Macarthur Girls High School 2

Practical Reports
Macarthur Girls High School 3

Practical Reports

Production of Materials
Comparing the reactivity of alkanes and alkenes with bromine
water #01

Introduction:
Alkenes are hydrocarbons which are very reactive. This is because the double
bond between carbons is unstable. Therefore, the double bond breaks and
undergoes addition reaction (chemical reaction). However, alkanes have a single
bond which is not reactive.

Aim:
To investigate and identify the reactivity of alkanes and alkenes in bromine
water.

Materials:
● Bromine water
● Safety glasses
● Test tube
● Test rack
● Cyclohexane liquid
● Cyclohexene liquid
● Waste container

Variables:
Independent: type of compound (alkane or alkene)
Dependent: the change in colour
Controlled: amount of each liquid, width of test tube

Method:
1. Wear safety glasses
2. Transfer 1mL of liquid hydrocarbon into the test tube
3. Add a drop of bromine water and shake the test tube laterally.
Observe the results.
4. Continue step 3 until it changes colour. If it does not, then it is an
alkane. If it does, it is alkene.
5. Transfer all the waste into the waste container.
Macarthur Girls High School 4

Practical Reports

Risk Assessment:
Liquid Bromine: is very toxic and corrosive as it can cause severe burns to eyes
and skin if it is in contact. To avoid this, wear safety glasses and conduct the
experiment into an air absorbing container. Avoid breathing the fumes of
bromine solution if it is not in the air absorbing container.
Cyclohexane and cyclohexene: is very toxic and flammable as it is very
volatile. It is harmful because it can cause lung damage if swallowed. To avoid
this, wear safety glasses and conduct the experiment into an air absorbing
container.

Results:
Substance What Happened?

Cyclohexane No reaction. Bromine and cyclohexane
stayed at the bottom and the H20 was
formed on top of the bromine.

Cyclohexene The bromine water changed colour
from brown to white. The H2O stayed
at the top.

Conclusion:
From the results it can be seen that alkenes are more reactive than alkanes.

Discussion:
The experiment was deemed to be a success as it answered the aim. The results
show that alkanes are not reactive as alkenes. This experiment can be deemed
valid as there was only one variable that was changed. This experiment can also
be deemed reliable as the results were same when checked with other groups.
This was not repeated due to time constraints. Moreover, this experiment can be
deemed accurate as all the materials were clean and uncontaminated.
Further improvements to the experiment can include, adding smaller quantities
to the test tube. This will allow for a quicker result which can be more accurate.
However, negatives include a higher percentage error.

Fermentation of glucose to ethanol #02

Introduction: Alkanols are a long chain of hydrocarbons which consists of C,
H and other chains. Ethanol is a type of alkanol whose formula is C 2H5OH. When
Macarthur Girls High School 5

Practical Reports

glucose ferments in the presence of yeast, it produces ethanol and carbon
dioxide.

Aim: To successfully carry out to experiment of fermentation of glucose by
monitoring the mass change.

Hypothesis: Glucose will form ethanol and water in the presence of a
catalyst, yeast.

Materials:
● Side conical flask
● Rubber tube
● Delivery tube
● Test tube
● Glucose
● De-ionised water
● Yeast
● Electronic balance
● Limewater
● Evaporating dish
● Plastic spoon
● Stopper

Method:
1. Insert the rubber tube into the long end of the delivery tube. Insert
another side of the rubber tube to the side conical flask.
2. Measure 100mL of glucose solution into measuring cylinder. Pour it
into the side conical flask.
3. Add 3 grams of dry yeast into the evaporating dish. Measure it on
an electronic balance. Pour it into the side conical flask.
4. Close the side conical flask with a stopper.
5. Measure the mass of the conical flask on the electronic balance.
6. Leave it for two days. Record results.

Risk Assessment:
The glassware may break if there is excessive force applied to it. To avoid this,
handle the glassware with care.
Lime water is very dangerous to the skin. It may cause burns if it is in contact
with the skin. To avoid this, wear safety glasses and wipe any spills.

