Monday, March 13, 2006

Science Paper Towel Absorbency Experiment Report

Question: Which of the four paper towels: Job Squad, Bounty, Kirkland, or Brawny’s is most absorbent?

Purpose: To find out which paper towel will be most useful, when a major “spill disaster” occurs.

Hypothesis: I think that the winner of this contest will be Job Squad, because it is very thick, tough, and has a lot of space and fiber threads to absorb the water.

Procedures: The materials you will need to test this hypothesis the way table 1 did it, are: a plastic container about 10x15 inches in size, each of the four paper towels, a measuring cup/beaker, and 100ml of water. An eyedropper is optional.

Pour 100ml of water into the plastic container; make sure the amount is exact. Cut the four paper towels to the same width and length (usually Job Squad is the smallest). Take one of the paper towels, and absorb as much water from the container as physically possible, then squeeze it out as hard as you can. Pour what is left in the container into the measuring cup. Record the results. Repeat with the other three paper towels; remember to refill the amount of water until it is up to 100ml.

Observation/Data:

Brawny’s…………………………9/100ml absorbed

Job Squad……………………… 17/100ml absorbed

Kirkland…………………………10/100ml absorbed

Bounty………………………… 5/100ml absorbed

Conclusion and Analysis:

After much analysis, we come to a conclusion: the one paper towel that is most absorbent is in fact Job Squad. It absorbed 5ml more than Kirkland, 6ml more than Brawny’s, and three times as much as Bounty. But the size of the paper towel is smallest, so the others might absorb more in real life, since we do not like to cut our paper towels to Job Squad’s size when we use them.

New Questions:

The primary question was solved, but when the conclusion was made, there were other unsolved questions that popped up at us, like “If Job Squad absorbs the most, is it also most expensive?” or “will there be a big difference if we didn’t squeeze the water out?” and many more.

No comments: