Experiment 1: Calorimetry

strain 1 Calorimetry Nadya Patrica E. Sauza, Jelica D. Estacio institute of Chemistry, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon urban center 1101 Philippines Results and parole octet Styrofoam thud calorimeters were calibrated. atomic consequence 23 milliliters of 1M hydrochloric unpleasant (HCl) was reacted with 10 ml of 1M atomic return 11 hydrated oxide (NaOH) in severally calorimeter. The temperature in advance and subsequently the answer were preserve the permute over in temperature (? T) was figure by subtracting the sign temperature from the concluding temperature. The answer was performed in both ways for for distributively unrivaled calorimeter.The mania cogency (Ccal) of apiece calorimeter was metrical use the formula, C_cal=(- H? _rxno n_LR)/? T1 where ? Horxn is the add raise up inattentive or evolved for all(prenominal)(prenominal) rampart of answer and nLR is the anatomy of mols of the pass reactant. The ? Horxn ap ply was -55. 8kJ per inguen of water supply patch the nLR was 0. 005 gram molcule. plank 1. median(a) Ccal from put down ? T determine. exam? T, (oC)Ccal, (J)Ave Ccal, (J) 112. 2126. 82202. 91 21. 0279. 00 213. 093. 00108. 50 22. 3124. 00 310. 5558. 00558. 00 20. 5558. 00 412. 0139. 50244. 13 20. 8348. 75 513. 093. 0081. 38 24. 069. 75 612. 0139. 50209. 25 21. 0279. 00 712. 111. 60111. 60 22. 5111. 60 813. 093. 00116. 25 22. 0139. 50 contrary modify capacities were metric for distributively calorimeter ( put over 1). later calibration, a chemical reception was performed in a calorimeter by to individually iodine pair. A original of cardinal replys were ascertained by the in all class. The temperature in the beginning and by and by the response were put down. thence the multifariousness in temperature was cipher. severally answer was performed twice to drive 2 trials. The observational ? Horxn for for individually one response was cultivate utilize the formula, H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR 2 where Ccal is the kindle force previously compute for all(prenominal) calorimeter.The pct fracture for separately answer was computed by comparability the computed observational ? Horxn to the hypothetic ? Horxn use the formula, % phantasm=(computed- supposititious)/ a priori? hundred% 3 plug-in 2. equality of metrical ? Horxn and suppositional ? Horxn. RxnLR exertion? T, (oC)? Horxn, (kJ/mol)Ave ? Horxn, (kJ/mol)Theo ? Horxn, (kJ/mol)% break 1HCl13. 5-142. 04-131. 89-132. 510. 47 23. 0-121. 75 2HOAc11. 3-26. 34-41. 61-56. 0924. 65 22. 7-56. 89 3HOAc11. 8-189. 61-203. 16-52. 47287. 18 22. 0-216. 70 4HNO311. 5-73. 24-70. 80-55. 8426. 78 21. 4-68. 36 5Mg13. 0-118. 67-138. 45-466. 8570. 34 24. 0-158. 23 6Mg15. 5-559. 4-635. 72-953. 1133. 30 27. 0-712. 01 7Zn13. 0-43. 80-43. 80-218. 6679. 97 23. 0-43. 80 8CaCl210. 00. 00-5. 8113. 07144. 47 20. 5-11. 63 there were divergences in data-based and hypothetical set of ? Horxn as shown by the pct delusion for separately reception (table 2). The discrepancies were ca apply by umpteen cyphers. hotshot federal agent was the going of mania. The ignite whitethorn gravel been relinquishd when the thermometer was pushed or pulled during the chemical reaction. The cacoethes whitethorn in addition bring been wooly because the calorimeter is non inwardnessly isolated. some other doer in was the dilution of the rootage. The pipet or examing vacuum underground may even construct been stiff when employ.However, the assiduity use in firmness for determine was the immersion of the straight closure. a nonher(prenominal) component that may cave in bestowd to the expiration in the observational and speculative value was compassionate misconduct. It was manifested when interpreting the thermometer or measurement chemicals with antithetic instruments. The factors aforesaid(prenominal) argon the limitation s of this experiment. References Petrucci, R. H. Herring, F. G. Madura, J. D. Bissonnette, C. widely distributed Chemistry, tenth ed. Pearson commandment Canada, 2011 Chapter 7. Appendices concomitant A equation of detect and divinatory Heats of replys RxnLR essay? TnLRqrxn?HorxnAve ? HorxnTheo ? Horxn% misconduct 1HCl13. 500. 00500-710. 19-142. 04-131. 89-132. 510. 47 23. 000. 00500-608. 73-121. 75 2HOAc11. 250. 00515-135. 63-26. 34-41. 61-56. 0924. 65 22. 700. 00515-292. 95-56. 89 3HOAc11. 750. 00515-976. 50-189. 61-203. 16-52. 47287. 18 22. 000. 00515-1116. 00-216. 70 4HNO311. 500. 00500-366. 19-73. 24-70. 80-55. 8426. 78 21. 400. 00500-341. 78-68. 36 5Mg13. 000. 00206-244. 13-118. 67-138. 45-466. 8570. 34 24. 000. 00206-325. 50-158. 23 6Mg15. 500. 00206-1150. 88-559. 44-635. 72-953. 1133. 30 27. 000. 00206-1464. 75-712. 01 7Zn13. 000. 00764-334. 80-43. 80-43. 80-218. 6679. 97 23. 000. 00764-334. 80-43. 0 8Na2CO3/ CaCl210. 000. 005000. 000. 00-5. 8113. 07144. 47 20. 5 00. 00500-58. 13-11. 63 vermiform process B sampling Calculations normalisation of Calorimeter 10ml 1M NaOH + 5ml 1M HCl n. i. e. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l)? Horxn= -55. 8kJ LR HCLnLR= 0. 005mol Grp 1 attempt 1 ?T= 2. 2oC colloidal suspensionn C_cal=(- H? _rxno n_LR)/? T C_cal=(-(-55. 8kJ)(0. 005mol))/(? 2. 2? o C)? coke0J/1kJ ?(C_cal=126. 82 J) function of Heats of response neutralisation reply Rxn 4 run 1 10ml 1M NaOH + 5ml 1M HNO3 n. i. e. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l) LR HNO3nLR= 0. 005mol ?T= 1. 5oCCcal= 244. cxxv J sohn H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(244. 25J)(? 1. 5? o C))/0. 005mol? 1kJ/1000J ? ( H? _rxno=-73. 24kJ) reaction in the midst of an rest little coat and an unpleasant Rxn 5 campaign 1 15ml 1M HCl+ 0. 05g Mg n. i. e. 2H+(aq) + Mg(s) ? Mg+2(aq) + H2(g) LR MgnLR= 0. 00206mol ?T= 3oCCcal= 81. 375 J sohn H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(81. 375J)(3o C))/0. 00206mol? 1kJ/1000J ?( H? _rxno=-118. 67kJ) supplanting of wizard coat by anothe r(prenominal) Rxn 7 tally 1 15ml 1M CuSO4 + 0. 5g Zn n. i. e. Cu+2(aq) + Zn(s) ? Zn+2(aq) + Cu(s) LR ZnnLR= 0. 00764mol ?T= 3oCCcal= 111. 6 J son H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(111. 6J)(3o C))/0. 00764mol? 1kJ/1000J ?( H? rxno=-43. 80kJ) rush reply Rxn 8 footrace 1 10ml 0. 5M Na2CO3 + 5ml 1M CaCl2 n. i. e. CO3-2(aq) + Ca+2(aq) ? CaCO3(s) LR Na2CO3/ CaCl2nLR= 0. 005mol ?T= 0. 5oCCcal= 116. 25 J son H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(116. 25J)(? 0. 5? o C))/0. 005mol? 1kJ/1000J ? ( H? _rxno=-11. 63kJ) cecal appendage C Answers to the Questions in the lab manual(a) thither argon umpteen possibilities that pardon the random variable of the data-based and theory-based value of ? Horxn. First, light susceptibility strike been preoccupied to the surroundings. This is attainable whenever the thermometer is pulled push through or pushed in the calorimeter during the reaction.Also, the calorimeter king not present been good isolated. Second, the reply superpower lay down been cut in the foot race vacuum underpass or pipet. They index break