Results:
Mass of glucose dissolved: 5 grams
Macarthur Girls High School 6

Practical Reports

Volume of de-ionised water: 100ml
Moles of glucose: 0.02775
Concentration of glucose: 0.0275molL-1
Initial mass of reaction flask: 418.9g
Final mask of fermentation flask: 416.5g
Mass change: 2.4g
Actual Theoretical mass of ethanol produced:
C6H12O6 ----yeast-----> 2C2H5OH(aq) + 2CO2(g)
Mole ratio: 1:2:2
nCO = 2.4/44.01
2

= 0.0545
New mole ratio: 0.027:0.054:0.054
Theoretical mass of ethanol produced from glucose:
Mole ratio: 0.02775:0.0555:0.0555
So percentage of theoretical yield is,
0.0545
0.555 x 100 = 98%

Discussion:
This experiment was deemed as successful as the aim was successfully
answered. The hypothesis was correct as seen from the results. The experiment
can be considered accurate as all the apparatus was washed before using to
avoid contaminations. This experiment can also be called reliable as other
groups got similar results to ours. However, this experiment cannot be deemed
valid as there were no independent variables. This is because the aim of the
experiment was to measure the mass changes.
Further improvements to this experiment can include making the glucose
solution from scratch with the powder. This improves the accuracy of the
experiment. Moreover, the electronic balance was accurate to two decimal
places which improve the accuracy. Possible improvements could include tilting
the side conical flask towards the limewater test-tube to allow carbon dioxide to
pass out of the mixture more easily.
Some of the errors in this experiment may have been that the temperature was
not constant across the two days which may affect the rate at which
fermentation occurs. Because carbon dioxide is a fairly dense gas, some of the
carbon dioxide may have remained in the test-tube.

Conclusion: From the results it can be seen that the mass changes when
glucose undergoes fermentation.

Measuring the heat of combustion of three alkanols [methanol,
ethanol, propanol] #03
Macarthur Girls High School 7

Practical Reports

Aim:
To compare the heat of combustion of three alkanols by carrying out the
experiment.

Hypothesis:
Ethanol will have the highest heat of combustion both per mole and per gram.

Materials:
● Thermom ● Wire ● Retort
eter gauze stand
● Measurin ● Beaker ● Boss
g cylinder ● Electronic head
● Match balance ● Clamp
box ● Ethanol ● Safety
● Spirit 20mL Glasses
burner ● Water ● Methanol
● Tripod 100mL ● Propanol
Risk assessment:
Risk Prevention

Ethanol is irritating to eyes. This can be prevented by wearing
safety glasses.

Methanol is highly flammable and To avoid this, wear safety glasses.
toxic.

Method:
1. Gather all the materials needed to conduct the experiment.
2. Pour 100mL of water into a measuring cylinder (100mL) and
transfer it into the beaker.
3. Place a heat proof mat under a spirit burner and place the tripod
and gauze mat.
4. Put the beaker on top of the gauze mat.
5. Attach the boss head and clamp to the retort stand.
6. Gently insert the thermometer into the clamp so that it goes into
the beaker full of water but it does not touch the beaker.
7. Light the spirit burner and leave it for 5 minutes.
8. Repeat steps 1-7 using methanol
9. Repeat steps 1-7 using propanol
Macarthur Girls High School 8

Practical Reports

Variables:
Independent: Type of Alkanols (methanol, ethanol, propanol)
Dependent: Heat of combustion of each of the alkanols.
Controlled: amount of water added to each experiment, same amount of height
between the spirit burner and the beaker, same width and size of measuring
cylinder and beaker.

Results:
ETHANOL:
Mass of beaker + ethanol = 228.4g
Mass of beaker + ethanol after burning = 224.3g
Initial temperature = 21°C
Final temperature = 61°C
CALCULATIONS:
ΔH = mCΔT
= 100x4.18x40
= 16720J
m
n= Mm
4.1
n= 46.068
= 0.08899887123 moles
HEAT OF COMBUSTION PER MOLE:
16720
=187.87 kJ /mol
0.08899887123
HEAT OF COMBUSTION PER GRAM:
16720
=¿ 4078.05 J / g−1
46.068
METHANOL:
Mass of beaker +methanol = 204.9g
Mass of beaker after burning methanol = 203.3g
Initial Temperature = 23.5°C
Final Temperature = 41°C
CALCULATIONS:
Macarthur Girls High School 9

