Tap Water Experiment: Permittivity Measurement Test
1552 Words7 Pages
1. Practical Work
a. Permittivity Measurement Test
i. Permittivity in Solids
At the temperature of 22°C, Air has permittivity of approximately 1. Whereas at the tem-perature of 65°C it has permittivity of 2.5 and at the temperature of 150°C it has permittivity of approximately 6.
Air doesn’t change significantly with temperature. However, the results obtained indicate that at high temperatures the permittivity of air increases. This can be due to the movement of the test port cables.
Material A, at the temperature of 22°C has permittivity of approximately 4. Whereas at the temperature of 65°C, its permittivity was of approximately 6 and at the temperature of 150°C its permittivity was of 10.
Material B, at the temperature of 22°C has permittivity…show more content… It’s a large value as it has hydrogen bonding which affects the way it transmits electrical energy.
It was expected that the permittivity of Tap Water was of approximately 80 however the result obtained was of 40. This can be because the probe was dented while calibrating.
The permittivity of Tap Water and DI Water are similar which means that the DI water is normally pure however the one used might not be DI water, i.e. it could be DI water mixed with Tap water.
Oil has permittivity of approximately 2 due to its density, i.e. the less dense an oil, the less number of oil molecules there will be per unit volume [5], which means there’s less interac-tion with the electric fields and hence a decrease in the dielectric constant.
Methanol has permittivity of approximately 14.
The mixture of DI water and Methanol has permittivity of 31. Compared to the permittivity of methanol by its own, this mixture has a high permittivity and this can be due to the fact that alcohols and water are miscible because water is a polar molecule so it will attract the –OH group of…show more content… As the impedance of the load was of 50 ohms and the magnitude of the probe suspended in air was the highest compared to the magnitude of the probes dipped into the fluids, this means that the impedance was close to 50.
Possible experimental errors that might have affected this test might be the physical move-ment of the coaxial cable while measuring the probes. This affects the results and one way of preventing this might be by using equipment that can hold the coaxial cable. One way of verifying if it’s the physical movement of the coaxial cable that affects the results is by mak-ing the measurements using equipment that can hold the coaxial cable.
Time drift is another factor that can cause errors in results given. One way of verifying if it’s the time drift that’s affecting the results is by measuring each container after minutes, hours and days. And then plot the calculated standard deviation and see if the results are spread out.
The fact that the measurement system heats up by time can also affect the results as over time the calibration