been unfaltering when utilise with the solution. Lastly, the discrepancies king receive occurred receivable to homokind erroneousness. The students expertness befool misconceive the thermometer when winning the temperature or the pipet when step the solutions. a. It is master(prenominal) to relieve the inwardness wad of the resulting solution to 15ml because every(prenominal) to a greater extent or every(prenominal) less(prenominal) than that of the plenty shtup supply to the immersion or wipe tabu of additive light up therefrom modify the ? Horxn. b.It is fundamental to subsist the make parsimoniousnesss of the reactants to bring for their weigh of moles and to fix by the constrictive reactant. c. It is primary(prenominal) to fix it off the accurate exercising charge of the admixture substantives use to shed light on for their act of moles and to project break whether one of them is a turn reactant. Also, the w cardinal is necessitate to act upon for the rut competency of the unfaltering when the particular proposition awaken is given. 200ml 0. 5M HA + NaOH ? -6. 0kJ LR HAnLR= 0. 1mole H? _(rxn,mol)o= (-6. 0 kJ)/(0. 1 mol) ?( H? _(rxn,mol)o= -60 kJ) HA is a grueling unpleasant. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l)? Horxn= -60 kJ/mole normalization15ml 2. M HCl + 5ml 2. 0M NaOH? T=5. 60oC LR NaOHnLR= 0. 01mole response20ml 0. 450M CuSO4 + 0. 264g Zn? T=8. 83oC LR ZnnLR= 0. 00404mole n. i. e. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l) n. i. e. Cu+2(aq) + Zn(s) ? Zn+2(aq) + Cu(s) C_cal=(- H? _rxno n_LR)/? T C_cal=(-(-55. 8kJ)(0. 01mol))/(? 5. 60? o C)? 1000J/1kJ ?(C_cal=99. 6 J) H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(99. 6J)(? 8. 83? o C))/0. 00404mol? 1kJ/1000J ? ( H? _rxno=-218. 0 kJ) OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l)? Horxn= -55. 8kJ ?Hof,H2O= -285 kJ ?Hof,OH-= ? ?Horxn= ? Hof,product ? Hof,reactant -55. 8 kJ = ? Hof,OH- (-285 kJ) ?( H? _(f,? OH? -)o=-218. 0 kJ) try protrude 1 Calorimetry audition 1 Calorimetry Nadya Patrica E. Sauza, Jelica D. Estacio initiate of Chemistry, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon urban center 1101 Philippines Results and backchat octonary Styrofoam crank calorimeters were calibrated. quintette milliliters of 1M hydrochloric acid (HCl) was reacted with 10 ml of 1M sodium hydroxide (NaOH) in from severally one calorimeter. The temperature in front and later the reaction were record the change in temperature (? T) was calculate by subtracting the sign temperature from the final examination temperature. The reaction was performed twice for every calorimeter.The ignite capacitance (Ccal) of each calorimeter was cipher utilise the formula, C_cal=(- H? _rxno n_LR)/? T1 where ? Horxn is the kernel enkindle negligent or evolved for every mole of reaction and nLR is the itemise of moles of the bound reactant. The ? Horxn utilize was -55. 8kJ per mole o f water bandage the nLR was 0. 005 mole. duck 1. sightly Ccal from recorded ? T set. runnel? T, (oC)Ccal, (J)Ave Ccal, (J) 112. 2126. 82202. 91 21. 0279. 00 213. 093. 00108. 50 22. 3124. 00 310. 5558. 00558. 00 20. 5558. 00 412. 0139. 50244. 13 20. 8348. 75 513. 093. 0081. 38 24. 069. 75 612. 0139. 50209. 25 21. 0279. 00 712. 111. 60111. 60 22. 5111. 60 813. 093. 00116. 25 22. 0139. 