DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY

Gokongwei College of Engineering

Chemical Engineering Department

Engineering Thermodynamics Laboratory

Final Laboratory Report

Experiment # 1
Calibration of Thermometers

Group Name N3P Section EA1

NAME SIGNATURE Criteria Score

1. Cellona, Kimberley B. Content (50%)
2. Dar, Lloyd Ross M. Presentation (25%)

3. Javier, Mona Lyndsay C. Relevance (25%)

4. Lopez, Maristela Ann F. Total (100%)

5. Soriano, Elijah Jeremie D. Percentage Equivalent

31 July 2018 7 August 2018

Date of performance Date of Submission

Dr. Lawrence P. Belo

Instructor
Engineering Thermodynamics Laboratory

Calibration of Thermometers
Kimberley B. Cellona, Lloyd Ross M. Dar, Mona Lyndsay C. Javier,
Maristela Ann F. Lopez, Elijah Jeremie D. Soriano
Department of Chemical Engineering, Gokongwei College of Engineering, De La Salle University,
2401 Taft Avenue, Manila 1004, Philippines

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

AY 2017–2018 | Term 3 Temperature is one of the most important parameters that needs to be considered in a
LBYCHED EA1
chemical engineering problem application. Thus, measuring the temperature of
Final Laboratory Report
Experiment # 1 materials involved in a process and making sure that these are compatible with each
Date Performed: July 31, 2018 other is very vital for the successful operation of a chemical plant. Measurement of
Date Submitted: August 7, 2018 temperature is done using a thermometer. There are different kinds of thermometers,
each with a different function and mechanism. In this experiment, three mercury
Keywords
Mercury thermometer, thermocouple, thermometers, one dial thermometer, and a thermocouple were calibrated using a
dial thermometer, scale calibration block calibrator as the standard. It could be concluded from the results that the
thermocouple is more accurate as compared to the dial thermometer, and the dial
thermometer is more accurate as compared to the mercury thermometers. The
percent error of the thermocouple is 0.907%, the dial thermometer 0.134%, and the
three mercury thermometers averaged at 0.259%.

I. INTRODUCTION that expands or contracts when it is subjected to heating

or cooling, respectively. Thermal expansion is necessary
Temperature is one of the most important operating plays a vital role for expansion thermometers, since the
conditions that a certain company or industry must volume of which the liquid will change depends on this
constantly monitor. Different equipment can tolerate factor. Mercury has been widely used as the medium for
various temperatures, depending on the application. these thermometers, since it has the adequate thermal
Hence, it is vital to have proper temperature expansion necessary for the said equipment. However,
measurements and control, since even the slightest due to health reasons, it has now been changed with
change in temperature could cause massive repercussions liquid alcohols [2]. Proper handling for all types of
on the operating plant. It is, therefore, essential to have thermometers is a must, to ensure correct readings and
accurate temperature-measuring devices that will monitor lessen potential damage to the equipment.
the temperature of any given system. Accordingly, proper
calibrations of these devices must be conducted to have There are two different temperature scales used for
the most exact measurements [1]. In this experiment, the representing the temperature of a substance, the relative
students are tasked to operate and calibrate various and absolute scale. The relative scale is based on the
temperature-measuring devices. increments found between the freezing and boiling point
of water. Similarly, both the zero points of the Celsius
Currently, there are different types of thermometers and Fahrenheit scale were arbitrarily set by their
available, which has different functions and mechanisms inventors. For the former, the zero point represented the
on how those devices indicate the temperature. Some of freezing point of water, while the latter’s zero point
which are electrical resistance thermometers, represented the coldest achievable temperature that both
thermocouples, optical pyrometers, and pyrometer cones ice and salt water could attain. However, the absolute
[1]. Commonly, the expansion thermometers are used, scale was then devised to have the absolute zero point as
which exploits the concept of thermal expansion. Those the lowest possible temperature that a substance could
thermometers have liquids encased inside a glass tube attain. This then indicated that all temperature
[1]
measurements would yield positive values. Kelvin is
used for the Celsius scale, whereas Rankine is used for
the Fahrenheit scale [3].

Correction factors are set for the proper calibration of the

thermometers. For liquid-in-glass thermometers that is
partially immersed in the fluid, the following corrective
factor is done to compensate for the equalization of
temperature found at the non-immersed portion of the
thermometer:
Figure 1. Boiling water setup (left) and ice bath (right) for
C F =0.00016 X M ( T 1 −T 2 ) (1) determining boiling and ice point for each thermometer.

