials for the Zirconium rods (appendix B).

2. Place the first randomized rod on the scale and record the mass.

3. Repeat step 2 until the mass of every rod has been recorded.

4. Fill the calorimeter with 43 ml of water.

5. Measure the initial temperature of the water in the calorimeter with the use of the
Vernier Temperature Probe.

6. Allow the water to reach equilibrium with the probe by leaving it in the calorimeter
for 45 seconds, and then record the temperature. (See appendix C to operate
Lab Quest)

7. Fill the loaf pan halfway with water.

7
8. Place the loaf pan on the hot plate until the water is between 97 - 100 Celsius.

9. Place a Zirconium rod in the loaf pan for 160 seconds (based on a graph), so it
can reach equilibrium with the water.

10. Record the temperature of the water after equilibrium has been reached. Assume
the temperature of the metal is equal to the temperature of the water. Record this
as the initial temperature of the metal.

11. Using tongs, remove the rod from the loaf pan and immediately place into the
calorimeter.

12. Allow the rod to sit for 120 seconds in the calorimeter to reach equilibrium.

13. Once there the graph has reached a flat plateau, record the final temperature of

the water in the calorimeter.

14. Record the difference in the final and initial temperatures.

15. Insert the mass and change in temperature into the equation as seen in the
equation in appendix a.

16. Solve for specific heat (see appendix E for equation).

17. Repeat steps 1-16 with the unknown metal rods.

Diagram:

8
Figure 2. Materials

Figure 2 shows all of the materials that are required to conduct the experiment.

9
Figure 3. Recording the Temperature

Figure 3 shows the setup for recording the heat exchange of the rods after they

have been removed from the boiling water. The rods go inside and the temperature

probe goes through the hole on the top of the cap. This measures the temperature of

the water.

10
 Data and Observations
Data:

Table 1
Zirconium Rod Specific Heat Data
Zirconium Rods
Equilibriu Change in Specifi
Initial Temp. Mass
m Temp. Temp. c Heat
Trial Rod (C)
(C)
(g)
(C) (J/g C)
Water Metal Water Metal Metal Water
26.73
1 B
22.7 97.7 25.6 2.9 -72.1 1 43 0.271
26.00
2 B
23.0 98.3 22.3 -0.7 -76.0 0 43 -0.064
26.74
3 B
22.9 98.7 25.7 2.8 -73.0 5 43 0.258
26.74
4 A
26.1 98.3 28.8 2.7 -69.5 3 43 0.261
26.74
5 A
22.2 98.2 24.9 2.7 -73.3 3 43 0.248
26.74
6 B
23.1 98.3 26.3 3.2 -72.0 5 43 0.299
26.74
7 A
22.3 97.6 25.2 2.9 -72.4 5 43 0.269
26.74
8 B
21.9 97.7 24.9 3.0 -72.8 4 43 0.277
26.74
9 A
22.5 97.6 25.5 3.0 -72.1 2 43 0.280
26.74
10 A
22.9 97.5 25.7 2.8 -71.8 2 43 0.262
26.74
11 A
23.0 97.7 25.8 2.8 -71.9 3 43 0.262
26.74
12 B
22.4 97.8 25.7 3.3 -72.1 3 43 0.308
26.74
13 A
22.9 97.9 25.8 2.9 -72.1 3 43 0.271
26.74
14 A
22.9 97.9 25.7 2.8 -72.2 3 43 0.261
26.74
15 A
22.8 97.7 26.0 3.2 -71.7 3 43 0.300
26.74
16 A
22.6 98.3 25.4 2.8 -72.9 3 43 0.258
26.74
17 B
22.9 97.7 25.7 2.8 -72.0 3 43 0.262
18 B 23.2 97.8 26.0 2.8 -71.8 26.74 43 0.262