Practical Reports

ΔH = mCΔT
= 100x4.18x 17.5
=7315J
m
n= Mm
1.6
n=
32.042

0.04993446102 moles
HEAT OF COMBUSTION PER MOLE:
7315
0.04993446102 = 146.49kJ/mol

HEAT OF COMBUSTION PER GRAM:
7315
1.6 = 4571.88 J/g-1

PROPANOL:
Mass of beaker + propanol = 195.7g
Mass of beaker + propanol after burning= 194.1g
Initial Temperature = 22°C
Final Temperature = 50.5°C
CALCULATIONS:
ΔH = mCΔT
= 100x4.18x 28.5
= 11913
m
n= Mm
1.6
n=
60.094

n=0.02662493421
HEAT OF COMBUSTION PER MOLE
11913
0.02662493421 =447.44 kJ/mol

HEAT OF COMBUSTION PER GRAM
11913
1.6 = 7445.63 J/g-1
Macarthur Girls High School 10

Practical Reports

Discussion:
The hypothesis was proved wrong as propanol has the higher heat of
combustion. The experiment was conducted successfully as it was fairly constant
over time. This experiment can be considered reliable as the results were fairly
consistent across the class when compared. It can also be considered accurate
as the apparatus was cleaned before it was used. This experiment can also be
considered valid as there was only one variable that was changed.
However, errors to this experiment is that the spirit burner containing ethanol
was left to burn for about 10 minutes due to miscommunication. This caused the
change in heat of combustion for ethanol. However overall, this experiment can
be improved by conducting it by one person. This can limit the possible sources
of human error.

Conclusion:
From the results it can be seen that propanol has a higher heat of combustion.

Galvanic Cells #04

PART 1

Introduction
Reduction and oxidation (redox) reactions occur when electrons are
transferred from the reductant to the oxidant. In 1800, Volta invented an
electrochemical cell where the transferred electrons were channelled into
an external circuit and could be put to use. Volta’s original cell was
composed of silver and zinc discs separated by paper soaked in vinegar.
Each of these cells produced 0.76 volts. Volta could not explain the
working of his cell, since electrons and redox reactions were unknown at
this time.
Aim: to identify conditions under which galvanic cell is produced

Materials:
● Safety Glasses
● Voltmeter
● Beaker
● Emery paper
● Connecting wires(alligator clips)
● Zinc, copper and graphite electrodes
● 50mL distilled water
Macarthur Girls High School 11

Practical Reports

● 50mL NaCl(aq)
● 150mL H2S04

Risk Assessment:
Acids are corrosive. They may also cause burns on hands if it is not
handled properly. To avoid this, handle the acids with care. If there are
spills, clean it up immediately.
Glassware may break if it is not handled with care. The glass pieces can
hurt and may bleed. To avoid this, hold the glassware properly.

Method:
1. Warning: Wear safety glasses!
2. Warning: 1 mol L–1 H2SO4 is corrosive. Avoid skin contact. Clean up
spills immediately.
3. Set up the apparatus shown in the diagram using a small beaker
filled with electrolyte (Z). Connect electrodes (X) and (Y) by wire to a
voltmeter (V).

Perform the trials listed below and observe the cell for signs of chemical
reaction, e.g. gas bubbles, colour changes, voltage reading.
TRIAL ELECTRODE X ELECTRODE Y ELECTROLYTE Z

1 Zn Cu Distilled water

2 Zn Cu 1 mol L–1 NaCl
Macarthur Girls High School 12

Practical Reports

3 Zn Cu 1 mol L–1 H2SO4

4 Cu Cu 1 mol L–1 H2SO4

5 Zn C 1 mol L–1 H2SO4

4. Electrodes must be rubbed with emery paper, rinsed with water and
dried before each trial cell is connected.
5. Rinse the beaker with water between trials 2 and 3.
6. If the voltmeter reads below zero, reverse the connections
(polarity).

