You are on page 1of 10

# Name of student: Section: Group Number: Colligative Properties I.

Introduction

## Date performed: Date submitted:

Colligative properties are properties of a solution that are dependent to the concentration of the dissolved solute particles but not on the nature of that solute (Burns, 2003). These include vapor pressure lowering, boiling point elevation, freezing point depression, and osmotic pressure. Vapor pressure pertains to the pressure caused by molecules that have escaped from the liquid phase to the gaseous phase in a closed system (Kelter et al., 2008). The addition of solute in a solution lowers its vapor pressure. This is due to the crowding of solute molecules at the surface of the solution, reducing the rate of solvent molecules to escape the liquid phase (Olmsted & Williams, 2006). Such phenomenon is called vapor pressure lowering. The total vapor pressure of a solution is dependent on the vapor pressure of pure solvent, multiplied by its mole fraction in the solution. This proportionality between vapor pressure and mole fraction is expressed in Raoults Law. It can be expressed in the equation P solution = X solvent Posolvent However, Raoults Law strictly applies only to those solutions with nonvolatile solutes. When the solute is volatile, the total pressure of the solution is the sum of the vapor pressures of the solvent and the solute (Robinson et al.,1992). Increasing the amount of solute being dissolved in a solution does not only lower its vapor pressure, it also results in changes in the boiling point and freezing point of the solution. In order for the solution to boil, its vapor pressure must be increased to equal that of the atmospheric pressure. For this to happen, the solution must be heated higher the boiling point of the pure solvent (Kelter et al., 2008). The result is a new boiling point higher than the boiling point of the pure solvent. This condition can be shown in following formula. Where = change in boiling point (in C) = boiling-point elevation constant

= molality of the solute Like boiling point elevation, freezing point depression is proportional to the molal concentration of the solute. Nevertheless, this time, the vapor pressure of the solution is lower than the pure solvent. In this condition, the solution must be cooled below the freezing point of the pure solvent, in order for the vapor pressure of the solution to equal to that of the pure solvent. It simply denotes that the addition of solute in a solution will give rise to a lower freezing point compared to the freezing point of the pure solvent (Zumhdahl,1992). Since the addition of nonvolatile solute would hinder the solvent molecules with sufficient energy from escaping into the gas phase. It would lead to the decline in the number of molecules that have sufficient energy to break free from the solid phase(Slowinski, et al., 1989). This effect can be displayed in this simple equation: Where = change in boiling point (in C) = boiling-point elevation constant = molality of the solute

In the case of freezing point depression, molar masses of unknown substances can be determined. If a specified amount of solute is dissolved in a fixed amount of solvent and the value of of the generated solution is measured, and if the k for the solvent is known, then the molality can be computed and hence the molar mass of the solute. The relation can be depicted in this formula: MM= (

Osmosis, a special form of diffusion, is the net movement of water molecules through a semipermeable membrane into a region of high concentration to an area of low concentration (Brown 1999). Net movement of solvent is from the less concentrated solute (hypotonic) to the more concentrated solute (hypertonic) solution. Without internal pressure considerations, osmosis will continue until solution equilibrium is reached (equal concentrations on each side of the membrane). If internal pressures are in play, a combination of solution concentration and pressure will determine equilibrium (Campbell & Reece 2008). This pressure is called osmotic pressure. Pressure is exerted to prevent osmosis from a pure solvent into a solution (Robinson et al.,1992). The osmotic pressure of a solution can be calculated from this expression:

Where M is the molar concentration of the solute, R is the gas constant, and T is the temperature of the solution in Kelvin.

II.

Materials A. Reagents 2.0 g pure naphthalene 0.20 g unknown solute A Varying amounts of unknown solute B B. Apparatus Test tubes Hot plate Iron stand Iron ring Iron clamp Wire gauze Thermometer Stopwatch 250-ml beaker

III.

Procedure The weighed 2.0 grams of naphthalene was placed in a test tube. Using an iron stand and an iron clamp, the test tube was submerged in a water bath with the water level above the sample in the test tube though not allowing the tube to touch the bottom of the bath. The water was heated until the sample melted and the temperature reached 90C. The flame was put off and the temperature was read at a 15-second interval until the temperature had fallen to 70 C. Then the cooling curve was plotted. A 0.20 gram unknown solute was weighed and mixed with 2.0 grams of naphthalene in a test tube. The test tube was also submerged in a water bath with the water level above the sample in the test tube with the use of an iron clamp and an iron stand the water was heated until the sample melted and the temperature reached 90C. The flame was put off and the temperature was read at a 15-second interval until the temperature had fallen to 70 C. Then the cooling curve was plotted in the same graph. The boiling point of water was determined by heating 100 ml of distilled water in a 250 ml beaker. Then the assigned amount of solute obtained from the instructor was dissolved

in 100 ml distilled water. The boiling point of the solution was determined. Data of the other groups in this experiment was also gathered. IV. Data/ Observations Table 2.1. Observations on the cooling curve of pure naphthalene at a 15-second interval. Time (seconds) Temperature (C) Appearance 90 0 89 15 88 30 87 45 85 60 85 75 84 90 84 105 83 120 82 135 81 150 81 165 80 180 79 195 79 210 78 225 78 240 78 255 78 270 78 285

78 300 78 315 78 330 78 345 78 360 78 375 78 390 77 405 76 420 76 435 76 450 75 465 75 480 72 495 70 510

Table 2.2. Observations on the cooling curve of an unknown solute A- naphthalene solution at a 15-second interval. Time (seconds) Temperature (C) Appearance 90 0 88 15 87 30 86 45 84 60 82 75

80 90 79 105 77 120 76 135 75 150 75 165 75 180 75 195 75 210 75 225 72 240 70 255

1 0.9 0.8 0.7 Temperature (C) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Time (seconds) Pure Naphthalene Unknown solutenaphthalene solution

Figure 2.1 Comparison of cooling curve of the pure naphthalene and an unknown solutenaphthalene solution.