11
 5
26.74
19 B
23.2 98.1 26.0 2.8 -72.1 3 43 0.261
26.74
20 B
23.1 97.6 26.2 3.1 -71.4 5 43 0.292
26.74
21 A
23.4 97.5 26.5 3.1 -71.0 3 43 0.294
26.74
22 B
23.1 98.1 26.1 3.0 -72.0 3 43 0.280
26.74
23 A
23.5 98.4 26.3 2.8 -72.1 3 43 0.261
26.74
24 A
23.1 97.6 26.3 3.2 -71.3 3 43 0.302
26.74
25 A
23.4 98.0 26.3 2.9 -71.7 3 43 0.272
26.74
26 B
23.1 98.1 26.0 2.9 -72.1 4 43 0.271
26.74
27 B
23.0 97.3 25.8 2.8 -71.5 3 43 0.263
26.74
28 B
23.3 97.5 26.2 2.9 -71.3 3 43 0.274
26.74
29 A
22.9 97.9 25.8 2.9 -72.1 3 43 0.271
26.74
30 B
23.0 98.0 25.9 2.9 -72.1 4 43 0.271
26.71
Average: 23.0 97.9 25.8 2.8 -72.2 2 43 0.260

Table 1 is shows the specific heat data results from the 30 Zirconium rod trials.

For every trial, the initial temperature of water and metal, equilibrium, change in

temperature of water and metal, mass of water and metal, and specific heat is displayed

(Refer to Appendix E for formula and sample calculation).

Table 2
Unknown Metal Rod Specific Heat Data
Unknown Metal Rods
Trial Rod Initial Temp. Change in
(C) Equilibrium Temp. (C) Specific
Mass
Temp. Heat
(C) (g) (J/g C)

12
 Water Metal Water Metal Metal Water
22.50 99.40 69.80 42.90
1 B 29.600 7.100 43 0.427
0 0 0 4
21.20 99.23 70.23 42.90
2 B 29.000 7.800 43 0.466
0 0 0 3
21.70 99.10 69.70 42.69
3 A 29.400 7.700 43 0.465
0 0 0 8
23.00 99.30 68.70 42.90
4 B 30.600 7.600 43 0.464
0 0 0 4
21.70 97.80 69.30 42.69
5 A 28.500 6.800 43 0.413
0 0 0 8
22.90 98.20 68.20 42.90
6 B 30.000 7.100 43 0.437
0 0 0 3
22.00 98.30 69.30 42.90
7 B 29.000 7.000 43 0.424
0 0 0 4
22.80 98.70 68.70 42.90
8 B 30.000 7.200 43 0.439
0 0 0 4
22.00 98.40 69.44 42.69
9 A 28.960 6.960 43 0.422
0 0 0 8
22.30 98.40 69.00 42.69
10 A 29.400 7.100 43 0.434
0 0 0 8
22.70 98.10 68.00 42.90
11 B 30.100 7.400 43 0.456
0 0 0 3
22.40 98.40 68.90 42.69
12 A 29.500 7.100 43 0.434
0 0 0 7
23.00 99.20 69.20 42.90
13 B 30.000 7.000 43 0.424
0 0 0 4
21.90 98.50 69.30 42.69
14 A 29.200 7.300 43 0.444
0 0 0 8
23.00 98.90 69.80 42.69
15 A 29.100 6.100 43 0.368
0 0 0 7
22.50 98.70 69.80 42.69
16 A 28.900 6.400 43 0.386
0 0 0 8
22.40 98.60 68.40 42.90
17 B 30.200 7.800 43 0.478
0 0 0 3
23.00 98.90 68.90 42.90
18 B 30.000 7.000 43 0.426
0 0 0 3
23.50 98.90 67.60 42.69
19 A 31.300 7.800 43 0.486
0 0 0 8
23.60 98.50 67.60 42.90
20 B 30.900 7.300 43 0.453
0 0 0 4
22.70 98.70 69.20 42.69
21 A 29.500 6.800 43 0.414
0 0 0 7
23.60 98.50 68.30 42.90
22 B 30.200 6.600 43 0.405
0 0 0 4