Results:
ELECTRODE X ELECTRODE Y ELECTROLYTE Z VOLTS

Zn Cu Distilled water 0.65V

Zn Cu 1 mol L–1 NaCl 0.9V

Zn Cu 1 mol L–1 H2SO4 1.0V

Cu Cu 1 mol L–1 H2SO4 0V

Zn C 1 mol L–1 H2SO4 1.1V

Discussion:
The aim of this experiment was answered, hence it can be deemed
successful.
Validity: this experiment cannot be called valid as there were no
independent variables in the experiment.
Accuracy: the experiment cannot be called accurate as the metal
electrodes were previously used which may have caused some errors as
they have a high risk of getting contaminated.
Reliability: this experiment can be deemed reliable as the results were
similar to other groups when it was compared to other groups due to time
constraints.
Further improvements: Further improvements to this experiment
includes, using uncontaminated electrodes, beakers, and acid solutions.
Macarthur Girls High School 13

Practical Reports

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the conditions under which galvanic cells are produced are
found.
PART 2

Introduction:
In the previous experiment (Galvanic cells (I)), you investigated the essential
conditions necessary for a galvanic cell to operate, and discovered two important
points:
● The electrodes must be made of dissimilar conductors.
● The electrodes must be immersed in an electrolyte.

Aim:
to measure the difference in potential of different combinations of metals in an
electrolyte solution.

Materials:
● 1x safety glasses
● 6x 1 10 cm paper strips* soaked in saturated KNO 3 solution*
● 1x voltmeter*
● 2x connecting leads (wires)
● 1x 150 mL beaker* + Zn electrode + 1 mol L–1 ZnSO4
● 1x 150 mL beaker* + Cu electrode + 1 mol L–1 CuSO4
● 1x 150 mL beaker* + Mg electrode + 1 mol L–1 MgSO4
● 1x 150 mL beaker* + Pb electrode + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2 Label:
Toxic

Risk Assessment:
Lead in any form is toxic. If it is in any contact with skin, wash it off with water as
soon as possible. To avoid touching lead, use filter funnel to transfer the solution
from the bottle into the beaker.
Macarthur Girls High School 14

Practical Reports

Method:

DIAGRAM OF APPARATUS FOR TRIAL 1

1 Set up the apparatus using two beakers filled with metallic salt solutions, a
salt bridge and two metal electrodes connected to a voltmeter. For
convenience, the salt bridge used will simply be a strip of filter paper
soaked in saturated KNO3 solution.
Note: To avoid contamination, each trial requires a fresh salt bridge.
2 Record:
athe polarity of the electrodes
b the net voltage (E°net) for each of the trials in the table below:
CE
BEAKER 1 BEAKER 2 NOTES
LL
Zn + 1 mol L–1
1 Cu + 1 mol L–1 CuSO4
ZnSO4
Zn + 1 mol L–1
2 Mg + 1 mol L–1 MgSO4
ZnSO4
Zn + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2 is
3 Pb + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2
ZnSO4 toxic
–1
Cu + 1 mol L
4 Mg + 1 mol L–1 MgSO4
CuSO4
Cu + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2 is
5 Pb + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2
CuSO4 toxic
–1
Mg + 1 mol L Pb(NO3)2 is
6 Pb + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2
MgSO4 toxic
Macarthur Girls High School 15

Practical Reports

Results:
CEL Observatio
BEAKER 1 BEAKER 2 E0
L ns
Zn + 1 mol L–1 No
1 Cu + 1 mol L–1 CuSO4 0.2V
ZnSO4
Zn + 1 mol L–1 Bubbles
2 Mg + 1 mol L–1 MgSO4 0.15V
ZnSO4
Zn + 1 mol L–1 Bubbles
3 Pb + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2 0.4V
ZnSO4
Cu + 1 mol L–1 No
4 Mg + 1 mol L–1 MgSO4 0.025V
CuSO4
Cu + 1 mol L–1 No
5 Pb + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2 0.025V
CuSO4
Mg + 1 mol L–1 White
6 Pb + 1 mol L–1 Pb(NO3)2 0.6V
MgSO4 precipitate

Discussion:
The experiment was conducted successfully as the aim was successfully
answered to the question. It can also be seen that the aim was successfully
done, as seen from the results. However, further improvements to the
experiment includes ensuring accuracy as the glassware may have been
contaminated which can change the potential energy, hence resulting in
inaccuracy in experiments. Furthermore, this experiment cannot be deemed
valid as it the variables were not controlled. But, this experiment can be deemed
reliable as the results were matched with several groups and we got similar
results.