Where C F is the correction factor in oC [4], X M is the

length of the thread of exposed mercury, T 1 and T 2 are
the indicated temperature and calibrated temperature both
in oC, respectively.

Similarly, correction factors are also done for

measurements done in pressures other than atmospheric,
and is given by the equation:

T 1−T 2
B= (2)
P1−P2
Figure 2. Setup for the comparison of temperature readings for
Mercury thermometers and the dial thermometer.
Where B is the external pressure coefficient, expressed
in F/psia, T 1 and T 2are the temperatures read at P1 and
o

P2, both in oF. While P1 and P2 are the external absolute

pressure in psia.

II. METHODOLGY

2.1 Materials and Reagents

Ice and tap water were used for the experiment.

2.2 Equipment Figure 3. Block calibrator and setup for calibration above
This experiment involved four set-ups: stream bath, boiling temperature of water.
ice bath, temperature-controlled water bath, and a
block calibrator. Three mercury thermometers, a dial 2.3 Experimental Procedure
thermometer, and a thermocouple were used to
measure the temperature in the different set-ups 2.3.1 Calibration Based on Physical Properties of
Pure Substances
An amount of ice was placed in a beaker and
cold water was added. The initial temperature
of the thermometer was noted before
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[2]
 submerging it into the ice bath (Note: The bub thermometer was also recorded with the
must not touch the surface of the beaker.). The thermocouple’s temperature. This procedure
temperature was recorded every 15 seconds was repeated at 10 oC intervals until 200 oC.
until the thermometer reaches a constant
reading. The constant reading is the melting
point reading for the particular thermometer. In the analysis of the data, it is noted that the
The whole procedure was repeated for all measurement of the length of Mercury immersed in
temperature reading devices. the liquid was not conducted in the procedure, and
therefore Eq. 1 cannot be used. Further, [4] also
An amount of water was placed in the steam illustrates that the correction factors obtained from
bath apparatus. The apparatus was heated applying the equation are minimal, and thus for this
using a Bunsen burner. Once the water is experiment will be assumed negligible. Lastly, since
boiling, the initial temperature of the the experiment was conducted in atmospheric
thermometer was noted begore placing the pressure, Eq. 2 will also not be used.
thermometer on top of the boiling water (Note:
The bub must not be submerged underwater.).
The temperature was recorded every minute III. RESULTS & DISCUSSION
until the thermometer reaches a constant
reading. The constant reading is the boiling 3.1 Calibration based on Physical Properties of Pure
point reading for the particular thermometer. Substances
The whole procedure was repeated for al With expected readings of 0oC and 100oC for the
temperature reading devices. melting point and boiling point of water under
atmospheric pressure, the five thermometers
2.3.2 Comparison of Temperature Readings with examined exhibited different readings from the same
a Standard Instrument steam bath and ice bath setups, thus highlighting the
In this part of the experiment, the need for calibration. Fig. 4 shows a bar chart
thermocouple connected to the Fluke digital illustrating the melting and boiling points observed
monitor was considered as the standard for each device, and their difference from the 100 oC
instrument. The thermometers and and 0oC line.
thermocouple were hanged using a support
and were submerged in water contained in a Melting Point
beaker. The beaker was then heated until the 120
98.9 98.2 100 99.5 99.6
Fluke digital monitor reading was 100 oC. The 100
temperature reading of the other thermometers 80
were then recorded. The procedure was
60
repeated for every 5 oC drop on the Fluke
Temperature (oC)

40
digital monitor reading until the reading
reaches 60 oC. 20
0.1 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0
0
Mecury Thermom...

Mecury Thermom...

Mecury Thermom...

Dial Thermometer

Thermocouple

2.3.3 Using Block Calibrator for Temperatures

above Boiling Point of Water
A mercury thermometer and thermocouple
were placed on the respective ports on top of
the block calibrator. The initial reading was
recorded. The calibrator’s temperature was set Figure 4. Ice and boiling points observed for each thermometer.
at 100 oC and the thermocouple reading was
left to stabilize. Once it showed a constant Analyzing these data, Table 1 lists the melting and
reading, the temperature in the mercury
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[3]
 boiling points alongside their errors based on the
400
expected melting and boiling point of pure water at
atmospheric pressure referenced earlier. 340

Temperature (oC)
280
Table 1. Summary of accuracy of thermometers according to
melting point and boiling point of water at 1 atm. 220

