IB Prized Writing Sevenoaks School IB Prized Writing 2014 | Page 41

Robert Cinca - Physics 400 surge current time against 1/(final steady current) 2 surge current time 1/(final steady current) 2 using against the excel model using the excel model line of best fit: Δt = (7.3 ± 2.1) I -2 + (15 ± 37) line of best fit: Δt = (7.3 ± 2.1) I -2 + (15 ± 37) 400 350 350 300 300 250 maximum gradient line: Δt = 9.9 I -2 - 34 250 200 maximum gradient line: Δt = 9.9 I -2 - 34 200 150 minimum gradient line: Δt = 5.7 I -2 + 40 150 100 minimum gradient line: Δt = 5.7 I -2 + 40 100 50 50 0 0 0 0 10 10 20 30 current) 2 , I -2 /A -2 20 1/(final steady 30 1/(final steady 40 50 60 40 50 60 current) 2 , I -2 /A -2 Figure 16: Excel Model Graph Figure 16: Excel Model Graph My model had similarities with my experimental results but also some differences. My model had similarities with my experimental results but also some differences. They were similar, in that: They were similar, in that:  The model showed a surge current. showed up a with surge  The model ended a current. reasonable temperature for a filament bulb 11 11  The model ended was up with reasonable temperature for a in filament bulb (when the model used a to get the normal final current the 6.5V 0.30A (when the model was used to get the normal final current in the 6.5V 0.30A filament bulb, I recorded a temperature of 2850K±50K). filament bulb, I recorded a temperature of 2850K±50K). They were different, in that: They were different, in that:  The excel model reached the final current sooner than the experiment (the  surge The excel model reached final current than the experiment current times for my the experiment are sooner larger by a factor of three). (the current times for my experiment are larger by a rather factor than of three).  surge The model had an instantaneous maximum current, a short delay  as The seen model had experiment. an instantaneous maximum current, rather than a short delay in my as seen in my experiment. The possible reason for this difference is that in the model self-inductance of the 12 The possible reason this difference is that in the force model self-inductance of the (e.m.f.) was not included. filament, which would for create a back electromotive 12 (e.m.f.) volume was not on included. filament, reason which would create a back electromotive Another could be the possible expansion of force the filament’s heating. Another reason the the possible expansion area of the filament’s volume on heating. I have taken the could length be and cross-sectional of the filament as constant, with I have taken the length and expansion. the cross-sectional area filament as constant, with no consideration of volume Tungsten has of a the volume expansion coefficient no consideration of volume expansion. Tungsten has a volume expansion coefficient 11 “Types of Lighting: Incandescent Bulbs”, The Pennsylvania State University [Online][Date Accessed 11 20/07/13] https://www.e-education.psu.edu/egee102/node/2035 (The Pennsylvania State “Types of URL: Lighting: Incandescent Bulbs”, The Pennsylvania State University [Online][Date Accessed University) URL: https://www.e-education.psu.edu/egee102/node/2035 (The Pennsylvania State 20/07/13] University) th 12 “Self-Inductance”, A Level Physics, 4 Edition (Muncaster, 1993), p658 12 th “Self-Inductance”, A Level Physics, 4 Edition (Muncaster, 1993), p658 40 22