--

Investigating Resistivity Dependence on Mine Dimensions

Vásquez Apolinar, María Jimena1; Núñez Olaya, Juan Pablo2; Morales Martínez, Andrés Mauricio3
1
vasquezjimena22@gmail.com
2
jpno_0612@hotmail.com
3
mora200217@hotmail.com
First and Last version. Made on September 2 of 2018 for Physics SL year II – Colegio Nueva York. Presented to: Gabriel Palacios

Abstract— Is natural to observe an electrical resistance on different materials. Each individual property, refers to the capacity of
the object to increase its resistance in relation with the dimensions of the body. In this experimental practice, the dimensions of a
mine, were variated and by means of a potential divider, its relation current / voltage were identified. From here, the resistance was
calculated and then with regard to length and transversal section area, the resistivity was defined for different dimensions of the same
mine; Finally the average was used in order to affirm that not only the length is directly proportional to resistance, but that the mine,
is an acceptable conductor (111 Words)

Index Terms— Electromagnetism, Potential Difference, Resistivity, Electric Current, Ohmic Materia

I. INTRODUCTION

Potential difference among materials, allows electrons displace

TABLE 1: Resistivity of different metals at 20 ºC
alongside conductors. Thus, an electric current is the created.
According to ohms law, this current (I), is given by the ratio between Substance Resistivity, ρ x 10-8 (Ω • m)
the potential difference – voltage (V), and the resistance of the
Silver 1.47
material. Copper 1.72
𝑉 Gold 2.44
𝐼= (1.1)
𝑅 Aluminum 5.75
Tungsten 5.25
However, for different kinds of materials, the resistance would Steel 20
variate, affecting the current of the electric circuit due to inverse Lead 22
proportionality at constant Voltage. Therefore, material properties Mercury 95
change the capacity of the object for resisting the electron flow,
increasing resistance and reducing the electric current. Overall, each Temperature, rise up as an important factor due to thermal concepts.
material may have a constant of proportionality between dimensions Is said that any material will present a body expansion – dilatation,
of the object and resistance. Commonly known as resistivity, is the due to temperature increase. Hence, a temperature variation may
numerical value that states the capability of an object for resisting the change transactional area, of the object and thus the resistance of the
electric current at constant temperature, depending of the body material. In fact, resistivity directly depends on body temperature to
dimensions. Higher transversal area, implies increasing the express the resistance change in terms of thermal energy transfer.
instantaneous surface for the electrons to flow – thus although (Sears & Zemansky, 2010)
maintaining a constant drift electron speed, area increase suggests a
higher electron flow per unit area among time – and consequently As expressed in Ohms law – equation (1.1), at constant resistance
provoking a current raise. Following equation mathematically its exists a linear proportionality between Voltage and Current. When
expresses, the relationship between Resistance (R), tendency between those variables are not linearly expressed, its
known as no-Ohmic material. For Ohmic materials, as the mine used
𝐿𝜌 for this experiment, at constant temperature follows the relationship
𝑅= (1.2)
𝐴 expressed by equation (1.2).

Isolating for resistivity, is stated then that resistance and resistivity Understanding the fundamentals of material properties under
present a directly proportional relationship, with the ratio of Area and potential differences, allow scientists determining the most
Length as the proportionality constant. Table 1, expresses the appropriate material for either reducing current flow o increasing it –
resistivity variation for different materials at constant temperature. these principles are the basis for constructing the electronic projects

1949-307X © 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information. (Inserted by IEEE)
————————————————————————————————————–
that a present in our daily life. Understanding resistance dependence
on material dimensions, also allow optimizing the structure for
electronic devices and construct the path for a more technological and
useful development.
II. Experimental Development
A. Planning
From background information, the research equation that is aimed to
be solved yield on: What is the relationship between mine length at
constant circular diameter, and electric resistance at constant
potential difference?
following list contains the materials used for the practice.
• 2 Graphic Mines with Table 2 Dimensions – (E)
• Ruler - 0.1cm
• Voltage source – Variate According Table 2 – (A)
• Connection wires
• Current Sensor, Vernier / ±0,01 A - (C)
• Voltage Sensor, Vernier /±0,1 V - (D)
• Lab Quest 2, Vernier © - (B)
Henceforth, the experimental montage may be described as
follows:

The hypothesis of this research, is that, according to theory,

regarding resistance dependence on material dimensions,
increasing the length of the mines, but maintaining a constant
circular radius, will only variate slightly the electric resistance
expressing a positive correlation. Higher the length, higher the
final resistance.

