Determining the Specific Heat

Capacity of Copper
Aim:
Our aim is to calculate the specific heat capacity of copper using our own
experimental method.

Prediction:
I predict that copper will have a lower specific heat capacity than water but a
higher specific heat capacity than other metals which are being tested.
Water is known for its high specific heat capacity as it is because of this property
that it makes up the majority of the liquid in central heating systems. Metals are
good conductors of heat which means they require hardly any energy to heat up
in comparison. However copper doesnt heat up as much as other metals so t is
used in electric circuits.

Plan
Diagram:

Equipment:

12V Immersion heater

Wires
Voltmeter
Ammeter
Copper Cylinder
Power supply
Stopwatch
Thermometer

Method:
1. Use weighing scales on a flat, solid surface to measure the mass the
copper cylinder
2. Set up the equipment as shown in the diagram above
3. Turn the power supply on and start the timer immediately
4. Put the thermometer in the smaller hole in the copper cylinder
5. Wait for 5 minutes for the immersion heater to warm up and the
thermometer to adjust to the temperature of the cylinder
6. Record the initial temperature of the copper cylinder
7. Put the immersion heater into larger hole in the copper cylinder
8. Wait another 5 minutes
9. Record the reading on the ammeter, voltmeter and thermometer
10.Remove the immersion heater for 2 minutes to allow the copper cylinder
to cool down slightly before repeating the experiment again
11.Carry out the calculations required to find the specific heat capacity of
copper
12.Take an average of the values you calculate

Risk Assessment:
This practical involves heating equipment to high temperatures. Gloves must be
worn when handling items which could be hot
If the thermometer is within 10 degrees of its limit, remove it from the immersion
heater and record the values at that time. This will prevent the thermometer
from breaking.

Variables:
Independent variable:
The material of the cylinder (we are testing copper)
Dependent variable:
The specific heat capacity
Control variables:
Distance between the immersion heater and the thermometer
The same insulating sleeve should be used

Results
Try
numbe
r
1
2
3
4

Mass/kg

Current /
A

1.023
1.027
1.023
1.027

3.3
3.3
3.3
3.2

Potential
Difference /
V
9.7
9.2
9.7
9.1

Temperature/C
Initial
After 300
seconds

Difference

18
20
40
38

18
15
16
14

36
35
56
52

Calculations
P=IV
Power is measured in Watts, or Js-1. We must multiple by time to get the energy
supplied:

E=ItV

This is the equation for specific heat capacity:

E=mc

This can be re-arranged into:

E=

ItV
m

We have all the experimental data we need to calculate the specific heat
capacity using this equation. The results of these calculations are shown below:
Try 1
522
Try 2
591
Try 3
587
Try 4
608
The average for these values, excluding try 1 as I have singled this out as an
anomaly is 595Jkg-1C-1.

Conclusion
The actual specific heat capacities for each material tested are shown in the
table below. I have sorted them in decreasing order.
Material
Water
Aluminium
Steel
Copper
Brass

Specific Heat capacity/Jkg-1C-1

4181.3
897
420
385
375

From this I can see that my initial prediction was incorrect- steel and aluminium
have higher specific heat capacities than copper. I can also see that the value
which we got was much higher than the real value.
My conclusion is that the stronger the intermolecular forces in the substance you
are testing, the higher the specific heat capacity.

Evaluation
The result we got for specific heat capacity was much higher than the actual
value. Part of this difference may be due to experimental error. The errors
possible of the equipment are as follows:

Voltmeter 0.005
Ammeter 0.005
Stopwatch 0.5
Thermometer 0.5

As there are various pieces of equipment the percentage error would turn out to
be large enough to be considered but not large enough to be the sole reason we
got such a high value compared to what it should be.
Other groups also got higher results using the same equipment. However
different methods were used by some of them so it is possible that our method
had a flaw in it somewhere.
If there were impurities in the copper that may have affected the specific heat
capacity as these impurities would have their own specific heat capacity.
There is a slight delay in which the heat from the immersion heater gets to the
thermometer. Another experiment could be done to find out what this time delay
is.
Another possible reason for such a large error is that the temperature of the
copper cylinder at the start of each experiment was not monitored as we did not
take into account that there is a possibility that this could affect the specific heat
capacity. A greater temperature gradient would increase the rate at which heat is
transferred from the immersion heater to the cylinder, which would affect our
results. Therefore I think it is necessary to carry out another set of experiments
to answer the question Does the temperature of a metal affect its specific heat
capacity.
To do this I would use a very similar set up to my original experiment but the
insulating sleeve would be a combination of cotton wool and bubble wrap. This
would also be used to cover the top once the thermometer. It is likely to act as a
better insulator that the cardboard sleeve we used. I would p the thermometer in
the small hole and the immersion heater in the big whole ready. After 5 minutes I
would record the reading on the voltmeter and the ammeter then turn on the
immersion heater. The temperature of the cylinder would then be recorded every
30 seconds.

From these results I would draw a graph of temperature against time. The
gradient of this will be the temperature gradient. It would be interesting to see
what the graph of temperature gradient against specific heat capacity measured
is as for our experiment we assumed it the difference of temperatures between
the immersion heater and the copper cylinder would have no affect.