Table 2.3. Boiling point of distilled water. Group Number Boiling Point (C) 100 1 100 2 100 3 100 4 100 5 100 Average

Table 2.4. Boiling point of an unknown solution. Group Number Amount of Solute (in Boiling Point (C) grams) 1 2 3 4 5 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 99 99 99 102 96

V.

Discussions As seen in Table 2.1, results showed that the freezing point of pure naphthalene is 78 C. Whereas in Table 2.2, the freezing point of the solution formed by mixing unknown solute A and naphthalene exhibited a freezing point of 75 C. Furthermore, in Figure 2.1, it indicated that the freezing point of the solution is relatively lower than the pure naphthalene. These experimental data accord with the theoretical result that the concentration of solute in a solution is inversely proportional to its freezing point. It can be acquired from the obtained data, the temperature difference of 3C between the freezing points of pure naphthalene and the unknown solution. From this value of temperature difference, specified freezing point depression constant of naphthalene, which is 6.9C-kg/mole solute, mass of unknown solute A, 0.20 grams, and the mass of naphthalene in kilograms, 0.002 kilograms, the molecular mass of the solute was calculated, it resulted that it was 230 grams per mole. After the experiment, the unknown solute A was revealed to be benzoic acid with a molar mass of 112.12 grams per mole. It has a relatively lower molar mass, compared to the experimental molar mass. The values yielded a percent error of 88.34%. This implies that the obtained data from the experiment is highly inaccurate, and some factors may have affected the experimental molar mass of the solute. Possible errors that led to these inconsistencies may be due to some human errors conducted: (a) imprecise measurement of the initial mass of unknown solute A, an increase in the amount of solute can also increase its molar mass since the it has direct relationship (b) while measuring the temperature, the thermometer touched the sides or the bottom of the test tube, temperature of the test tube was measured instead of the sample (c) heat was not equally distributed in the water bath after the flame was put off, constant stirring of the solution would have assured even mixing of particles and a more accurate determination of freezing points (d) inaccurate reading of temperature.

From Table 2.3 and 2.4, the discrepancies from the data obtained with the above mentioned principle regarding the boiling point elevation can be perceived. Based on the data, the boiling point of the solvent, distilled water was 100C. While the boiling point of the unknown solution varied with the amount of solute. However, it did not show any trend, in order to indicate its relation with each other. It implies that possible errors may have occurred during the experiment. Some of these errors may be due to: (a) while measuring the temperature, the thermometer touched the sides or the bottom of the beaker, temperature of the beaker was measured instead of the sample and (b) heat was not equally distributed in the solution, constant stirring of the solution would have assured even mixing of particles and a more accurate determination of boiling point. Conversely, the experiment showed no substance to support the aforementioned hypothesis. This may be due to human error or to a number of possible reasons. However, these speculations need to be validated by further experiments. There are other factors which may affect the boiling point of solution. Such factors may include varied temperatures, different amounts of substance, the type of medium used, or handling and execution of the experiment. It is recommended that the same test should be performed in

a well isolated system, free of other factors which may affect the boiling point of the solution other than the controlled variable.

VI.

Conclusion The effect of the addition of nonvolatile solutes to the freezing point was determined with the use of a cooling curve experiment. An unknown solute was combined with naphthalene in order to form a solution. The solution was heated in a water bath until its temperature reached 90C. The flame was putt off and then the temperature was measured at 15-second intervals, until the temperature dropped to 70C. The recorded data was then compared to the data from the cooling curve of pure naphthalene. The results showed that, the addition of unknown solute A lowered the freezing point of the solution. The outcomes of the experiment attained correspond with the principle in the freezing point depression that the freezing point of solution has a lower freezing point compared to the pure solvent and that it is depressed with an increase in the amount of solute dissolved. In addition, the molar mass of unknown solute A was calculated simply by manipulating the freezing point depression formula and after calculating the temperature difference between the freezing points of pure naphthalene and the unknown solution, all values were input in the equation. The measured molar of unknown solute A was 230 grams per mole. In the effect of varying amounts of solute in the boiling point of a solution, the problem was assessed by recording the boiling point of solutions formed by dissolving different amounts of unknown solute B in 100 mL distilled water. Nevertheless, the obtained results did not support the theoretical assumption that an increase in the amount of nonvolatile solute would elevate that boiling point of the solution. Therefore, further study was recommended, since inconsistencies acquired in the experiment may be due to errors.

VII.

## Literature Cited/ Bibliography

Bell, Rebekah P., et al. (2004). Investigations in Biology. Chattanooga: University of Tennessee. Brown, Terry. (1999) . Osmosis.<http://www.tvdsb.on.ca/WESTMIN/science/sbi3a1/cells/ Osmosis.htm>. Accessed December 10, 2013. Burns, R. (2003) . Fundamentals of Chemistry. 4th ed. USA: Pearson Education, Inc. Campbell, N. A. & Reece, J. B. 2008. Biology. 8th edition. San Francisco (CA). Pearson Education, Inc. Kelter, P. Mosher, M. and Scott, A. (2008) . Chemistry: The Practical Science. USA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Olmsted, J. III and Williams,G. (2006) . Chemisty. 4th ed. USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Slowinski, E., Wolsey, W. and Masterton W. (1989) . Chemical Principles in the Laboratotry. 5th ed. USA: Saunders College Publishing. Zumdahl, S. (1992) . Chemical Principles. USA: D. C. Health and Company.