BETWEEN THE FREEZING AND BOILING-POINTS. 
235 
First Set. —Heating wire resting on sides of fine-bore tube. 
Mean Temperature, 26°'l C. November 4, 1898. 
do. 
Q- 
4 • 2 Q d0. 
EC. 
Difference. 
Di ff./dd. 
Larc 
;e flow. 
8-2666 
•600605 
20-8528 
21-6696 
•8158 
•09870 
8-2759 
•599645 
20-8429 
21-6624 
•8195 
•09902 
Small flow. 
8-3056 
•276991 
9-6624 
10-3699 
•7075 
•08518 
8-3043 
•276888 
9-6573 
10-3668 
•7095 
•08544 
Second Set.— Heating wire drawn straight through fine-bore tube. 
Mean Temperature, 27° C. November 21, 1898. 
dd. 
Q- 
4-2 Q dO. 
EC. 
Difference. 
Di fi./dd. 
• 
Large 
flow. 
8-4676 
•600527 
21-3571 
21-6677 
•3106 
.03668 
8-4861 
f 
•599570 
21-3696 
21-6695 
•2999 
•03534 
Small flow. 
8-8111 
•271465 
10-0460 
10-6749 
•6289 
•07138 
8-8144 
•271088 
10-0358 
10-6724 
•6366 
•07223 
The mean temperature in the two sets is so nearly the same that in comparing the 
two we can for the moment neglect the temperature coefficient of the radiation loss 
from the glass surface. Without otherwise disturbing the experimental conditions, 
the heat-loss for a flow of '60 gramme per second has been reduced exactly one-third 
by simply drawing the heating-wire central. The temperature of the outflowing 
water being the same in the two cases, the difference in the heat-loss between the 
two sets gives a measure of the space represented by the diagram in fig. 2 (p. 154), 
between the lines drawn for condition 1 and condition 2. 
The value of the heat-loss for the same calorimeter and same flow, but introducing 
the device for eliminating stream-line motion, is very nearly '06 watt per degree rise, 
which lies midway between '09 and '03 watt as given here respectively. For the 
small flow, as might be expected, the heat-loss is more nearly the same in the two 
2 h 2 