Conclusion:
From the results, it can be seen that the difference in potential difference in
electricity it produces in different solutions.

Acidic Environment
Making a natural indicator using red cabbage & comparing to
universal indicator

Introduction:
Indicators have been used for a long time. Acid/base indicators are compounds
that change colour according to the pH. Indicators are organic compounds and
some, such as litmus, are found naturally in plant pigments like in red cabbage.
Macarthur Girls High School 16

Practical Reports

This can be used as a natural indicator because it contains anthocyanin which
can gain or lose hydroxide ions in a solution. Some of them, like universal
indicator are produced commercially.

Aim:
To perform a firsthand investigation to measure the pH of substances using a
natural indicator

Hypothesis:
If the natural indicator is prepared correctly, it should show similar colours when
it compared with the universal indicator.

Materials:
● 1x red cabbage leaf
● 1x 600 mL beaker
● 1x 100 mL measuring cylinder
● 1x safety glasses
● 1x tripod, wire gauze, Bunsen burner
● 18 x test tubes + labels
● 2x test tube rack
● 5 x 50 mL beakers
● Hydrochloric Acid
● Sulfuric Acid
● Sodium Hydroxide
● Sodium Carbonate
● Potassium Hydroxide
● Table salt
● Soda Water
● White vinegar
● Nitric Acid
● Universal Indicator
● Glass stirring rod
● Ph chart
Method:
1. Warning: Wear safety glasses!
2. Warning: 0.1 mol L–1 NaOH is caustic. Avoid skin contact.
Clean up spills immediately.
3. Warning: 0.1 mol L–1 HCl is corrosive. Avoid skin contact.
Clean up spills immediately.
4. Transfer 200 mL of water into a 600 mL beaker. Add a leaf of
shredded red cabbage. Boil the mixture gently until a richly coloured
extract is formed. Allow to cool, then pour off the reddish-purple indicator
solution.
5. Test the indicator by adding it to 3 mL samples of the following
Macarthur Girls High School 17

Practical Reports

solutions:
✓ Hydrochloric Hydroxide
Acid ✓ Table salt
✓ Sulfuric Acid ✓ Soda Water
✓ Sodium ✓ White vinegar
Hydroxide ✓ Nitric Acid
✓ Sodium
Carbonate
✓ Potassium
Macarthur Girls High School 18

Practical Reports

6. Add the indicator dropwise until a definite colour can be seen.
Record your observations in a data table.
7. Repeat step 5 using universal indicator. Use a colour chart to
determine the pH of each test solution. Record the colour and the pH. Add
these results to your data table.
8. Correlate the results and determine a pH/colour scale for red
cabbage indicator.
Variables:
Independent: type of indicator used (natural or universal)

Dependant: the colour shown when indicator is added to the substance

Controlled: concentration of acid used, amount of acid/base used (5 drops), test
tube rack, same width of test tubes,
Macarthur Girls High School 19

Practical Reports

Results:
Macarthur Girls High School 20

Practical Reports

Discussion:
The experiment was conducted successfully as the aim was answered. The
experiment cannot be deemed reliable as it was no repeated many times due to
time constraints. We also did not get to discuss the results in class due to time
constraints. The apparatus was uncontaminated as it was washed and dried
before using the glassware. This ensured that no other substance can affect the
experiment. However, the experiment can be deemed valid because it only had
one independent variable. This meant that we were able to distinguish the slight
colour difference between natural indicator and universal indicator.

Limitations to this experiment includes careful observation of the slight colour
difference to the pH chart. Furthermore, using a data logger and a pH probe after
guessing the pH of the solution would give better and accurate results. Further
improvements to this experiment can include conducting the experiment quickly
by many people, for time efficiency and repeating it several times.
Macarthur Girls High School 21

Practical Reports

Conclusion:
From the results it can be seen that natural indicator can work just like the
universal indicator as it has similar properties.