The aims of this laboratory practice would be:

1. to determine the resistivity of a pencil lead according to its
longitude
2. to determine the resistivity of a pencil lead according to its
area
Figure 1: Potential Divider Based Experimental Montage Diagram1
B. Experimental Procedure
In order to accomplish the aims of the research, two mines
were used as connecting bridge for a continuous circuit. Hence, C. Results and Analysis
having a potential difference, allow the electric flow current among Table below, presents the raw collected data for each mine length
the mine. Using Vernier © Current and Voltage sensor, a potential and diameter used. Detailed Uncertainty propagation is described in
divider was build – Refer to image 1.1, allowing a data gathering for section D, of Experimental Development.
the voltage drop among the mine. Firstly, voltage and current were
measured for the mine of 0.2 mm, at a fixed length of 12 cm, and TABLE 3: Raw Data Results Table for different mine
gradually, increasing the potential difference for the close circuit
dimensions
from 0,5 V to 4,5 V, for intervals of 0,5 V – Yielding 8 Voltages.
Afterwards, the process was repeated for several larger segments of Diameter, d Length, L Voltage, V Current, I
(m±0.0001) (m ±0.01) (V ±0.1) (A ±0.01)
the mine, although variating the voltage difference intervals. Finally,
the process was recreated for the mine of 0.7 mm variating Potential 0.5 0.06
difference and mine length as well. The following table expresses 1.0 0.15
the lengths and voltages values for the experimental practice: 1.5 0.19
2.0 0.25
1.2 x 10-1
TABLE 2: Mine dimensions and Voltage used for 2.5 0.32
experimental trials 3.0 0.39
3.5 0.47
Diameter, d (m) Length, L (m) Voltage Boundaries*, V (V) 2.0 x 10-4 4.0 0.52
0.5 0.23
1.2 x 10-1 0.5 – 4.0 (0.5) 3.0 x 10-3
1.0 0.48
2.0 x 10-4 3.0 x 10-3 0.5 – 1.0 (0.5)
6.1 x 10-2 0.5 – 2.5 (0.5) 0.5 0.06
5.8 x 10-3 0.5 – 1.0 (0.5) 1.0 0.15
7.0 x 10-4 6.1 x 10-2 1.5 0.19
3.0 x 10-3 0.5 – 1.0 (0.5)
2.0 0.25
*Values Inside Brackets states the intervals separation for the ranges 2.5 0.32
presented 0.5 0.23
5.8 x 10-3
2.0 x 10-4 1.0 0.43
Furthermore, for simplifying the experimental procedure, the 3.0 x 10-3 0.5 0.30

1 Own graphic creation Inspired in Vector Online Image

Page 2 of 4
 ————————————————————————————————————–
1.0 0.60

TABLE 4: Regressions coefficients for Linear

Graphical visualization for mine with diameter 2.0 x 10-4 m and regression on graph 1
length 1.2 x 10-1 m ended up as:

GRAPH 1: Current Variation With Voltage Change for mine with Diameter, Length, Coefficients, Resistance,
diameter 2.0 x 10-4 m and length 1.2 x 10-1 m d (m) L (m) C (V•A-1) R(Ω)
0.35 1.2 x 10-1 0.124 8.06
Mean Regression
Minimum Regression 2.0 x 10-4 3.0 x 10-3 0.500 2.00
0.3 Maxium Regression
6.1 x 10-2 0.124 8.06
0.25 5.8 x 10-3 0.400 2.50
2.0 x 10-4
3.0 x 10-3 0.600 1.67
Current / A

0.2 f(x)1 = 0.124x + 0.008

f(x)2 = 0.137x - 0.0185
0.15 f(x)3 = 0.126x + 0.006 Graphing, resistance against length yields on:
0.1
GRAPH 2: Resistance change on different lengths for 0.2 mm
Mine
0.05 10

9
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
8
Voltage / V
7

Creating a linear relation among each dataset – for each mine length Resistance / Ω 6

/ diameter, allow us determine the constant of proportionality between 5

current and voltage. Hence, the following table shows the coefficients 4
y = 51.646x + 2.8724
(slopes) of the regression of each mine dimension – recall table 3. 3