13
 22.40 98.60 69.70 42.69
23 A 28.900 6.500 43 0.393
0 0 0 8
23.50 98.40 68.10 42.90
24 B 30.300 6.800 43 0.419
0 0 0 3
22.30 98.50 69.10 42.69
25 A 29.400 7.100 43 0.433
0 0 0 8
Equilibriu Specifi
Trial Rod Water Metal Water Metal Water Metal
m Temp. c Heat
22.70 98.90 69.30 42.69
26 A 29.600 6.900 43 0.420
0 0 0 8
23.30 98.40 67.80 42.90
27 B 30.600 7.300 43 0.451
0 0 0 4
22.90 99.00 69.60 42.69
28 A 29.400 6.500 43 0.394
0 0 0 8
23.00 99.30 69.20 42.69
29 A 30.100 7.100 43 0.432
0 0 0 8
23.30 99.10 68.70 42.90
30 B 30.400 7.100 43 0.433
0 0 0 4
22.66 98.69 68.96 42.80
Average: 29.735 7.075 43 0.431
0 8 2 1

Table 2 is shows the specific heat data results from the 30 Zirconium rod trials.

For every trial, the initial temperature of water and metal, equilibrium, change in

temperature of water and metal, mass of water and metal, and specific heat is

displayed.

Observations:

Table 3
Zirconium Rod Specific Heat Observations
Zirconium Rods

Trial Rod Calorimeter Observation

1 B 1
Rod slipped into loaf pan when placed
2 B 2
Everything went according to procedure
3 B 1 Everything went according to procedure
4 A 2
Everything went according to procedure

14
 5 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
6 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
7 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
8 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
9 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
When rod was being placed into loaf pan,
10 A 2 it did not fit and was only partially
submitted for 3 seconds
11 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
12 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
Calorimete
Trial Rod Observation
r

When rod was being placed into loaf pan,

13 A 1 it did not fit and was only partially
submitted for 3 seconds
14 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
15 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
16 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
Rod was over exposed after taken out of
17 B 1
boiling water for about 1 second longer
18 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
19 B 1 Everything went according to procedure
20 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
21 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
22 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
Water boiled slower after metal was
23 A 1
placed
24 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
25 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
26 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
Water spilled when metal was placed into
27 B 1
calorimeter
28 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
29 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
30 B 2 Everything went according to procedure

15
 Table 3 shows the observations made for the Zirconium rods. Most of the trials

went according to the procedure, but anything that would have a notable effect on the

results was noted.

Table 4
Unknown Metal Rod Observations
Unknown Metal Rods

Trial Rod Calorimeter Observation

Cap took longer to unscrew so the rod stayed

1 B 1
in the water 6 seconds more than 2 minutes
Water splashed out of calorimeter when
2 B 2
dropped
3 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
Trial had to be redone because metal was too
4 B 2
exposed after taken out of water
5 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
Water boiled vigorously when metal was
6 B 2
placed
7 B 1 Everything went according to procedure
8 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
9 A 1 Everything went according to procedure

10 A 2
Everything went according to procedure
11 B 1 Everything went according to procedure
12 A 2 Everything went according to procedure

13 B 1
Everything went according to procedure
14 A 2 Everything went according to procedure

16
 15 A 1 Rod took longer to put into calorimeter
16 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
17 B 1
Everything went according to procedure
18 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
19 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
20 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
21 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
22 B 2 Everything went according to procedure
23 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
Water boiled vigorously when metal was
24 B 2
placed
25 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
Calorimete
Trial Rod Observation
r
26 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
27 B 1
Everything went according to procedure
28 A 2 Everything went according to procedure
29 A 1 Everything went according to procedure
30 B 2 Everything went according to procedure

Table 4 shows all of the observations made for the unknown metal rods.

Most of the trials went according to the procedure, but anything that would have a

notable effect on the results was noted.