  Melting Point Boiling Point 160

Erro Erro
100
Temp r Temp r
Thermometer . (oC) (%) . (oC) (%) 40
Mercury thermometer 0.29
1 0.1 0.04 98.9 5 -20 0 5 10 15 20 25
Mercury thermometer 0.48 Distance (cm)
2 0.0 0 98.2 2 Total 1 Total 2
Mercury thermometer
3 0.0 0 100.0 0 Figure 5. Scale calibration of three Mercury thermometers
0.13 used.
Dial Thermometer 2.0 0.73 99.5 4
0.10
From the graph, Fig. 4 illustrates that the graduations
Thermocouple 0.0 0 99.6 7
per degree of temperature in the thermometers are
From the table, it can be initially observed that the precisely linear, but not exactly accurate as the
thermometers studied are nonetheless precise and dotted lines, representing the ice to boiling
exhibit accuracy with only at most 0.5% error. temperature over length data, do not properly
Further, it can be observed that the thermometer with coincide with the solid lines, representing the total
the highest accuracy is Mercury thermometer 3, range of temperature over total length. However,
having reached equilibrium at 0oC and 100oC under they are nearly aligned with each other, hence being
the ice and steam bath setups respectively. This is precise. Quantitatively, Table 2 lists the comparison
followed by the digital thermometer or the on scale calibration data for each thermometer,
thermocouple, wherein it was able to reach 0 oC at which represent the slopes of the lines from the
equilibrium in the ice bath setup, however only at figure.
99.6oC in the steam bath. Lastly, on the other end,
Table 2. Scale calibration of three Mercury thermometers used.
the thermometer with the least accuracy relative to
others according to the test is the dial thermometer, Scale Calibration (oC/cm)
Thermomete
having errors on both its equilibrium melting point r Total Ice-
Difference (%)
Length boiling
and boiling point readings. The errors incurred,
nonetheless, are fairly minimal and close to each 1 16.87 16.07 4.867
other. They may be attributed to (1) human bias in 2 6.930 6.235 10.55
reading thermometers with several fine graduations, 3 22.16 20.20 9.225
and (2) the offset in calibration of the equipment
with use over time. From the table, it can be observed that Mercury
thermometer 1 is the most linear in terms of its
Further, looking into the scale calibration of the three calibration scale, having the least percent difference
Mercury thermometers used, Fig. 4 shows the between progression or slope of the ice to boiling
temperatures plotted against their distance from the temperatures over length, and the total temperature
first graduation in the thermometer length. range over length. In contrast, Mercury thermometer
2 is the least linear in terms of its calibration scale,
with the highest percent difference evaluated.
Altogether, the data indicate that the rise in
temperature for each thermometer is not
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[4]
 hysteresis is not entirely uniform over the range, as can
Further, it can also be observed from Table 2 that be observed at coinciding spheres at 70oC and 80oC
Mercury thermometer 3 is the longest thermometer, standard temperatures, but only more pronounced to be
followed by Mercury thermometer 1 and with 2 inconsistent as compared to other ranges from both data
being the shortest. This relates Mercury thermometer sets. The difference in temperatures may also be
2 having the greatest resulting percent difference, accounted to human bias in reading the thermometer
despite actually having the smallest absolute error prior to change in temperature of the standard, or the
(0.8 for MT1, 0.69 for MT2, and 1.95 for MT3) fluctuation in temperature during the forced cooling
among the three, as the effect of the deviation is (addition of ice) conducted instead.
more pronounced for smaller values or ranges.
100
3.2 Comparison of Temperature Readings with a

Temperature Reading (oC)

Standard Instrument 90
Recording the temperature readings from a defined
80
range, set as from 40oC to until boiling point,
approached from an increasing temperature (heating) 70
and a decreasing (cooling) manner, the temperatures 60
read from each thermometer are compared against a
standard temperature, taken as the thermocouple 50
used in the experiment. The parity charts are 40
illustrated in the following figures for each 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
thermometer. Standard Temperature (oC)
Standard
Mercury Thermometer 2 - Heating
100 Mercury Themometer 2 - Cooling
Temperature Reading (oC)