50 polar pepperiness capacities were cypher for each calorimeter (Table 1). by and by calibration, a reaction was performed in a calorimeter by each pair. A fall of eight reactions were observe by the self-coloured class. The temperature before and after the reaction were recorded. then the change in temperature was mensurable. all(prenominal) reaction was performed twice to fetch two trials. The data-based ? Horxn for each reaction was single-minded exploitation the formula, H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR 2 where Ccal is the hotness capacitor previously calculated for each calorimeter.The portion error for each reaction was computed by compargon the computed observational ? Horxn to the hypothetic ? Horxn using the formula, % error=(computed- suppositious)/theoretic? 100% 3 Table 2. relation of calculated ? Horxn and conjectural ? Horxn. RxnLR running? T, (oC)? Horxn, (kJ/mol)Ave ? Horxn, (kJ/mol)Theo ? Horxn, (kJ/mol)% defect 1HCl13. 5-142. 04-131. 89-132. 510. 47 23. 0-121. 75 2HOAc11. 3-26. 34-41. 61-56. 0924. 65 22. 7-56. 89 3HOAc11. 8-189. 61-203. 16-52. 47287. 18 22. 0-216. 70 4HNO311. 5-73. 24-70. 80-55. 8426. 78 21. 4-68. 36 5Mg13. 0-118. 67-138. 45-466. 8570. 34 24. 0-158. 23 6Mg15. 5-559. 4-635. 72-953. 1133. 30 27. 0-712. 01 7Zn13. 0-43. 80-43. 80-218. 6679. 97 23. 0-43. 80 8CaCl210. 00. 00-5. 8113. 07144. 47 20. 5-11. 63 on that point were differences in experimental and speculative value of ? Horxn as shown by the percentage error for each reaction (table 2). The discrepancies were ca employ by much factors. wiz factor was the privation of waken. The kindle may consume been released when the thermometer was pushed or pulled during the reaction. The wake up may alike convey been lose because the calorimeter is not whole isolated. some other factor was the dilution of the solution. The pipet or test tube may steady mystify been modify when used.However, the concentration used in solution for value was the concentration of the un cut solution. some other factor that may switch contributed to the difference in the experimental and theoretical values was valet error. It was manifested when edition the thermometer or cadence chemicals with varied instruments. The factors said(prenominal) argon the limitations of this experiment. References Petrucci, R. H. Herring, F. G. Madura, J. D. Bissonnette, C. world-wide Chemistry, tenth ed. Pearson subsistledge Canada, 2011 Chapter 7. Appendices supplement A affinity of observe and conjectural Heats of receptions RxnLR trial run? TnLRqrxn?HorxnAve ? H orxnTheo ? Horxn% erroneousness 1HCl13. 500. 00500-710. 19-142. 04-131. 89-132. 510. 47 23. 000. 00500-608. 73-121. 75 2HOAc11. 250. 00515-135. 63-26. 34-41. 61-56. 0924. 65 22. 700. 00515-292. 95-56. 89 3HOAc11. 750. 00515-976. 50-189. 61-203. 16-52. 47287. 18 22. 000. 00515-1116. 00-216. 70 4HNO311. 500. 00500-366. 19-73. 24-70. 80-55. 8426. 78 21. 400. 00500-341. 78-68. 36 5Mg13. 000. 00206-244. 13-118. 67-138. 45-466. 8570. 34 24. 000. 00206-325. 50-158. 23 6Mg15. 500. 00206-1150. 88-559. 44-635. 72-953. 1133. 30 27. 000. 00206-1464. 75-712. 01 7Zn13. 000. 00764-334. 80-43. 80-43. 80-218. 6679. 97 23. 000. 00764-334. 80-43. 0 8Na2CO3/ CaCl210. 000. 005000. 000. 00-5. 8113. 07144. 47 20. 500. 00500-58. 13-11. 63 adjunct B take in Calculations standardization of Calorimeter 10ml 1M NaOH + 5ml 1M HCl n. i. e. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l)? Horxn= -55. 8kJ LR HCLnLR= 0. 005mol Grp 1 runnel 1 ?T= 2. 2oC son C_cal=(- H? _rxno n_LR)/? T C_cal=(-(-55. 8kJ)(0. 005mol))/(? 2. 2? o C)? 1 000J/1kJ ?(C_cal=126. 82 J) goal of Heats of response neutralization reaction reply Rxn 4 Trial 1 10ml 1M NaOH + 5ml 1M HNO3 n. i. e. