Technical Paper on the Heat Conductivity Experiment

Baratilla P.M.​1​, Jimenez K.​2​,Landicho A.​3​, and Paet J.​4

1​
College of Engineering, University of the Philippines Diliman, Melchor Hall, Osmena Ave., Quezon City,
Philippines 1101
*Corresponding author: keira.dee.jimenez@gmail.com , patriciabaratilla@gmail.com

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to understand the concepts of heat transfer
specifically thermal conduction. It is then to be related to heat conduction
between different materials in thermal contact. In the experiment ​k​brass ​was
determined by connecting copper and brass rods to each other and subjecting
each ends to different temperatures. The temperatures taken from three different
points will then be used to determine ​k​brass.​ Results of the experiment show an
inverse relationship between the temperature gradient and thermal conductivity.

Keywords: Heat, Heat Conduction, Temperature Gradient, Heat Current,

Thermal Conductivity

1. Introduction
Heat is defined as the energy in transit in which it flows from a hotter object to a colder object. The focus of the
experiment is heat conduction, a type of heat transfer which requires physical contact between objects. The rate of
heat transferred from one region to another per unit time, via heat conduction, is called heat current. The heat current
across a single rod is as seen in Equation 1.
A (T H −T C )
H = k L ​(1)

​As seen from above, the parameters which affect the heat current through an object are the quantities: (T h − T c )/L
known as the temperature gradient, and its product with the cross-sectional area of the solid (A), and the constant ​k,​
which is the thermal conductivity. Thermal conductivity describes the ability of the material to conduct heat. This
property is inherent to the material and is determined by the atomic structure of the material.
Metals, such as brass and copper, are good conductors due to its free electrons, also known as conduction
electrons. These electrons move within the metal which is a mechanism for heat transfer to occur. It involves heat
flowing from a region of higher molecular kinetic energy (an object of higher temperature) to a region of lower
molecular kinetic energy (an object of lower temperature).

Figure 1: Two metal rods in contact at a junction with its properties

(temperature (​T)​ , length (​L​), cross-sectional area (​A​)) [3]

The temperature of interest, is that of the steady-state condition, wherein the temperature at each point of the rods
in contact no longer change. Due to the interdependence of these properties, the heat current equation can be used to
quantify the thermal conductivity of brass and copper which are the materials of interest in the experiment, and vice
versa.
As seen in Figure 1, upon reaching the steady-state condition, the heat current of materials which are in contact
are equal, thus the Equation 1 can be used to equate the two different materials in contact. Equation 2 shows how
this similar heat current is used:
A (T H −T j ) A (T J −T C )
H = kH L = kC L (​ 2)

Physics 73.1 2​nd​ Semester 2017-18 Technical Report

University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City
22 March 2018
1
2. Methodology
For the experiment, the dimensions of the metal rods for their diameter ​d ​and length ​L ​were first measured with
the use of a Vernier caliper. Next, water was then added to three-fourths of the pot and was heated on the stove until
boiling and the steam generator was then submerged into the boiling water. Ice chunks were then placed within a
Styrofoam cup and a hole was made just enough for the exposed end of the copper rod to fit. After preparing the hot
and cold reservoirs for the experiment, the metal rods were then set-up according to the diagram below:

Figure 2: Diagram setup of the experiment [3]

Furthermore, the rubber tubing from the steam generator was attached to the open end of the brass rod which was
then joined together with the copper rod, with the ends of the copper rod inserted within the Styrofoam cup and is in
contact with the ice inside. Glass thermometers are then placed in contact with the brass and copper ends that is
connected to the hot and cold reservoirs, while a digital thermometer, in our case, a thermistor was placed in contact
with the brass and copper junction. The temperatures were monitored for all three points in the system and a
steady-steam and ice was ensured for both ends. As the temperature readings for all three points stabilized, the
temperature readings were then recorded as T​H​, T​J and T​C​, for temperature at hot reservoir, temperature at junction,
and temperature at cold reservoir respectively. These steps were then repeated for a total of three trials each.
The conductivity of brass was then calculated using equation 2; where the temperature in the brass’ far end is
used for T​H​, and the copper’s for T​C​. A given constant of 385.0 W/m·K was given for copper. The equation then
becomes:
ACopper LBrass (T J −T C )
k Brass = k copper ABrass LCopper T H −T J (3)

3. Results and Discussion

The measured dimensions for the brass and copper rods are shown in Table 1, wherein it is shown that both rods
have approximately the same dimensions with only minor deviations.

Table 1. Rod Dimensions.

Rod d​ (m) L ​(m)
Copper 0.0115 0.1505
Brass 0.0115 0.1514

The temperatures measured for each of the three trials are shown in Table 2, in which the resulting temperatures
vary slightly from the expected ideal temperatures of the hot and cold reservoirs of which the expected ​T​H ​values
was supposed to be in line with 100 °C and the expected ​TC​ ​values was supposed to be in line with 0°C. Possible
deviations may have been caused by the impurity of the water used for the hot and cold bath as well as the closeness
of the set-up where the close proximity may have caused the cold regions to heat up and the hot regions to cool
down.
Table 2. Temperature Measurements.
Trial T​H​ (°C) T​C​ ​(°C) T​J​ ​(°C)
1 86 10.3 30.3
2 88 10.3 30.0

Physics 73.1 2​nd​ Semester 2017-18 Technical Report

University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City
22 March 2018
2
 3 92 10 31.5

It can be observed as well that the temperature of the junction ​T​J ​is closer to the temperature of the colder
reservoir or in this case, the temperature of the copper. This trend indicates that with the inverse relationship of the
temperature gradient with thermal conductivity as seen in the equation above. The copper will have the higher
thermal conductivity as with the closeness of the ​TJ​ to ​ its temperature suggests a smaller temperature difference and
therefore a smaller temperature gradient. Using the measured values for the rod dimensions’ d and ​L ​as well as the
temperatures ​T​H​, T ​ ​, ​and ​T​J​. The thermal conductivities for brass for each of the three trials as well as the computed
​ C
average thermal conductivity are calculated using the equation below and the values are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Thermal Conductivity of Brass.

Trial ​ ​ (W/m·K)
kbrass
1 139.0672623
2 131.5492382
3 137.6363636
Average 136.0843026

The values agree with the predicted trend of thermal conductivities in which the thermal conductivity of copper
will have a higher value than that of brass. The inverse relationship of the thermal conductivity with the temperature
gradient is also retained. The average thermal conductivity for brass as determined experimentally was then
compared with the theoretical value of 109.0 W/m·K where a 24.85% deviation was observed.

4. Conclusion
It can be concluded from the experiment that the conductivity of brass is about 136.08 W/m·K, with a deviation
of 24.85% from the theoretical value. This implies that brass, having lower conductivity than copper, conducts heat
worse than copper. The measured junction temperatures also show the integrity of the equations used, and that the
experiment is largely successful but can still be improved to reduce the error percentage.

Acknowledgements
The researchers would like to acknowledge Sir Christopher Patrick Elegado for his assistance during the
experiment proper. In addition, acknowledgements are also given to the panel of reviewers who had given their
insights for the furtherance of this study.

References:
1. G.K. Chan, R.E Jones (1962). "Low-Temperature Thermal Conductivity of Amorphous Solids". Phys. Rev.
126: 2055. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.126.2055
2. Callister, William (2006). "Appendix B". Materials Science and Engineering - An Introduction. John Wiley
& Sons, INC. pp. 757. ISBN 0-471-22471-5
3. Physics 73.1 Module pp.2-3

Physics 73.1 2​nd​ Semester 2017-18 Technical Report

University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City
22 March 2018
3