90 Figure 7. Parity chart for Mercury thermometer 2 against Fluke

standard temperature.
80

70 Similarly, in Fig. 7, the datasets overall lie closely along

60
the standard temperature line, wherein minor
inconsistencies, which can be considered hysteresis, can
50
be observed from 60oC to 75oC of the standard
40 temperature. In comparison to Fig. 6, the white boxes,
40 50 60 70 80 90 100
representing the cooling temperatures, are above the
Standard Temperature (oC)
Standard black boxes, representing the heating temperatures, and
Mercury Thermometer 1 - Heating the standard line, while some of the latter data points are
Mercury Thermometer 1 - Cooling
located below the standard line. However, similarly, this
Figure 6. Parity chart for Mercury thermometer 1 against Fluke
hysteresis is less pronounced or not uniform over the
standard temperature.
range. Further, the difference in temperatures may also be
accounted to human bias, or the fluctuation in
From Fig. 6, the temperatures recorded for Mercury
temperature during the cooling procedure.
thermometer 1, from both heating and cooling directions,
can be observed to lie close to the standard temperature
line. A small extent of hysteresis can be observed within
the range of standard temperature 65oC to 85oC, wherein
white spheres, representing some of the points from the
cooling dataset, are found below the black spheres,
representing the heating temperatures dataset, and the
standard line. However, it is also considered that this
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[5]
 from the dial thermometer to lie above and below the
100
standard line. Further, hysteresis or inconsistencies with
Temperature Reading (oC)

90 the heating and cooling data sets is similarly observed in

80 the standard temperature range of 60oC to 80oC, with the
difference between the white and black data points as the
70
most defined relative to the previous figures observed.
60 This pronounced hysteresis can be attributed to the nature
of the dial thermometer, which measures the temperature
50
according to the expansion and contraction of the metal
40 attached to the dial [5]. The thermometer could have
40 50 60 70 80 90 100
been expanding or contracting at the moment the
Standard Temperature (oC)
Standard temperature was read, and therefore was not able to
Mercury Thermometer 3 - Heating accurately display the proper temperature [5]. Further,
Mercury Thermometer 3 - Cooling the data can also be indicative that the calibration of the
Figure 8. Parity chart for Mercury thermometer 3 against Fluke thermometer is already poor, as compared to other
standard temperature.
thermometers used in the experiment.
In Fig. 8, the data for the Mercury thermometer 3 can be
Altogether, superimposing all temperature datasets from
observed to lie mostly above the standard line rather than
each thermometer against the standard temperature line,
on it. At the same time, however, it can be noted that the
an overall comparison on the accuracy of the
temperatures were observed to be the same for both
thermometers studied can be observed. Fig. 10 shows
heating and cooling directions, hence the overlapping and
this, combining the temperature readings from the
the projection of only black triangles as data points.
previous figures into one graph.
Hysteresis was therefore not observed for this
thermometer. The accuracy of the readings, as denoted by 100
the data points lying above the standard line, may be
Temperature Reading (oC)

90
attributed to the loss in calibration of the thermometer
with use over time. In addition, human bias may still be 80
considered as a contributing factor, however, given the
70
reproducibility of the readings from both directions, may
be considered minimal. 60

50
100
40
Temperature Reading (oC)

90 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

80 Standard Temperature (oC)

Standard Mercury Thermometer 1 - Heating
Mercury Thermometer 1 - Cooling Mercury Thermometer 2 - Heating
70 Mercury Themometer 2 - Cooling Mercury Thermometer 3 - Heating
Mercury Thermometer 3 - Cooling Dial Thermometer - Heating
60 Dial Thermometer - Cooling

Figure 10. Temperature readings from different thermometers

50
against standard.
40
40 50 60 70 80 90 100
The thinner outer lines observed mark the datasets for the
Standard Temperature (oC)
Standard Mercury thermometer 3 and the dial thermometer as
Dial Thermometer - Heating these were the devices with the pronounced difference
Dial Thermometer - Cooling
Figure 9. Parity chart for Dial thermometer against Fluke
from the standard line as discussed earlier. This is
standard temperature. indicative, therefore, that the Mercury thermometers 1
and 2 are more accurate or properly calibrated than the
For the last device, Fig. 9 illustrates data points read two, in terms of providing incremental temperature
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[6]
readings over a temperature rang. This is in comparison measurements. Further, from these two, the overall
with the Mercury thermometer 3 and the dial instrument with the greatest accuracy, referring from
thermometer being considered as more accurate than Figs. 6 to 9 and 11, is thermometer 1.
thermometers 1 and 2 in the previous section according
to their data on the melting and boiling point Nonetheless, as the errors for all thermometers
temperatures alone. To further analyze, Fig. 11 shows the remain below 5%, the devices remain adequate for
plot of the error incurred from each thermometer against measuring temperatures, however could use
the standard temperature. recalibration to produce more accurate data for
future use.
5.00
3.3 Using a Block Calibrator for Temperatures above
4.00 Boiling Point of Water
Supplementing the calibration for temperatures until
3.00 the boiling point of water, Fig. 12 shows the
Error (%)

temperatures obtained from a Mercury thermometer

2.00 and a thermocouple plotted against the standard
temperature from a block calibrator, over the
1.00 temperature range of 100oC to 200oC.