Decarbonation of Soft-drink #02

Introduction:
Carbon dioxide exists in equilibrium when the bottle is sealed.

CO2(g) ↔ C02(aq)

When the bottle is opened, there is a change in the conditons. This means that
according to Le Chatelier’s principle, system will try to readjust the change by
shifting the equilibrium to the side which minimises the change.

Aim:
to observe the mass changes of carbon dioxide loss when softdrink is
decarbonated

Materials:
● 375mL of sealed coca cola bottle
● 500g digital weighing scale
● Hydrochloric acid (1Molar)

Method:
1. Take a 375mL sealed coke bottle and measure the mass on the
mass scale and record the initial mass in the table below.
2. Break the seal carefully and keep the lid onto the bottle loose so
that water vapour does not come out.
3. Leave it for two days in the room at 25 degrees.
4. Measure the mass of the coke bottle on the digital weighing scale
and record on the table.
5. Add 3 grams of HCL(aq) to the bottle, close the lid and shake it.
Carefully open the bottle and allow the CO2(g) to evaporate and weigh the
bottle again.
Macarthur Girls High School 22

Practical Reports

Results:
Mass of sealed bottle 327.2
grams

Mass of opened bottle after 2 days 325.6
grams

Mass after adding 3 g of HCl 328.6
grams

Mass after remaining co2 is 328.2
evaporated grams

Total mass of CO2 lost 2 grams
lost

Calculations:

m
n=
Mm

2
n=
48.01

V ( gas)
n=
V ( SLC )

V
0.04165798792=
24.79

∴V =1.032701521

Discussion:
The experiment was conducted successfully as the aim was answered. It was
fairly accurate as the electronic balance was used gave readings to 2 decimal
places. However we assumed that all mass lost was due to CO2 escaping vessel,
but some water vapor may have also escaped. To prevent this a control should
have been used (a beaker filled with distilled water) in order to account for this
Macarthur Girls High School 23

Practical Reports

mass loss. Also we assumed the experiment was carried out at 25°C for
calculation, however this temperature could not be accurately maintained and
results may have been affected by this. The experiment was deemed reliable as
the results were compared with other groups in class ans they got similar results.

Conclusion:
From the results it can clearly be seen that the mass change was successfully
measured through de carbonating a soft drink.

pH of household chemicals with probe & data logger #03

Introduction:
Many household substances are used for different purposes. This is why, they
have different chemicals, with different pH. To check the pH, data logger and pH
probe is used.

Aim:
To measure the pH of household substances using a data logger and pH probe.

Materials:
● Data logger ● Magnesium sulfate
● pH probe ● Vinegar
● 3 beakers ● Methylated spirits
● Stock solutions ● Sugar soap
● Bleach ● Lemon detergent
● Shampoo ● Lemon juice
● Window cleaner

Variables:

Independent: substances tested, with the probe

Dependent: pH of the substance

Controlled: pH probe used, data logger, beaker, same amount of chemicals used
Macarthur Girls High School 24

Practical Reports

Method:
1. Turn the data logger on, and connect the pH probe wire to the data
logger machine. Calibrate the data logger, using 3 different pH solutions,
(pH = 4,7,9)
2. Fill, 30mL of each of the solutions in the beakers.
3. Place the pH probe into the beaker. Ensure that the bottom part of
the probe is in the solution. Record the pH into the table, wash the probe
with water and dry it.
4. Repeat step 4 for all the solutions.

Risk Assessment:

Do not allow bleach to contact the skin, eyes or clothes as it can cause irritations
to the skin. Methylated spirits, are highly flammable and it may cause
drowsiness. To avoid this, keep it away from face and gases.
Results:

pH solution After calibration

4 4.04

7 7.04

9 9.03

Household pH
substance

Bleach 13.1
3

Shampoo 6.34
Macarthur Girls High School 25

Practical Reports

Window cleaner 8.64

1M magnesium 6.9
sulfate

Methylated spirits 7.51

Sugar soap 11.1
1

Lemon detergent 6.96

Vinegar 1.79

Lemon Juice 1.65

Conclusion:

From the results, it can be seen that the household substances vary from a pH of
1 to pH of 13.
Macarthur Girls High School 26

Practical Reports

Discussion:

The aim was successfully answered; hence the experiment can be called
successful. The pH probes are highly accurate compared to pH chart as it gives
the reading to 2 decimal places. This experiment can also be called valid
because there was only one independent variable which was tested against. This
can also be called reliable, because other groups got the same results, which we
got.

