Experiment #1: Empirical

Temperature Measurement
By: Rakesh Narang (10124375)
Date: October 27th, 2014
Nguyen

Coworkers: Anh (Annie)

Kenrick Villar
Jason Battershill

OBJECTIVE
The primary objective of this experiment is to investigate the
thermometric properties of the typical thermometers; namely, a
platinum resistance thermometer, a chromel-alumel thermocouple, a
constant volume gas thermometer, and a liquid-in-gas thermometer.
Correlations between these thermometers are also examined, as well
as the concept of a temperature scale, which is independent of the
properties of individual thermometers.
APPARATUS AND PROCEDURE
This experiment involves a water bath which starts off at its ice point
and it is gradually heated to its steam point. Along the way various
points are read on different sorts of thermometers including a regular
alcohol and glass thermometer, a constant volume (CV) gas
thermometer, a thermocouple and a platinum resistance temperature
device. This lab analyzes the thermometric properties of typical
thermometers. We start at ice point and collect property data for four
separate thermometers while increasing the temperature to the boiling
point.
RAW DATA
Table 1: Room temperature and pressure recorded at 2pm on October
27th, 2014
Parameter
Value
Barometric Reading (mmHg)
665.4 mmHg 0.05mmHg
O
Room Temperature ( C)
22.2 oC 0.05oC
Converting the barometric pressure from mmHg to kPa:

P = 665.4mmHg x

101.325 kPa
760 mmHg

Table2:RawdataforExperiment1.

= 88.713 kPa

Figure 1: Graph of all different types of measurements instruments

versus the thermocouple.

TREATMENT OF RAW DATA AND RESULTS

Empirical temperature in oCalgary: Empirical temperature

measurements are made using a thermometer in conjunction with an
empirical temperature scale based on an arbitrary fundamental
interval between two known different thermal levels. We can
determine the temperature in oCalgary by using the formula:
=

Eqn.1-1

X X 0
X 100 X 0

100oCal

Where:
= Empirical temperature (oCal)
X = Thermometric property of
X 100 = Thermometric property at the steam point
X 0 = Thermometric property at the ice point
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
For the alcohol in the glass, we will take 42mm as our
X 0 and 213mm as X 0 .
=

42 mm32 mm
213 mm32mm

X , 32mm as

100oCal = 5.52 oCal

Uncertainty Calculations:
W

( )

WA
A

( )

WB
B

( )

Where:
= Empirical temperature (oCal)
W = Uncertainty of empirical temperature (oCal)
WA = Uncertainty of A (oCal)
WB = Uncertainty of B (oCal)
A = X X 0 (oCal)
B = X 100 X 0 (oCal)
The uncertainty of A (WA) and B (WB) can be determined by the formula
of error propagation for addition and/or subtraction:
WA2 =

WX

WX

2
0

and WB2 =

WX

2
100

WX

Where:
W N = Uncertainty of its respective subscript

2
0

Combining the two formulas gives us the equation for

W :

+W X 2
W X 2 +W X 2

W =
+
X X 0
X 100 X 0
Where all of these symbols have been defined in previous formulas
used to make up this equation.
2

)(

100

A sample calculation for the uncertainty in alcohol in glass would give

us:
W = 5.52

12 +12

)(
+

12 +12

4232
21332
0.78 oCal

Table 3: Recorded value converted the empirical temperature in

and the uncertainties.
Empirical
Uncertainty of
Recorded Value
Temperature (
Calculation ((
(mm)
al)
al)
32
0.00
42
5.52
0.78
62
16.57
0.79
82
27.62
0.81
102
38.67
0.84
121
49.17
0.87
141
60.22
0.91
160
70.72
0.96
180
81.77
1.01
202
93.92
1.07
213
100.00
1.10

al

The same sample calculations can be done for the other thermometers
and their respective uncertainties.
Temperature for constant volume thermometer:
=

X X 0
X 100 X 0

45.88 kPa43.55 kPa

89.20 kPa43.55 kPa

100oCal

100oCal

5.10 oCal

Uncertainty for temperature of CV thermometer:

W =

W = 5.10

+W X 2
+
X X 0

)(

+W X 2
X 100 X 0

0.0052+ 0.0052

45.8843.55
W = 0.0155 al

2
X 100

)(
+

0.0052 +0.0052
89.2043.55

All these values can then be tabulated.

