Nova Scotia Community College – Information Technology Campus

Junior Mechanical Engineering Technology

Fundamentals of Heat, Light, and Sound

Lab # 7
HEATS OF FUSION AND VAPORIZATION

Submitted by: Brian Lynds ___________________

Ian Coolen ___________________
Lloyd Muise ___________________

Submitted to: C. Rogers

Date of Lab: 30-Oct-2003
Date Submitted: 13-Nov-2003

1 of 5
Nova Scotia Community College – Information Technology Campus
Junior Mechanical Engineering Technology
Fundamentals of Heat, Light, and Sound

Objective:
To measure the heats of fusion and vaporization of water using the
method of mixtures
Procedure:
See lab handout
Data and Results:
Table 7.1 – Heat Of Fusion
Mass of Calorimeter (g) 48.8
Mass of Calorimeter and Water (g) 233.5
Temperature Of Water (°C) 30.7
Temperature of Final Mixture (°C) 14.9
Mass of Final Mixture (g) 274.5
Mass of Water (g) 184.7
Mass of Ice (g) 41.0

Table 7.2 – Heat Of Vaporization

Mass of Calorimeter (g) 48.8
Mass of Calorimeter and Water (g) 147.1
Temperature Of Water (°C) 7.4
Temperature of Final Mixture (°C) 28.0
Mass of Final Mixture (g) 157.0
Mass of Water (g) 98.3
Mass of Steam (g) 9.9

Table 7.3 – Known Values for Specific Heat Capacity

Water (cal/g•°C) 1.00
Aluminum (cal/g•°C) 0.22

2 of 5
Nova Scotia Community College – Information Technology Campus
Junior Mechanical Engineering Technology
Fundamentals of Heat, Light, and Sound

Calculations:
Latent Heat of Fusion

micw(t2-t3) + Lfmi = mwcw(t1-t2) + mccc(t1-t2)

Lf = mwcw(t1-t2) + mccc(t1-t2) - micw(t2-t3)

mi

=(184.7g)(1.00 cal/g•°C)(15.8°C)+(48.8g)(0.22 cal/g•°C)(15.8°C)-m icw(t2-t3)

41.0g

= (2918 + 169)cal – (41.0g)(1.00 cal/g•°C)(14.9°C)

41.0g

= (3087 – 611)cal = 60.4cal/g

41.0g

Percent Error
Actual Value – Measured Value X 100%
Actual Value

80cal/g – 60.4cal/g X 100% = 24.5% error

80cal/g

3 of 5
Nova Scotia Community College – Information Technology Campus
Junior Mechanical Engineering Technology
Fundamentals of Heat, Light, and Sound

Latent Heat of Vaporization

mscw(t3-t2) + Lvms = mwcw(t1-t2) + mccc(t1-t2)

Lv = mwcw(t1-t2) + mccc(t1-t2) - mscw(t3-t2)

ms

=(98.3g)(1.00 cal/g•°C)(20.6°C)+(48.8g)(0.22 cal/g•°C)(20.6°C) - m scw(t3-t2)

9.9g

= 2024 cal + 221 cal – (9.9 g)(1.00 cal/g•°C)(72°C)

9.9 g

= 2245 cal – 713 cal = 155 cal/g

9.9 g

Percent Error
Actual Value – Measured Value X 100%
Actual Value

540 cal/g – 155 cal/g X 100% = 71.3% error

540cal/g

4 of 5
Nova Scotia Community College – Information Technology Campus
Junior Mechanical Engineering Technology
Fundamentals of Heat, Light, and Sound

Discussion:
To calculate the heat of fusion of water (the energy required to change
one gram of ice into one gram of water) we add a known mass of ice at 0°C to a
known mass of water at a significantly higher temperature. When the ice has
melted completely we measure the temperature of the mixture. Knowing that the
energy transferred from the high temperature water must equal the energy
absorbed by the ice we can calculate the heat of fusion.
A similar method can be used to calculate the heat of vaporization of
water. However, in this procedure we add steam at 100°C to water below room
temperature. During this procedure the steam will condense into water giving off
a large amount of energy. By measuring the change in temperature as well as
the mass of steam added to the container, we can determine the amount of
energy transferred and thus the heat of vaporization. Again the aluminum
container must be accounted for in the calculations.
The enormous percent error that resulted from the experiment to
determine the heat of vaporization tells us that either the procedure is flawed or
we failed to follow it properly. The latter is much more likely. We believe that the
experiment was such a monumental failure because the final mixture was not
much above room temperature. We suspect that condensation from inside the
tube used to transfer the steam was being added to the mixture, throwing off our
measurement of the mass of the steam added. If we had not gained mass from
this condensation, our measured mass of the steam added would have been
lower and our calculated heat of vaporization would probably have been closer to
the accepted value.

Conclusion:
The experiment we performed was extremely inaccurate. The best
explanation we can find for the flawed results is a misread (or miswritten)
measurement.
This experiment was a failure.

5 of 5