0.00
40.00 55.00 70.00 85.00 100.00 210
Standard Temperature (oC)
190
Temperature Reading (oC)

Mercury Thermometer 1 Mercury Themometer 2

Mercury Thermometer 3 Dial Thermometer
170
Figure 11. Percent error of temperature readings from each
thermometer. 150

From the graph, and as discussed from Figs. 6 to 9, 130

Fig. 11 now directly illustrates that the data obtained 110

from the Mercury thermometer 3 and the dial
thermometer include more error (around 1.5-4%) 90
90 110 130 150 170 190 210
than those read from thermometers 1 and 2 (0 to
Standard Temperature (oC)
1.5%). Hence, the graph supports the earlier Block Calibrator Mercury Thermometer Thermocouple
conclusion wherein, in comparison to the results
from the previous section, the comparison against a Figure 12. Parity chart for Mercury thermometer and
standard temperature test shows that the Mercury thermocouple readings against standard block calibrator
temperature.
thermometers 1 and 2 are more accurate than
thermometer 3 and the dial thermometer.
From the graph, it can be observed that the Mercury
thermometer and the thermocouple studied were both
Considering these two contrasting results, it is more
fairly accurate and precise, having the data points lie
practical to consider Mercury thermometers 1 and 2
close toe the standard line and to each other, with the
to be overall more accurate given their accuracy in
black spheres, representing the temperatures from the
terms of providing the temperature data over a range
Mercury thermometer, only slightly above the standard
of temperatures as compared to the other two
line than the white spheres, representing the temperatures
devices. Further, their results in the previous section
from the thermocouple. The thermometer and the
are also close with those for thermometer 3 and the
thermocouple used can therefore be considered properly
dial thermometer, indicating that they were only
calibrated. However, similar with the previous section, to
found less accurate relative to thermometer 3 and the
further analyze, the plot of the error incurred against the
dial, but nonetheless still accurate as their own
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[7]
standard temperature should be observed, as shown in Lastly, individual observations from the experiment
Fig. 13. are as follows:
(1) The mercury thermometers registered different
5.00
temperatures even though they were in the same
system, thus the requirement for calibration
4.00 (Cellona).
(2) There are varying temperature readings per
3.00 equipment, which also depend on the accuracy of the
Error (%)