Table 4: Recorded values of the constant volume thermometer with the
empirical temperature in al and uncertainties.
Empirical
Recorded Value
Uncertainty of
Temperature (
(kPa)
Calculation ( al)
al)
43.55
0.00
0.0000
45.88
5.10
0.0155
51.44
17.28
0.0157
56.56
28.50
0.0161
61.79
39.96
0.0167
66.54
50.36
0.0173
71.56
61.36
0.0182
76.42
72.00
0.0191
81.31
82.72
0.0201
86.57
94.24
0.0213
89.2
100.00
0.0219
Temperature for Resistance Temperature Device:
=

X X 0
X 100 X 0

10.264 10.074
13.799 10.074

= 5.10 oCal

100oCal

100oCal

Uncertainty for temperature in RTD:

W =

W = 5.10

+W X 2
+
X X 0

)(

0.0052+ 0.0052
10.26410.074

2
X 100

+W X 2
X 100 X 0
2

)(
+

0.0052 +0.0052
13.79910.074

W = 0.0190 al
Table 5: Recorded values of the resistance temperature device (RTD)
with the empirical temperature in al and uncertainties.
Empirical
Uncertainty of
Recorded Value (
Temperature (
Calculation (

al)
al)
10.074
0.00
0.0000
10.264
5.10
0.0190
10.721
17.37
0.0193
11.139
28.59
0.0197
11.569
40.13
0.0205
11.957
50.55
0.0213
12.365
61.50
0.0223
12.762
72.16
0.0234
13.158
82.79
0.0246
13.585
94.26
0.0261
13.799
100.00
0.0268
Temperature of thermocouple:
=

X X 0
X 100 X 0

0.22 7 mV 0.04 mV
13.799 mV 10.074 mV

= 4.55 oCal

100oCal

100oCal

Uncertainty of temperature of thermocouple:

W =

W = 4.55

+W X 2
+
X X 0

)(

0.0052 +0.0052
0.2270.04

2
X 100

+W X 2
X 100 X 0
2

)(
+

0.0052 +0.005 2
4.1470.04

W = 0.0172 oCal
Tabulated values:
Table 6: Recorded values of the thermocouple with the empirical
temperature in al and uncertainties.
Empirical
Recorded Value
Uncertainty of
Temperature (
(mV)
Calculation ( al)
al)
0.04
0.00
0.0000
0.227
4.55
0.0172
0.689
15.80
0.0174
1.125
26.42
0.0178
1.584
37.59
0.0184
2.006
47.87
0.0191
2.463
59.00
0.0200
2.918
70.08
0.0210
3.384
81.42
0.0222
3.897
93.91
0.0236
4.147
100.00
0.0243
Deviation from CV Gas Thermometer
According to Table 3, 4, 5 and 6, the uncertainty values of the constant
volume are the smallest and we can therefore assume that the
constant volume thermometer is the most accurately measuring
device. Every other thermometer is then compared to this one. We can
determine the deviation using the following equation:
d= CV |
Where:
d = Deviation ( al)
= Temperature of the thermometer being compared ( al)
CV = Temperature of the CV thermometer ( al)
Sample Calculation:

This sample calculation applies to all the other three thermometers

except for control volume thermometer as we are using that as the
standard to compare all other thermometers with. The deviation of
alcohol in glass at 42mm is:
d = | 5.52 al 5.10 oCal|
d = 0.42 oCal
The uncertainty calculation is as follows:
W d = W 2+ W 2CV
Where:
W d = Uncertainty of deviation (oCal)
W = Uncertainty of temperature being compared (oCal)
W CV = Uncertainty of corresponding CV temperature (oCal)
Selecting the from the same batch of values that we did above we will
receive this:
W d = W 2+ W 2CV

W d = 0.782+ 0.01552
W d = 0. 78 oCal

Table 7: The deviation of values from each type of thermometer to

constant volume temperature in oCal with the highest values
highlighted.
Constant Volume
Deviation for alcohol and
Deviation for the resistance
o
o
Temperature ( Cal)
glass ( Cal)
temperature device (oCal)
0
5.1
17.28
28.5
39.96
50.36
61.36
72
82.72
94.24
100