17
 Data Analysis and Interpretation

The purpose of this experiment was to determine if an unknown metal was the

same as a known metal, Zirconium, with the use of specific heat. To acquire the values

required to calculate the specific heat of the metals, the metal and water were

measured in uniform units such as grams and milliliters. The mass of the metal was

measured in grams every time. The initial and final temperature of both the metal and

the water were measured in Celsius. When conducting the experiment, it was assumed

that the metal had reached equilibrium with the boiling water it was placed after a set

time. The initial temperature of the water was also assumed to have come to equilibrium

with the surrounding air of the lab environment before recording it. The known specific

heats of water and the Zirconium sample were recorded with the units of joules per

gram Celsius (J/gC). To determine if the sample falls below the alpha level of 0.10, a

two sample t-test was utilized. The t-test compared the means of the Zirconium sample

and the unknown metal sample.

To conduct the experiment, a TI Nspire calculator was used to randomize 30

trials for the Zirconium rods and the unknown rods. Since there are 30 trials, it meets

18
the Central Limit Theorem (n30). Also, with each trial there is a general repetition for

every 30 trials following the same procedures in the same environment.

Upon completing the experiment, the validity of the data could be determined. To

do this, each trial of the Zirconiums specific heat would have to fall below the previously

determined percent error of 7.5%. If the percent error of the Zirconium was greater than

7.5, it would because of a lurking variable. This is because any value above or below

the 7.5 percent belonged to a different element. Since the average of the values

recorded was within the parameters set before the experiment, the data can be

considered valid.

Table 5
Percent Error of Zirconium and Unknown Metal

Table 5 displays the calculated percent error for each trial of the Zirconium and

unknown metal rods. The percent errors were calculated using the percent error formula

(see appendix D). The calculated average of the Zirconium was -1.367%, while the

average for the unknown metal was 55.171%. When calculating the averages, the

19
absolute value of the calculated percent error was not taken. This is because there was

a need to account for whether the calculated percent error fell above or below the actual

value used for Zirconium, that being 0.278. Falling above or below this value by more

than 7.5% would be the value of a different element. Comparing the average of the

Zirconiums percent error to the unknown metals, there is a clear distinction between

them. The difference between these averages is 56.538, a very large value reinforcing

the possible difference between the materials. Moreover, the average percent error for

the unknown metal far exceeds the 7.5% percent error allowed for the material to still be

Zirconium. The range of percent error for the Zirconium rods is 21.622%. The value is

so high because of the negative numbers that were taken into account. The range of

percent error for the unknown metal rods is 42.424%. Compared to the range for

Zirconium, it is very different.

In order to once again check the reliability, a normal probability plot was made for

both metals.

20
 Figure 4. Normal Probability Plots for
Specific Heat of Zirconium and Unknown Metal

Figure 4, above, shows a normal probability plot for the data of the unknown

metals specific heat to the left and a normal probability plot for the data of Zirconiums

specific heat to the right. The unknown metal data is scattered very closely to the line

which means there is a normal distribution. That means that that set of data can be

seen as reliable in the stats test. On the contrary, the Zirconium data follows a vertical

shape which forms a diagonal pattern with the line. Although this data does not seem to

follow a normal distribution, the data of Zirconiums specific heat is between a close

21
range, which is fairly close to that of the actual value. The reliability in the stat test

though, may not be as certain compared to the unknown metal.

Another method of analyzing the data is the form of a box plot, as shown below.

Figure 5. Boxplots for Specific Heat of Zirconium and Unknown Metal

Figure 5, above, shows two box plots of specific heat, one for Zirconium on the

bottom and one for the unknown metal on the top. From how close the data of the

Zirconium specific heat is to the true value, it supports that the data is reliable.

Both of the boxes are plotted on the same the axis, allowing them to be easily

compared. It is evident that the Zirconium specific heats were less than the unknown

metal. The clear difference between the specific heats are seen with the help of the

statistical values: minimum, median, and max. Each of the values in the Zirconium plot

are less than when compared to the unknown metals value. This demonstrates the

potential difference in the identity of the metals. In both of the box plots, the data has no

22
notable skewness, but contains one outlier. This could be a result of a trial performed

with an error. In some trials, the metal was overexposed for too long, which caused it

lose heat, most likely causing the outliers.

Another way to note any trends in the data would be to make a histogram.