person reading it. It was seen that the temperature

2.00 measuring devices were not accurate with the results.
The thermometers must first be cooled before
1.00
applying to another liquid to prevent heat errors
(Dar).
0.00
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 (3) It is difficult to measure temperature from various
Standard Temperature (oC) types of thermometers, since each thermometer
Mercury Thermometer Thermocouple
varies on the scale. Moreover, it is also difficult to
Figure 13. Percent error of Mercury thermometer and perform this experiment as a group because the
thermocouple readings. readings will depend not only on the type of
thermometer used, but on the reading interpretation
From the graph, it can be more accurately observed that of the person reading the temperature. However, in
the thermocouple is more accurate than the Mercury this experiment, we saw a pattern/trend regarding the
thermometer used as clearly shown by the range of their types of thermometers (i.e. certain thermometers
error curves. A constant low percent error was incurred almost always give reading that are higher than the
throughout the range (0-0.5%) for the thermocouple, in others). (Javier).
contrast with that of the Mercury thermometer (1-2%). (4) Temperature readings depend on the person reading
This difference may similarly be explained by comparing the thermometer, and the accuracy of the
the nature of the two thermometers. While the Mercury thermometer itself. Not all thermometers are able to
thermometer relies on the expansion or contraction of the provide the same reading as different types of
Mercury inside the glass, the thermocouple measures the thermometers employ different methods in
temperature according to the potential difference at its determining the temperature of the body being
junctions [6]. Therefore, the time for the expansion or observed. However, it can be noted that digital
contraction of the Mercury thermometer may have been a thermometers help minimize human bias or error in
factor in displaying the accurate temperature at the time a reading temperatures, as they rely on a more
reading was made, in comparison to the instant instantaneous approach, such as the generation of
electromotive force generated and read by the potential due to a temperature difference for the
thermocouple, hence it’s more accurate readings [6]. thermocouple. Nonetheless, calibration is therefore
Nonetheless, similar to the previous section, as the errors important in order to be able to properly adjust
for both devices are very low, at most of 2%, both temperature readings obtained and make use of
thermometers can be considered fairly accurate for proper temperature data when utilizing for studies
measuring temperatures. Recalibration of the (Lopez).
thermometer may be advised to further minimize its (5) The different temperature measuring devices used in
relative error. In addition, the noticeable outlier this experiment gave slightly different temperature
temperature in the data set of the Mercury thermometer, readings. This emphasizes the importance of
at 190oC standard temperature, may be attributed to an properly calibrating devices as well as establishment
error during the operation of the block calibrator. of a fixed scale for measurement (Soriano).
Similarly, human bias, however may be considered
minimal due to the accuracy of the data in this section,
remains a present factor as in all parts of the experiment.
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[8]
IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION Celsius scale, and Rankine, for the Fahrenheit
scale [8]. To convert from one unit to the other,
From the data collected and the graphs presented, it can the following equations, found in Table 8, are
be observed that from the temperature measuring device used.
tested, the temperatures measured deviated from the
temperature indicated by the block calibrator. These may 2. What is the property of mercury which makes it
have been caused by deviations of pressure from 1 atm as an ideal medium for liquid-in-glass thermometer?
well as by instances where the device touched the walls
of the beaker. The thermocouple gave the lowest percent The property that makes mercury the ideal
error while the dial thermometer has the highest. medium for liquid-in-glass thermometers is its
Hysteresis was observed and mostly evident in the dial coefficient of expansion. Theoretically, this liquid
thermometer. The mercury thermometer and could be replaced with other liquids, such as water
thermocouple had minimal error however it was and alcohol. However, water has very low
observed that as the temperature increased, the error also coefficient of expansion, having little perceivable
increased. Among the five thermometers, the changes in volume once subjected to heating or
thermocouple is the most accurate. In measuring the cooling. Conversely, alcohols have a high
temperatures of different objects, it is important that the coefficient of expansion, varying volumes even at
devices being used are properly calibrated in accordance the slightest change in temperature. At the middle
with international standards. Furthermore, external of these two liquids is mercury, in which is
pressure correction and emergent steam correction should considered to be the best medium, since it has
be taken into account to obtain more accurate data. It is greater coefficient of expansion than water,
also recommended in the calibration using a standard making it easier to visibly see volume changes,
thermocouple to repeat the run to avoid hysteresis. and has lower coefficient of expansion than
Repeating the setup instead of cooling the already hot alcohol, making it easier to read the measurement,
water may avoid the bias error committed in the since it doesn’t drastically change its volume [9].
experiment.
3. Describe the principle of a thermocouple. Give at
least 5 types of thermocouples not mentioned in
V. ANSWERS TO GUIDE QUESTIONS the discussion. How are they classified? Specify
the temperature range and limitations of each
1. What are the various units used in temperature type.
measurements? State their origin and the
equations to convert one to the other. A thermocouple is one of the many temperature
measuring devices available in the market. It
Temperature is measured in two ways, the relative operates by having two dissimilar metal wires,
scale and the absolute scale. First, the relative joined at both ends, while one end is heated. Once
scale is the temperature measurement wherein the the junction is heated or cooled, a certain voltage
zero points were set by the respective inventors. is produced that is correlated with the change in
These units are expressed in degrees Celsius, temperature of the system [10]. There are several
named after Andres Celsius, and degrees types of thermocouples, which has varying
Fahrenheit, named after Daniel Gabriel temperature range and limitations. These types are
Fahrenheit. It is known that at zero degrees listed in Table 9.
Celsius, the water is frozen [7]. However, that
zero point isn’t the lowest possible temperature 4. Explain the reason why temperature of the vapor
that the atoms would stop moving. This is measured just above the surface of the liquid.
temperature is known to be the absolute zero
temperature, which is based on the absolute Once the liquid boils, it produces vapors above its
temperature scale, expressed in Kelvin, for the surface. Hence, it is logical to place the
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[9]
 temperature-measuring devices just above that temperature devices or RTD’s exploits the change
surface, since that region is where the vapor in resistance of a material as temperature is
would settle. Similarly, placing it closer to the changed. On the other hand, infrared temperature
liquid might simple measure the heat produced of measuring devices determine the body’s
the liquid from the boiling process, not the vapor temperature through the radiation the material
temperature itself. This is also the reason why the emits. The bimetallic temperature measuring
device shouldn’t be placed too far above the devices, which exploit the difference in thermal
liquid, since the evaporated vapor would simply expansions of various metals. The amount of
mix together with the air in the space in between bending produced from this device is correlated
the device and liquid. with the temperature of the system. Lastly,
change-of-state temperature measuring devices,
5. Describe at least four modern instruments to which takes advantage of the change in
measure temperature. appearance or by having an indicator once a
certain temperature is reached [12].
Currently there are many different temperature-
measuring devices, which vary primarily due to its
purpose and application. The resistance