0.00
0.42
0.71
0.88
1.29
1.19
1.14
1.28
0.95
0.32
0.00

0.00
0.00
0.09
0.09
0.17
0.19
0.14
0.16
0.07
0.02
0.00

Table 8: The uncertainties of all the deviations with the highest

deviations uncertainties highlighted.
Uncertainty for Constant Volume
Uncertainty for Alcohol and
Temperature( al)
Glass
( al)
0
0.0155
0.0157
0.0161
0.0167
0.0173
0.0182
0.0191
0.0201
0.0213
0.0219

0
0.78
0.79
0.81
0.84
0.87
0.91
0.96
1.01
1.07
1.10

This data can be displayed in a graph as shown in figure 2.

Figure 2. Thermometer deviations as a function of the constant volume temperature

Deviation for Alcohol and

Glass
Deviation of Resistance
Deviation for
thermocouple

Figure 2 reveals a plot of the deviations versus the reference

temperatures of the constant volume thermometer. From this figure, it
is apparent that the thermocouple deviates the most from the CV gas
temperatures, the resistance temperature deviates the least and the

Uncertainty for
( al)
0
0.019
0.0193
0.0197
0.0205
0.0213
0.0223
0.0234
0.0246
0.0261
0.0268

alcohol in glass is somewhere in the middle. We can therefore class

each thermometer from most accurate to the least accurate in
reference to the CV thermometer, with RTD as the most accurate and
the thermocouple as the least.
Additionally, the deviations were largest near the halfway point
between the ice and the steam points. This could be due to the system
not having a chance to reach equilibrium prior to the thermometric
measurement.
Temperature and Pressure Corrections:
A plot of the constant volume temperature readings versus the
absolute pressures allows the determinations of absolute zero. The
absolute zero temperature, however, needs to be in oC. Hence, the
alcohol in glass thermometer readings are used to establish the
relationship between oCal and oC. The temperature scale correction is
the following equation:
T s C=

1730.63
233.426
8.07131log 10 P mmHg

Where:
T s oC = Temperature at the steam point
PmmHg = Atmospheric pressure in mmHg
T s C=

1730.63
233.426
8.07131log 10 (665.4 mmHg)

T s C=96.329

C = 100 oCal

This means that 1 oCal is 0.96329 oC. Using this conversion rate we can
find all of the corrected temperatures of the constant volume
thermometer.
Sample Calculation
T C =0.96329 T CV
Where:
T C = Corrected temperature
T CV = Uncorrected temperature
T C =0.96329 T CV
T C =0.96329(5.10 Cal )
T C = 4.91 oCal

In order to correct the pressure, we must use the following formula:

Pc =PT ( 1+3 ( T T 0 ) )
Where:
Pc
PT
T
T0

= Corrected pressure at some temperature (kPa)

= Measured pressure at temperature T (kPa)
= Corrected temperature (oC)
= Corrected ice point temperature = 0oC
= Coefficient of linear expansion for copper = 16.0 X 10-6 / oC

But first we have to calculate absolute pressure of the control volume.

We can use the formula:
||=P

guage

+ P atm

P
Where the symbols of the different pressure types are described by
their subscripts.
Sample calculation:
||=P

guage

+ P atm

||=43.55 kPa+88.713 kPa

||=132.263 kPa

P
Therefore it follows from the pressure correction formula that the
correct pressure can be calculated as such:
Sample calculation:
6

16.0 10 ( 00 )
1+3()
Pc =132.263
Pc =132.263 kP a

Table 9: All of the corrected values of temperature and pressure for

each corresponding reading of the CV thermometer.
Constant
Empirical Temperature
Absolute Pressure
Volume
Correction (C)
Correction (kPa)
Thermomet
er (kPa)
0
132.263
43.55
4.912779
134.6247388
45.88
16.6456512
140.264981
51.44
27.453765
145.464438
56.56
38.4930684
150.7810795
61.79
48.5112844
155.7147459
66.54
59.1074744
160.7277199
71.56
69.35688
165.6827493
76.42
79.6833488
170.6733041
81.31
90.7804496
176.0467889
86.57
96.329
178.7356327
89.20