Figure 6. Histograms for Specific Heat of Zirconium and Unknown Metal

Figure 6, above, shows two histograms of specific heat, one for Zirconium on the

bottom and one for the unknown metal on the top. The specific heats of Zirconium is

close to the true value of 0.278, with the exception of one outlier to the left. The data is

partly skewed to the right. The specific heats of the unknown metal appears to have a

normal distribution with no outliers, but it is visible that all the data from the unknown

metal is far from the true value of Zirconiums specific heat. This could mean that the

unknown metal is not Zirconium since the specific heats are so different from that of

Zirconium.

23
 The statistical analysis that was used for the experiment was a two-sample t test.

The test is appropriate because two samples from independent populations are being

compared, and a sample standard deviation is being used. The results can be stated as

valid because all of the conditions and assumptions for the test was met. The metal

rods were chosen randomly and were independent of each other because the

occurrence of one metal did not affect the occurrence of the other metal. The unknown

metal rod population is normally distributed, but the Zirconium population is not.

Because of the central limit theorem though, the test can still be performed because

there was thirty trials.

To begin the two-sample t test, a null and alternate hypothesis was made.

H o :1 =2

Ha: 1 2

Figure 7. Null and Alternate Hypotheses for Two-Sample t Test

Figure 7 shows the two hypotheses that were made for the analysis. The first

one, the null hypothesis, is what was being tested. The symbol stands for the

population parameter of the means of the specific heat. The numbers 1 and 2 stand for

the two population; 1 is the Zirconium rods, and 2 is the unknown metal rods. The first

statement is stating that the two populations are equal to each other, or that the

unknown metal is Zirconium. The second hypothesis, the alternate, is the opposite of

what is being tested. It states that the two populations are not equal, or the unknown

metal is not Zirconium.

After analyzing the statistical test, the t-value and p-value were taken into

account.

24
Table 6
Two-Sample t Test Results

Figure 7. Normal Distribution Graph of P-Value

Table 6 shows the two-sample t test results. The t-value is -14.0656, which

creates a p-value that is close to 6.655610 -17. The t-value is the specific statistic, and

means little by itself. The p-value states the statistical significance of the difference. In

the analysis, it can be concluded as to reject Ho , the two samples are the same,

because the p-value is far lesser than the alpha level of 0.10. There is no convincing

25
evidence that the means of the specific heat of both samples are similar. If the null

hypothesis was true, there would be a 6.655610 -17% of the unknown metal being

Zirconium by chance alone. Figure 7 shows the normal distribution of the p-value. Since

the p-value is such a small number, it cannot be seen on the graph.

Conclusion

To begin the research, the problem statement was to determine if an unknown

metal is Zirconium by comparing the intensive property of specific heat of the unknown

metal to that of the known metal, Zirconium. The hypothesis of the experiment was, if

the specific heat of the unknown element is within the alpha level of 0.10 and a percent

error of 7.5%, the unknown metal will be identified as Zirconium. The hypothesis was

accepted because the unknown metal did not meet the requirements necessary to be

Zirconium, and the data supports that answer.

The statistical test stated that the two metals were not the same, and were in fact

different. Every element has a unique specific heat, and if the unknown metal had the

same specific heat as Zirconium, it could be identified as that metal. The unknown metal

had an average specific heat of 0.431, which is not close to the specific heat of

Zirconium, 0.278.

Since the specific heat of the unknown rods yielded a different specific heat when

compared to the known Zirconium, the conclusion of deeming the metals as different is

26
possible due to the unique, intensive properties of specific heat. Because the specific

heat of a substance is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one gram

of the substance by one degree Celsius (Chang), it differs from element to element

across the periodic table. The heat capacity of a material will always be the same no

matter the size, shape, or quantity. The unknown material must have had a larger

specific heat capacity as it averaged to be greater than that of Zirconium. This means

that it took more heat energy to raise the temperature of the unknown metal. Specific

heat is a unique, intensive property, so the differing values mean that the metals are of

different elements.