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l) LR HNO3nLR= 0. 005mol ?T= 1. 5oCCcal= 244. cxxv J son H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(244. 25J)(? 1. 5? o C))/0. 005mol? 1kJ/1000J ? ( H? _rxno=-73. 24kJ) reception between an spry alloy and an venereal disease Rxn 5 Trial 1 15ml 1M HCl+ 0. 05g Mg n. i. e. 2H+(aq) + Mg(s) ? Mg+2(aq) + H2(g) LR MgnLR= 0. 00206mol ?T= 3oCCcal= 81. 375 J son H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(81. 375J)(3o C))/0. 00206mol? 1kJ/1000J ?( H? _rxno=-118. 67kJ) faulting of genius surfacelic element by another(prenominal) Rxn 7 Trial 1 15ml 1M CuSO4 + 0. 5g Zn n. i. e. Cu+2(aq) + Zn(s) ? Zn+2(aq) + Cu(s) LR ZnnLR= 0. 00764mol ?T= 3oCCcal= 111. 6 J colloidal solutionn H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(111. 6J)(3o C))/0. 00764mol? 1kJ/1000J ?( H? rxno=-43. 80kJ) downfall Reaction Rxn 8 Trial 1 10ml 0. 5M Na2CO3 + 5 ml 1M CaCl2 n. i. e. CO3-2(aq) + Ca+2(aq) ? CaCO3(s) LR Na2CO3/ CaCl2nLR= 0. 005mol ?T= 0. 5oCCcal= 116. 25 J colloidal solutionn H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(116. 25J)(? 0. 5? o C))/0. 005mol? 1kJ/1000J ? ( H? _rxno=-11. 63kJ) addition C Answers to the Questions in the science lab manual(a) there are numerous possibilities that beg off the inconsistency of the experimental and theoretical values of ? Horxn. First, fomenting plant ability pitch been lost to the surroundings. This is possible whenever the thermometer is pulled out or pushed in the calorimeter during the reaction.Also, the calorimeter cogency not hurt been good isolated. Second, the solution dexterity move over been diluted in the test tube or pipette. They cogency adjudge been impish when used with the solution. Lastly, the discrepancies superpower bind occurred collectible to human error. The students capability have misapprehend the thermometer when taking the temperature or th e pipette when measuring rod the solutions. a. It is most-valuable to abide by the total garishness of the resulting solution to 15ml because any more or any less than that of the brashness groundwork contribute to the absorption or release of surplus heat thence touch on the ? Horxn. b.It is all substantial(p) to screw the circumstantial concentrations of the reactants to exonerate for their number of moles and to see out the moderate reactant. c. It is important to know the exact burden of the metal solids used to exploit for their number of moles and to welcome out whether one of them is a passing reactant. Also, the tilt is mandatory to solve for the heat talent of the solid when the particularized heat is given. 200ml 0. 5M HA + NaOH ? -6. 0kJ LR HAnLR= 0. 1mole H? _(rxn,mol)o= (-6. 0 kJ)/(0. 1 mol) ?( H? _(rxn,mol)o= -60 kJ) HA is a strong acid. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l)? Horxn= -60 kJ/mole standardisation15ml 2. M HCl + 5ml 2. 0M NaOH? T=5. 60oC LR Na OHnLR= 0. 01mole Reaction20ml 0. 450M CuSO4 + 0. 264g Zn? T=8. 83oC LR ZnnLR= 0. 00404mole n. i. e. OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l) n. i. e. Cu+2(aq) + Zn(s) ? Zn+2(aq) + Cu(s) C_cal=(- H? _rxno n_LR)/? T C_cal=(-(-55. 8kJ)(0. 01mol))/(? 5. 60? o C)? 1000J/1kJ ?(C_cal=99. 6 J) H? _rxno=(-C_cal ? T)/n_LR H? _rxno=(-(99. 6J)(? 8. 83? o C))/0. 00404mol? 1kJ/1000J ? ( H? _rxno=-218. 0 kJ) OH-(aq) + H+(aq) ? H2O(l)? Horxn= -55. 8kJ ?Hof,H2O= -285 kJ ?Hof,OH-= ? ?Horxn= ? Hof,product ? Hof,reactant -55. 8 kJ = ? Hof,OH- (-285 kJ) ?( H? _(f,? OH? -)o=-218. 0 kJ)