Figure 3: A comparison between the corrected and uncorrected temperature values for the constant volume thermometer as a function of pressure

f(x) = 2.15x - 284.57

f(x) = 2.07x - 274.13
Corrected Temperature
Values
Linear (Corrected
Temperature Values)
Uncorrected Temperature
Values
Linear (Uncorrected
Temperature Values)

At this point, all corrected values for the temperature and the absolute
pressure were calculated and plotted alongside the uncorrected
empirical results. The values can be found in Table 9.
The absolute zero temperature can now be found on the graph at the
point P=0, or in other words, the y-intercept of the graph. One can
traditionally find this value by extrapolation, but for this experiment,
the linear equation generated by Excel will be used. The linear
equation y=mx+b is presented as:
||
T =mP+ T

Where:
m= Slope (oC/kPa)
P = Pressure at that temperature (kPa)
||
T = Absolute zero temperature
T = Temperature at a specific pressure

From this, we gather that from the uncorrected line, absolute zero
should be -284.57 o C, and with the corrected line, absolute zero should
be -274.13 oC. Illustrated by the plot, we see that the correction factor
near the ice point is much less significant than when near boiling point,
as the trend lines start to diverge while both temperature and pressure
increase.
Percent error to literature value:
The temperature at which a thermodynamic system has the lowest
energy is called absolute zero, which has a literature value of -273.15
o
C. Using this value we can find the percent error for both of the yintercepts stated above using the percent error formula:
valueTheoretical Value
| ExperimentalTheoretical
|100
Value

%Error=

For the uncorrected value:

tal valueTheoretical Value
| ExperimenTheoretical
|100
Value

%Error=

%Error=

(284.57)(273.15)
100
(273.15)

%Error=4.18

For the corrected value:

valueTheoretical Value
| ExperimentalTheoretical
|100
Value

%Error=

%Error=

(274.13)(273.15)
100
(273.15)

%Error=0.359
Table 10: Percent error for both corrected and uncorrected values of
absolute zero using experimental data compared to the literature
absolute zero value.
Parameter
Value (oC)
Percent Error
(%)

Uncorrected Tabs
Corrected Tabs

-284.57
-274.13

4.18
0.359

DISCUSSION
Constant Volume Thermometer
The CV has thermometer was the most accurate measuring device. It
is based on the ideal gas law (PV=nRT), so it therefore accurate
represents the Kelvin scale. Its thermometric property was pressure,
which is directly proportional to the change in temperature if the idea
gas law applies. Since nitrogen was the gas being used in this
thermometer, we can assume that the ideal gas law is indeed
applicable, giving accurate temperature measurements. Our reasons
for which we concluded that the CV thermometer is the most accurate
is based on the fact that it had the smallest uncertainties based on
Tables 3, 4, 5 and 6 and it had the least deviance as illustrated in
Figure 1 in the raw data section.
There are certain negative factors present for the CV thermometer.
First of all, it is impossible to keep the volume inside the cylinder 100%
constant. Particles of nitrogen may still escape the system and this
would alter the accuracy of the experiment. Second, the size of the
thermometer does not make it practical for every day use.
Alcohol in Glass Thermometer
The alcohol in the glass thermometer had the largest values of
uncertainty. This is because the operational uncertainty was 1mm,
which is still proportionally much larger than the measurement
uncertainty of all three other thermometers. This, the initial values
recorded cannot be completely trusted. In Figure 2, the temperature in
the alcohol in glass deviates significantly even though it does not
deviate the most from the temperature of the CV gas thermometer.
Despite the large uncertainty and deviation, the alcohol thermometer
is still widely used, as it holds some advantages, including its small
size and simplicity. The alcohol rises quickly with temperature change
and serves as a practice choice in everyday usage.
Platinum Resistance Thermometer Device
The RTD showed very little deviation from the CV thermometer, and
because of its minimal uncertainty of 0.005 the deviation
uncertainty is very small as well. This thermometer may not have been
very accurate, however, as it possesses a very slow response time, and
in Figure 1, the straight line from the start to the end passes through

the fewest points. It is very likely that the system did not reach steady
state during the two minutes waited and therefore the RTD did not
acquire an accurate measurement. The reason we see such low
uncertainty is due to the fact that slow response time allows for less
fluctuation in data points to occur, thereby reducing the random error.
This thermometer would be ideal for static environments since the
measured values increase at a slow state and hence there would be
fewer random errors affecting the system.