However, limitations to this experiment include calibration error. The probe was
not perfectly calibrated as there was 0.4 error. Further improvements can include
using an uncontaminated beaker containing uncontaminated household
substances.

pH of salt solutions #04

Introduction:

Indicators have been used to test the acidity or basicity of a substance. This
experiment tests the pH of salt solutions using a Universal indicator.

Aim:

To determine the pH of salt solutions using a universal indicator

Materials:
● Potassiu ● Magnesiu ● Water
m nitrate m carbonate ● Stirring
● Ammoniu ● Magnesiu rod
m acetate m Sulfate ● Universal
● Sodium ● Table salt indicator
acetate ● Sodium ● Test tube
● Copper hydrogen rack
carbonate carbonate
● Magnesiu ● 9 thin
m chloride test tubes
Macarthur Girls High School 27

Practical Reports

Method:
1. Place approximately 2 grams of each salt in the test tubes and add
5mL of water.
2. Mix the solution with a stirring rod
3. Add 3 drops of universal indicator in each test-tube.
4. Check the pH of the solution using a pH chart.
5. Record results.

Variables:

Independent: the salt solution

Dependant: the pH of the salt solution

Controlled: amount of water added, 3 drops of universal indicator, same
(height, width) of test tubes

Results:

Name of salt Polyprotic Weak Strong Predicted Calculated
pH

Potassium 10 11
nitrate


Ammonium 6 7
acetate


Sodium 8 8
acetate


Copper 7 8
carbonate
Macarthur Girls High School 28

Practical Reports


Magnesium 5 7
chloride


Magnesium 7 9
Carbonate


Magnegium 9 7
sulfate


Sodium 8 8
hydrogen
carbonate

Table salt 7 6.5

Conclusion:

From the results it can be seen that pH of the salts vary, when in solution.

Discussion:

The experiment can be deemed success as it answers the aim. It can also be
considered reliable, as the results were consistent with other groups. It can also
be considered accurate as the test tubes were washed and cleaned, before it was
used. It was also, valid because there is only one variable which changes
throughout the experiment.

Further improvements to this experiment includes, using a beam balance to
measure the salt, instead of approximating with a teaspoon.

*GOOD TO KNOW:
Macarthur Girls High School 29

Practical Reports

What happens in a carbonate salt? H2CO3 + H2O → HCO3- + H3O+

Titration of Na2CO3 and HCl

Introduction:

Titration allows us to find the exact concentration of an unknown substance by
using a known concentration.

Aim:

To prepare a solution of sodium carbonate standard and use it to titrate with
25mL HCl.

To find the exact concentration of 25mL HCl required to neutralize the reaction

Hypothesis:

It will take about 25mL of sodium carbonate standard to titrate with 25mL of HCl.

Materials:

● HCl ● Filter ● Thymol
● Na2CO3 paper Blue indicator
powder (1.32g) ● Burette ● Retort
● Conical ● Pipette(2 stand
flask 5mL) ● Electronic
● Volumetri ● Phenolph balance
c flask thalein
Macarthur Girls High School 30

Practical Reports

Method:

Part a: preparing a 250mL of 0.05M Sodium Carbonate in a
volumetric flask
1. Wear safety glasses.
2. Place 1.32g of sodium carbonate powder on a filter paper and weigh
on an electronic balance.
3. Transfer into the volumetric flask. Add distilled water into the
volumetric flask until the meniscus reaches 250mL mark. Close the flask,
with a lid. Shake it by inverting the flask to ensure that the sodium
carbonate solution is ready.

