One of the challenges I faced when completing this activity was that my coffee mugs do not have a lip at the top to allow for the materials to be secured at the top. I had to completely wrap the materials around the mug and handle securing the materials at the bottom of the mug, which allowed for a large air pocket under each insulator, as shown below. Because I was not sure of the accuracy of the results I obtained because of this problem, I chose to complete the experiment a second time using four identical drinking glasses.
The results of both trials in my experiment were as I had expected. The aluminum foil and micro fiber cloth topped the list as the best insulators, with the wool ski sock right behind. As expected, the paper proved to be the least effective at keeping the water warm. However, I was surprised by how close all the results were, including the results of the printer paper.
Amount of Heat Loss Trial 1-With Coffee Mugs
Insulating material | Initial temp. in ̊C | Final temp. in ̊C | Change in temp. in ̊C |
Aluminum foil | 56.3̊ C | 39.8̊ C | -16.5̊ C |
Micro fiber cloth | 56.3̊ C | 38.9̊ C | -17.4̊ C |
Wool ski sock | 56.3̊ C | 38.4̊ C | -17.9̊ C |
Printer paper | 56.3̊ C | 37.7̊ C | -18.6̊ C |
Amount of Heat Loss Trial 2-With Drinking Glasses
Insulating material | Initial temp. in ̊C | Final temp. in ̊C | Change in temp. in ̊C |
Aluminum foil | 66.8̊ C | 44.6̊ C | -22.2̊ C |
Micro fiber cloth | 66.8̊ C | 44.8̊ C | -22.0̊ C |
Wool ski sock | 66.8̊ C | 43.4̊ C | -23.4̊ C |
Printer paper | 66.8̊ C | 41.7̊ C | -25.1̊ C |
Even though the results were as expected, I gained many insights about heat transfer through this activity. I was able to observe all three modes of heat transfer; conduction, convection and radiation, thus deepening my understanding of all three. Conduction was observed by the heating of the aluminum foil above the hot water, as energy was transferred from the hot water to the cooler foil causing the foil to heat up (Tillery, Enger & Ross, 2008). The heating of the air above the water in all of the mugs or glasses demonstrated convection (Tillery, Enger & Ross, 2008). Convection currents were also experienced with the difference in temperature between the warmer water on top and the cooler water on bottom, which presented another challenge that I resolved by stirring the water before taking the final temperature of all samples (Tillery, Enger & Ross, 2008). Radiant energy was emitted from all samples and was easily felt in the air above and around the mugs or glasses.
I felt that this inquiry activity accomplished what it was meant to. I feel I have a better understanding of the three modes of heat transfer explored and the properties of a good insulator. I believe this inquiry activity would be engaging for younger students as they would probably enjoy just predicting what they believe would happen, making the observations and seeing if their predictions were correct. Older children may be more engaged with a more challenging scenario, such as developing the best container to keep food hot during transport.
References:
Tillery, B.W., Enger, E.D., & Ross, F.C. (2008). Integrated science. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill .
I enjoyed reading your post! The pictures were a great addition and I liked that you included an extra inquiry using drinking glasses. I am curious about the thermometer your used. I only had the one we got in our kits. The original temperature of my water was above 50 degrees Celsius, but I had no way of knowing the exact temperature.
ReplyDeleteI used a candy and oil thermometer we have in the kitchen to test the temperature of the water.
ReplyDelete