Thermocouple
In contrast to the RTD, the thermocouple is a very responsive
measuring device. This makes it an ideal dynamic measuring device.
This makes it an ideal dynamic measuring device. The thermometer
has a very low uncertainty but largely deviates from the temperature
values of the CV thermometer. However, because the device fluctuates
so much, it would be more difficult to consider it as an accurate
thermometer. Also, a large amount of calibration is required in order to
make sure that the relationship between voltage and temperature is
correct.
General Comments
The constant volume thermometer proved to be the most accurate as
the points deviated from the line on Figure 1 the least and the
uncertainties shown in Tables 3, 4, 5 and 6 were the least. After
calculations, it was revealed that alcohol in glass had the most
uncertainties. CV thermometer was used as the benchmark to compare
all other thermometers to. Then the deviations of the other
thermometers were found with respect to the CV thermometer. There
was a noticeable trend where all the deviations rose near the middle of
the experiment. This trend is probably directly related to the
thermometric properties of nitrogen gas and the fact that it is not
100% ideal behavior. This information was plotted in Figure 2 and Table
8. It was found that the RTD had the smallest of deviations and lower
uncertainty due to the precision of the instrument whilst the
thermocouple had the highest but the uncertainty of the alcohol was
much higher due to the original uncertainty of the device.
The thermocouple and the RTD are the most widely used
thermometers in the industry. Although not the most accurate devices
of the four studied in this lab, they still are effective at measuring
temperatures and maintaining fairly low uncertainties.

In addition to the sources of error previously mentioned, there is also a

chance that the errors were due to systematic calibration errors, heat
loss to surroundings, the assumption that quasi-equilibrium was
reached in the two minutes (insufficient amount of time), non uniform
stirring, as well as human errors in reading.
SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
This lab analyzed the thermometric properties of typical thermometers.
We started at ice point and collected property data for four separate
thermometers while raising the temperature to the boiling point. From
this data we were able to graph our raw results and see which of the
thermometers were the most accurate. The constant volume
thermometer proved to be the most accurate as the points deviated
from the line on Figure 1 the least and the uncertainties shown in
Tables 3, 4, 5 and 6 were the least. After calculations, it was revealed
that alcohol in glass had the most uncertainties. At this point, the CV
thermometer was used as the benchmark to compare all other
thermometers to. Then the deviations of the other thermometers were
found with respect to the CV thermometer. There was a noticeable
trend where all the deviations rose near the middle of the experiment.
This trend is probably directly related to the thermometric properties of
nitrogen gas and the fact that it is not 100% ideal behavior. This
information was plotted in Figure 2 and Table 8. It was found that the
RTD had the smallest of deviations and lower uncertainty due to the
precision of the instrument whilst the thermocouple had the highest
but the uncertainty of the alcohol was much higher due to the original
uncertainty of the device. Looking specifically at the CV thermometer,
it was found that the corrected temperature and pressure for the
system in oC and kPa were lower than the uncorrected values. These
were plotted on Figure 3 and using this we were able to calculate an
absolute zero value. The corrected value had a percent error of 0.359%
error from the literature value and the uncorrected value had a 4.18%.
Through this experiment we learned the concept of the Kelvin/Celsius
temperature scale and how it becomes independent from the
properties we initially measured. All purposes of this lab were fulfilled
and the errors within this experiment were expected and of reasonable
degree.
RECOMMENDATIONS

To reduce deviations in the calculations, we could allow more

time before taking the measurements. This would permit the
system to better reach equilibrium.
To make the results more accurate, insulating the system would
allow for loss of heat to be reduced.

To reduce human error n interpolation, a digital device could

instantaneously record all values of thermometers. This would
help in ensuring all measurements are taken at the same time.

REFERENCES
i)
ii)

Lab partners: Anh Nguyen, Kenrick Villar, Jason Battershill

Roberts E.P.L, Ramesh V. and Vermeulen P.J. (2014) Engg 311
Engineering Thermodynamics Laboratory Manual Fall 2014,
Schulich School of Engineering, University of Calgary