REFERENCES

[1] LBYCHED Manual [PDF Document]

[2] Available online at: https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/thermalP/Lesson-1/Temperature-and-Thermometers
[3] Available online at: https://www.engineersedge.com/thermodynamics/temperature_scales.htm
[4] Available online at https://icllabs.com/using-a-partial-immersion-thermometer-incorrectly-immersed/
[5] Available online at https://www.explainthatstuff.com/thermometers.html
[6] Available online at https://www.brighthubengineering.com/manufacturing-technology/53682-what-is-a-
thermocouple-how-thermocouple-works/
[7] Process Variables Temperature [PDF Document].
[8] Available online at: https://www.livescience.com/25959-atoms-colder-than-absolute-zero.html
[9] Available online at: https://www.scienceabc.com/innovation/why-is-mercury-used-in-thermometers.html
[10] Available online at: https://www.omega.com/prodinfo/thermocouples.html
[11] Available online at: https://www.thermocoupleinfo.com/
[12] Available online at: https://sea.omega.com/ph/prodinfo/temperaturemeasurement.html

Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[10]
 APPENDICES

A. Raw Data

Table 3. Melting and boiling temperatures of different thermometers.

Mercury thermometer Mercury thermometer Mercury thermometer
Dial Thermometer Thermocouple
1 2 3
Melting Melting Boiling Melting Boiling Melting Boiling
Time Temp Boiling Temp Temp Temp Temp Temp Boiling Melting Temp
(s) (oC) Temp (oC) (oC) (oC) (oC) (oC) (oC) Temp (oC) Temp (oC) (oC)
20 4.0 97.8 0 98 2.0 98 18 96 0.8 99.7
40 2.0 98.5 0 98.2 0.1 99 4 98 0.2 99.7
60 1.0 98.5 0 98.2 0 99 4 99 0.1 99.6
80 1.0 98.7 0 98.2 0 100 2 99.5 0 99.6
100 0.1 98.7 0 98.2 0 100 2 99.5 0 99.6
120 0.1 98.9 98.2 0 100 2 99.5 0 99.6
140 0.1 98.9 0 100 2 99.5 0 99.6
160 0.1 98.9 100 2 99.5 0
180 0.1 98.9
200   98.9                

Table 4. Measuring total Mercury thermometer length.

Thermomete Lowest Maximum o
Distance (cm) C/cm
r Reading (oC) Reading (oC)
1 -10 356 21.70 16.87
2 -11 112 17.75 6.93
3 -10 360 16.70 22.16

Table 5. Measuring calibration for the Mercury thermometers.

Thermomete Measured ice Measured boiling o
Distance (cm) C/cm
r point (oC) point (oC)
1 0.1 98.9 6.15 16.07
2 0 98.2 15.75 6.23
3 0 100 4.95 20.20

Table 6. Comparison of temperature readings against a standard instrument.