2
TABLE 4: Regressions coefficients for Linear regression 1
on graph 1 0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
Diameter, d (m) Length, L (m) Coefficients, C (V•A-1) Length / m
1.2 x 10-1 0.124
2.0 x 10-4 3.0 x 10-3 0.500 From resistivity formulae – equation (1.2), we may rearrange the
6.1 x 10-2 0.124 expression isolating for resistivity (R). Hence:
5.8 x 10-3 0.400
2.0 x 10-4 𝜌𝐿 𝜌
3.0 x 10-3 0.600
𝑅= = 𝐿 (2.3)
𝐴 𝐴
Calculated Coefficients represents the rate of change for the current
among a voltage variation. Hence refers to the constant of Therefore, multiplying the slope for the area of the mine, yield on the
proportionality for the current to voltage relation: resistivity of the mine. For area calculation, is used the area of a
circular structure, assuming that the transversal area of the mine
𝐼𝛼𝑉 (2.1) describes a perfect circumference.

Recalling ohms law – equation (1.1), the relations expressed on 𝑑 2

𝐴 = 𝜋𝑟 2 = 𝜋 ( ) (2.4)
equation (2.1), may be rewritten in terms of Voltage to express the 2
electric current, with 1/R as coefficient for the relation. Hence:
Therefore for 0.2 mm mine, the area is given by:
𝑉 1
𝐼= = 𝑉 (2.2) 2
𝑅 𝑅 2.0 𝑥 10−4
𝐴0.2 = 𝜋 ( ) = 3.14 𝑥 10−8 𝑚2 (2.5)
2
Therefore, the coefficients from the linear regression would refer
to 1/R. Isolating for resistance, the following table expresses the And finally the resistivity is expressed as:
reciprocal for Coefficients (C).
𝜌0.2 = (3.14 𝑥 10−8 )(51.6) = 1.62 𝑛𝛺𝑚 (2.6)

Page 3 of 4
————————————————————————————————————–
IV. References
Repeating the process for the 0.7 mm mine the resultant resistivity Sears, & Zemansky. (2010). Físcia Universitaria (Vol. I ). Mexico
yielded on, 257 nΩm. Hence, both values have a mean of 129 nΩm. D.F: Pearson .
For the uncertainty, the half of distance between both extrema’s is Tsokos. (2014). Physics for the IB Diploma. Oxford : Oxford .
Ravaioli, F. T. (2014). Fundamentals of Applied
used; Hence:
Electromagnetics (7th Edition). Pretince Hall .
257 − 129
𝛥𝜌𝐹 = = 64𝑛𝛺𝑚 (2.7)
2

Henceforth, the resistivity of the mine is (129 ± 64) nΩm.

III. Conclusions

In conclusion, using the potential divider like structure we could

determine the electric properties of a material – mine, by means of
Ohms law principles and resistivity formulae. As we can observe in
results section, the resistivity of the mine, is although much lower
compared to material such as mercury, it still not low enough to reach
the conductive properties of metals like silver. From these results,
further analysis can be made for several materials, leading to a
possible new material with better properties than the already
investigated conductors, as well as more appropriates characteristics
for certain situations. In the case of mine, and graphite, is important
to recall the remarkable discoveries of Graphene, whose electrical
properties exceed the boundaries of metals and other low resistivity
conductors, allowing scientists and engineers create more advanced
technological systems, with increased efficiency.

Moreover, we answer the research question, and accepted the

hypothesis, validating the fact that an increase in length would
provoke an increase in resistance to electric current. Furthermore, as
the material was constant for both mines – 0.2mm and 0.7mm, we
average the resultant resistivity to find an approximate range for the
resistivity of the mine.

In order to increase the precision, for the experiment, we suggest

increasing the trials, and investigating more different diameters. This
would reduce the random error, and would allow identifying a clearer
pattern for the numerical relationship shown. Moreover, having a
reference value, may permit defining the accuracy of the experiment,
and the validity of the method used. After the experiment, we realize
the importance of identifying the properties materials, which allows
scientist on the construction of more complex system which would
adapt to each situation. Finally, we learn the natural resistance that
every material can have to electric current, and the variety of
characteristics for each material. This knowledge is the path to a better
technological future, lead by physics and fundamental electrical
principles.

Page 4 of 4