Conclusively, the above experiment was not as successful as expected; it had a percentage error of about 22.63%. Notably, it will be upon the person doing the experiments to be keen and incentive whilst doing the experiment to ensure a more successful experiment.
These errors might have been occasioned by misreading the measurements therefore giving inaccurate records; Equipments used were inefficient therefore unreliable and inadequate time was given for expansion.
Some of these errors can be reduced by recording several readings of the water temperature, allowing adequate time of heating of the metal by the steam do expansion and being accurate and keen whilst reading the measurements.
Thermal expansion is very vital for engineering format mostly in contraction and expansion, due to the temperature variations. Models used in these formats that have distinct coefficients of thermal expansion may not give room for contraction and expansion of units thus causing stress. This can be demonstrated during the building of bridges and buildings (Moaveni, 2011).
Notably in welding, its important to use different coefficients of expansions to join two different metals. This is so because while metals are cooling down, tensile stress will be induced in one metal whilst compressive stress will be induced in the corresponding metal. Tensile stress may make the subjected metal to occasion a hot crack during welding or rather a cold crack in service, otherwise the asaid stresses may be relieved mechanically or thermally. A relevant example of this is the austenitic stainless steel/ ferrittic steel pipe butt joints that are viably used in energy-conservations mechanisms (Moaveni, 2011).
Conclusively, the experiment can be noted as prospective with a minimal percentage error of 4.55%. Notably, for accurate results these errors can be reduced by various ways such as noting down multiple readings and conducting the experiment several times, thereafter