Fluke Mercury thermometer 1 Mercury thermometer 2 Mercury thermometer 3 Dial Thermometer
Standar Heatin Coolin Erro Heatin Coolin Erro Heatin Coolin Erro Heatin Coolin Erro
d (oC) g (oC) g (oC) Ave. r (%) g (oC) g (oC) Ave. r (%) g (oC) g (oC) Ave. r (%) g (oC) g (oC) Ave. r (%)
40.5 41.0 40.5
40.00 41.00 40.00 0 1.25 42.00 40.00 0 2.50 42.00 41.00 41.50 3.75 40.00 41.00 0 1.25
45.0 45.5 44.5
45.00 46.00 44.00 0 0.00 46.00 45.00 0 1.11 46.00 46.00 46.00 2.22 44.00 45.00 0 1.11
50.5 50.0 49.0
50.00 51.00 50.00 0 1.00 50.00 50.00 0 0.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 4.00 48.00 50.00 0 2.00
55.5 55.5 55.5
55.00 56.00 55.00 0 0.91 56.00 55.00 0 0.91 56.00 56.00 56.00 1.82 56.00 55.00 0 0.91
60.0 59.5 59.5
60.00 60.00 60.00 0 0.00 58.00 61.00 0 0.83 62.00 62.00 62.00 3.33 58.00 61.00 0 0.83
65.0 65.0 66.0
65.00 66.00 64.00 0 0.00 65.00 65.00 0 0.00 66.00 66.00 66.00 1.54 66.00 66.00 0 1.54
70.0 70.0 69.5
70.00 70.00 70.00 0 0.00 69.00 71.00 0 0.00 72.00 72.00 72.00 2.86 68.00 71.00 0 0.71
75.0 74.5 73.5
75.00 76.00 74.00 0 0.00 75.00 74.00 0 0.67 76.00 76.00 76.00 1.33 73.00 74.00 0 2.00
80.0 80.0 79.0
80.00 80.00 80.00 0 0.00 80.00 80.00 0 0.00 82.00 82.00 82.00 2.50 78.00 80.00 0 1.25
85.0 84.5 83.0
85.00 86.00 84.00 0 0.00 85.00 84.00 0 0.59 86.00 86.00 86.00 1.18 83.00 83.00 0 2.35
90.0 89.5 88.0
90.00 90.00 90.00 0 0.00 89.00 90.00 0 0.56 92.00 92.00 92.00 2.22 88.00 88.00 0 2.22
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[11]
 95.0 94.0 92.5
95.00 96.00 94.00 0 0.00 94.00 94.00 0 1.05 96.00 96.00 96.00 1.05 93.00 92.00 0 2.63
98.0 98.5 100.0 98.0
100.00 98.00 98.00 0 2.00 99.00 98.00 0 1.50 100.00 100.00 0 0.00 98.00 98.00 0 2.00

Table 7. Using block calibrator for temperatures above the boiling point of water.
Block Mercury Error Thermocouple Error
Calibrator (oC) thermometer (oC) (%) (oC) (%)
100 102 2.00 100 0
110 112 1.82 110.3 0.273
120 122 1.67 120 0
130 132 1.54 130 0
140 142 1.43 140 0
150 152 1.33 150 0
160 162 1.25 160.4 0
170 172 1.18 170 0
180 182 1.11 180 0
190 194 2.11 190 0
200 202 1.00 200 0

Table 8. Temperature Unit Conversions

From To Equation
Degrees Celsius Degrees Fahrenheit T(oF) = T(oC) (1.8) + 32 (1)
Degrees Celsius Kelvin T(K) = T(oC) + 273.15 (2)
Degrees Fahrenheit Rankine T(R) = T(oF) + 459.67 (3)
Rankine Kelvin T(K) = (1.8) T(R) (4)

Table 9. Thermocouple Temperature Ranges [11]

Thermocouple Type Temperature Range Standard Error Limit Special Error Limit
K -454 to 2,300 oF (–270 to 1260 oC) +/- 2.2C or +/- .75% +/- 1.1C or 0.4%
J -346 to 1,400F (-210 to 760C) +/- 2.2C or +/- .75% +/- 1.1C or 0.4%
T -454 to 700F (-270 to 370C) +/- 1.0C or +/- .75% +/- 0.5C or 0.4%
E -454 to 1600F (-270 to 870C) +/- 1.7C or +/- 0.5% +/- 1.0C or 0.4%
N -454 to 2300F (-270 to 392C +/- 2.2C or +/- .75% +/- 1.1C or 0.4%
S -58 to 2700F (-50 to 1480C) +/- 1.5C or +/- .25% +/- 0.6C or 0.1%
R -58 to 2700F (-50 to 1480C) +/- 1.5C or +/- .25% +/- 0.6C or 0.1%
B 32 to 3100F (0 to 1700C) +/- 0.5% +/- 0.25%

B. Sample Calculations

 Scale calibration for the total length of Mercury thermometer 1

℃ (356 ℃−(−10 ℃ )) ℃
= =16.87
cm 21.7 cm cm

 Percent error for thermocouple at standard temperature 110oC in calibration with block calibrator
|110℃−110.3 ℃|
Error= ×100=0.273 %
110 ℃
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[12]
Cruz, Dela Cruz, Francisco(your last names only) Dr. Lawrence P. Belo
[13]