The experimental design played an important role in the experiment. To help

eliminate lurking variable, distilled water was brought to equilibrium with the room prior

to conducting the experiment. The use of tap water could bring lurking variables such as

differing initial temperatures. One problem was that the rods were taken out of the

boiling water with metal tongs. When the tongs would touch the rods, it would transfer

heat away because metal is such a good conductor. Depending on how long the tongs

were touching the rods, enough heat could have been transferred away to affect the

data. To fix that, plastic or a different type of tongs could have been used. Something

else that could have potentially affected the data was the rods exposure to the air.

When the rod was transferred from the boiling water to the calorimeter, it briefly came in

contact with the air surrounding the experiment. This would allow some of the heat held

within the rod to escape, changing the data results. It also could cause variability in the

data. The transfer time was not recorded but could affect the results and cause the data

to be misrepresented if the time exposed to the air varied. It was noted in the

27
observations table when there was a notable difference in transfer time. To help correct

this, the transfer time could be recorded and a correction factor would be utilized.

Another error was that sometimes water would splash out of the calorimeter

when the metal was placed in it. Less water could have affected the data because there

be less water to heat up. One last error was that sometimes the calorimeter was faulty.

If the cap was on too hard, it would be harder to take off which created timing issues. If

better materials were available, a better calorimeter could have been made to prevent

any problems. A change would be to get a better material that would not lose as much

heat. Easier caps would have also been able to make with better materials, so they do

not get stuck.

To make further progress on the experiment, the same process could be

attempted, but with many more trials. Since it just meets the requirement of the central

limit theorem for 30 trials, data could be claimed as significant and reliable, but if there

were more trials done, it could have greatly improved. Better equipment to help

eliminate any lurking variables would benefit the results. A more effective way to transfer

the rod from the boiling water to the calorimeter can minimize or eliminate the rods

exposure to the surrounding air. Another experiment that could be conducted to ID the

element, is using the linear thermal expansion. This is another intensive property that

could be used to confirm the identity of the unknown element.

The conformation of using uniform elements and materials is necessary in the

construct of any objects; be them parts, frames, or foundations. The research would

especially benefit mechanical and electrical engineers, as long with those who work with

construction because they have to make sure metals are the same for different objects.

28
Failure to do so could risk whatever is made to malfunction if not made with the correct

material. The identification of specific heat could use in instances of this.

Application

The metal Zirconium does find many uses in the real world. It is very strong and

resistant to acids and saltwater. Due to its toughness, it is used in ultra-strong ceramics.

This allows to be used as a blade in products such as knives and scissors.

29
Figure 8. Isometric View of Blade and Drawing

The sketch above is a blade made out of Zirconia Ceramic. This product

demonstrates a ceramic knife. The hardness of the ceramic gives these knives their

long-lasting good looks, as well as a razor sharp edge that does not require sharpening

for years. That is why many chefs love using ceramic knives. This sharpness makes

slicing easier, allows precise cuts and extremely thin slices.

The material used to make the knife was Zirconium. This is an appropriate metal

to use since the ceramic knife is made out of strong materials, usually Zirconium oxide.

The Zirconium causes the blade to be very tough, which it allows to cut difficult, tough

items. To make this particular blade out of pure Zirconium, it would cost about $35.61.

30
 Appendix A: Making a Calorimeter

1. Cut the PVC pipe into 7 inches.

2. Spread glue around the inside of the cap and one end of the pipe.

3. Place cap on the end with the glue. Press tightly to ensure it is sealed.

4. Drill a hole in the other cap using a 9/64 drill bit.

5. Place the cap with the hole on the other end of the pipe.

6. Wrap the pipe between the caps with the insulation tape.

7. Repeat steps 1-6 for all four calorimeters.

31
 Appendix B: Randomizing the Trials

On a TI-Nspire calculator, create a lists and spreadsheet page. In the equation bar, type

in randint(1,30,30) for the known metals. It should be repeated for the unknown metals

as well. The values may repeat, but ensure that each trial gets assigned its own unique

number. Conduct the trials in the order of the randomization.

