YEAR 8 SCIENCE

Practical Investigation Report

Investigation conducted by: Charlie Officer

Partner: Ben Sorrenson + Harry Terry
Date: 18/6/15
Title of Prac: Rusting and Salt Water

Aim:
To find out what liquid can make the rusting process slower.

Hypothesis:
It was expected that the Vaseline and the oil would slow the rusting process down.

Apparatus:

4 Test tubes
Test Tube rack
0.1% Concentration of Salt in Water
Vaseline
Oil
4 Iron Nails
2 Beakers
Test Tubes

Diagram:

Oil
Iron
Nail

Nail + Air

Nail + 0.1%
Salt Water

MG Science-Practical Reports

Vaseline Nail +
0.1% Salt Water

Oil Nail + 0.1%

Salt Water

Method:
1. Once the test tube rack was set up, place four test tubes into it.
2. The first tube was left alone and 0.1 concentration of water was placed into
the three other tubes
3. An iron nail was placed into the first two tubes.
4. In the third, a nail was coated in Vaseline and was placed into the tube
5. In the fourth, a nail was coated in oil and was placed into the tube.
6. The tubes was labelled, they were air, water, Vaseline, and oil.
7. The results were recorded over 10 days

Results:
After 10 days, the nails were inspected and the results were as follows:
Air The nail in the air was rusted fully.
Salt Water After the 10 Days the nail in this tube was also rusted
Vaseline The nail that was coated in the Vaseline was slightly rusted
Oil And the nail that the coated with oil hardly rusted.

Discussion / Analysis:
1. What do the results indicate or suggest?
The results suggest that when the nail is coated in Vaseline or oil, it slows
down the rusting process
2. Relate findings to theory and classroom work as well as real life
experiences.
The use of Vaseline and oil is found in real life when used on machinery.
When oil is used to coat and keep the engines of cars clean and to stop them
from rusting.
3. Answer any questions associated with the experiment. Answers need to be in
full sentences and questions need to be copied or repeated it in the answer.
There was no questions in the experiment.
4. What are some possible sources of error in the results?
In this experiment, there are many factors that could have gone wrong. One
of them was that the room temperature changed and could have affected the
end results. Also, the level of coating that was applied to the nails could have
been different.
5. If your experiment didnt work well, try and explain why.
It worked well but it was hard to take home. The End result was as we
predicted so I think the goal was achieved.
6. How could this experiment be improved?
More different test tubes. Maybe a couple with different concentrations of
salt water.
7. What are suggestions for further research?
For further research, find out if different concentrations of water effect the
time it takes for an iron nail to rust.

Conclusion:
The end result of the prac determined that the aim and the hypothesis were correct.
It was found that the oil and the Vaseline did slow down the rusting process.
MG Science-Practical Reports

Year 8 Science Practical Rubric

Name
Title
Partners Name
Date
Aim

Hypothesis

3
Clear and
logical, includes
explanation

Materials /
Apparatus and
Diagram
Method

Results
(Graph/Table/
photos)

Discussion and
Analysis

Conclusion

Student
Conduct during
Practical

4
All data clearly
recorded and
accurately
represented
8
All results
clearly and
accurately
analysed.
All calculations
clear and
accurate.
All limitations,
modifications
and revisions
identified.

3
Most data
clearly recorded
and accurately
represented
6
Most results
clearly and
accurately
analysed.
Most
calculations
clear and
accurate.
Most
limitations,
modifications
and revisions
identified.
3
Accurate, refers
back to the
aim/hypothesis

1
All present and
accurate

0
Not present or
inaccurate

1
Present and
accurate
1
Present but
incomplete or
inaccurate
1
Some present,
accurate and
clearly labeled
1
Present but
incomplete or
inaccurate
1
Some data
recorded and
represented

0
Not present or
inaccurate
0
Not present

4
Some results
clearly and
accurately
analysed.
Some
calculations
clear and
accurate.
Some
limitations,
modifications
and revisions
identified.

2
One or two of
the results,
calculations and
limitations are
identified.

0
No discussion
or analysis
present

2
Accurate, but
incomplete

1
Present but
inaccurate

0
Not present

1
Exhibited good,
safe, scientific
practice

0
Exhibited poor
scientific
practice or
unsafe
behaviour

2
Clear and
accurate, but
no why
2
Present,
accurate and
clearly labeled
2
Complete and
accurate (past
and impersonal)
2
Most data
recorded and
represented

0
None present

0
Not present

0
None present

Comment:

/25
MG Science-Practical Reports