32
 Appendix C: Setting Up the Lab Quest

1. Plug in the thermometer attachment to the top of the Lab Quest.

2. From the File Sensors page, select the mode tab.

3. Set the mode to time based.

4. Set the interval to 0.5 seconds per sample.

5. Set the duration to 600 seconds.

6. Click the Okay once the information from steps 3-5 has been put in.

7. Along the top of the screen, select the Graph Analyze page.

8. When ready to begin, click the play button at the bottom left of the screen to start
recording data.

33
 Appendix D: Calculating Percent Error

To determine if data recorded can be used, a percent error test was used. The validity of

the data would be accepted if the percent error fell below the absolute value 7.5%.

Shown in Figure 1 below is a sample calculation for the percent error.

Figure 1. Percent Value Calculation

Figure 1 shows a sample calculation solving for the percent error. The

experimental value is the specific heat that is found during the experiment. The true

value is the specific heat of the known metal, Zirconium. It is multiplied by 100 to get it

into a percent.

34
 Appendix E: Calculating Specific Heat

To determine the specific heat of the metals, a certain formula is used.

S M (T -T ) = S M (T -T )
M F I H2O F I

The left side of the equation represents heat lost from the metal and the right is the heat

gained in the water. Where S is the specific heat of Zirconium or the unknown metal, M
M

is mass, (T -T ) is the difference in initial and final temperatures of their respective sides,
F I

and S H2O is the specific heat of water. Shown in Figure 1 below is a sample calculation for

specific heat.

S (26.731)(-72.100) = 4.184(43)(2.900)
M

S = -0.271
M

Figure 1. Specific Heat Calculation

This a sample calculation for the specific heat of a Zirconium rod. This used data that

was collected during a trial in the experiment. From left to right, the mass of the rod was

26.731 (g), the change in temperature for the rod was -72.100(), the specific heat of

the water was 4.184 (J/g x ), the mass of the water was 43 (g), and the change in

temperature for the water was 2.900 ().

35
 Works Cited

Barth, Roger, and Michael J. Moran. "Improved Method for Determining the Heat

Capacity of Metals." J. Chem. Educ. Journal of Chemical Education 91.12

(2014): 2155-157. ACS Publications. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.

<http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ed500466m>.

"Calorimeters and Calorimetry." Calorimeters and Calorimetry. The Physics

Classroom, 2016. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.

<http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/thermalP/Lesson- 2/Calorimeters-and-

Calorimetry>.

Chang, Raymond. Chemistry. 9th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007. Print.

"Chapter 5: Thermochemistry." Pegasus, n.d. Web. 23 May 2016.

<http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~jparadis/chem2045/chapter05.html>.

D'Amelia, Ronald P., Vincent Stracuzzi, and William F. Nirode. "Introduction of

Differential Scanning Calorimetry in a General Chemistry Laboratory

Course: Determination of Heat Capacity of Metals and Demonstration of the

Law of Dulong and Petit." 10 (2008): n. pag. ACS Publications. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.

<http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ed085p109>.

36
Herrington, Deborah G. "The Heat Is On: An Inquiry-Based Investigation for

Specific Heat." J. Chem. Educ. Journal of Chemical Education 88.11

(2011): 1558-561. ACS Publications. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.

<http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ed200109j>.

Lucas, Jim. "What Is the First Law of Thermodynamics?" LiveScience. TechMedia

Network, 2015. Web. 14 Apr. 2016. <http://www.livescience.com/50881-

first-law- thermodynamics.html>.

"Specific Heat of a Metal." Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District, n.d. Web. 15

Apr. 2016. <http://www.matsuk12.us/site/default.aspx?PageID=1>.

"The Earth Forms." BBC, n.d. Web. 23 May 2016.

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/earth/earth_timeline/earth_formed>.

The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica. "Calorimeter." Encyclopedia Britannica Online.

Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.

<http://www.britannica.com/technology/calorimeter>.

"Thermodynamics: Thermochemical Equations." Calorimetry. ChemPages, n.d. Web. 15

Apr. 2016.

<https://www.chem.wisc.edu/deptfiles/genchem/netorial/modules/thermodynamic

s/chemical/chemical2.htm>.

37