Part b: titrating it with HCl
1. Set up a burette using a retort stand and
clamp stand, as seen from the diagram.
2. Close the stopcock of the burette. Fill the
burette with Na2CO3 solution using a small
funnel. Open the stopcock and drain a few
milliliters of solution into a small beaker until
the tip of the burette is free of air bubbles.
Refill the burette and adjust the meniscus to
0.00mL
3. Pipette exactly 25.0mL of HCl solution
into a conical flask. Add 20 drops of thymol
blue into the conical flask.
4. Place this flask under the burette, so
that the sodium carbonate solution drips into
the flask once the stopcock is opened.
5. Swirl the flask constantly to mix sodium
carbonate and hydrochloric acid. View the colour of the reaction mixture
against a white background. Occasionally stop the titration by closing the
stopcock(do this when you are at 20mL)
6. Record results, at which thymol blue changes colour to yellow.
7. Repeat steps 2-6 for 3 more times.

Results:

Amount of Sodium
Macarthur Girls High School 31

Practical Reports

carbonate standard
added

Trial 1 25mL

Trial 2 24.6mL

Trial 3 24.7mL

Trial 4 24.6mL

n
CALCULATIONS:
C=
v

0.050= n/0.250

n=0.0125 moles

m
n= Mm

0.0125=m/105.99

m=1.324875 grams of sodium carbonate are needed to make the standard
solution.

Concentration part:

Trial 1 is the outlier. Therefore it does not get calculated.
Macarthur Girls High School 32

Practical Reports

Trial 2 – 24.6ml Na2CO3 Trial 3 – 24.7ml Na2CO3 Trial 4 – 24.6ml Na2CO3
used used used

25mL = 0.025L 25mL = 0.025L 25mL = 0.025L

0.05M of 24.6mL(0.0246) 0.05M of 24.7mL(0.0246) 0.05M of 24.6mL(0.0246)
Na2CO3 used. Na2CO3 used. Na2CO3 used.

C1V1=C2V2 C1V1=C2V2 C1V1=C2V2

0.05 x 0.0246 0.05 x 0.0247 0.05 x 0.0246
C1= 0.025 C1= 0.025 C1= 0.025

C1=0.0492M of HCl C1=0.0494M of HCl C1=0.0492M of HCl
solution needed solution needed solution needed

Conclusion:

From the results it can be seen that it takes about 24.65mL of sodium carbonate
to neutralize the HCl acid.

Discussion:

Anhydrous (normal) Na2CO3 was used because it is stable and does not gain
mass by absorbing water from air. Therefore, its composition and mass is
accurately known. All equipment was free of foreign contaminants and was
washed with the correct liquids. All volumes were measured from the bottom of
the meniscus to increase the accuracy. No splashing or loss of liquid occurred
during the transfer of liquids. Hence accurate and valid as measurements were
also close to stoichiometric values. Overall experiment is valid, as all the
variables were controlled, to determine the endpoint of titration. The
experimental design is reliable because it was compared with other member of
Macarthur Girls High School 33

Practical Reports

the class and consistent results were achieved and it also accounted for
theoretically expected results.

Limitations to this experiment include using a pH probe and data logger, to see
the titration curve. This allows to determine the equivalence point and the
endpoint of the reaction.

Esterification practical

Introduction:

Alcohols and alkanoic acids, when reacted form an ester and water molecules.
The ester formed, is insoluble in water. This is why,
it causes the stinky smell.

Hypothesis:

As the reaction proceeds, it will form an ester called
butyl propanoate.

Aim:

To produce an ester by reacting alcohol and
alkanoic acid

Materials:
● Pear shaped flask
● Beaker
● Tripod
● Wire gauze
● Bunsen burner
● Retort stand
● 2 x boss heads
● 2 x clamps
● Condenser
● Boiling chips (heat ones)
Macarthur Girls High School 34

Practical Reports

● Concentrated sulfuric acid
● Ethanoic acid
● 1-butanol

Method:
3 Warning: Wear safety glasses!

4 Warning: 1-butanol is flammable and harmful.

5 Warning: Ethanoic acid is corrosive.

6 Warning: Sulfuric acid is corrosive.

7 Warning: Butyl ethanoate is flammable.

8 Assemble the refluxing apparatus as shown in the diagram on the next
page. Ensure that the glassware is securely clamped and supported on a
retort stand.
9 Connect tubing to the condenser (water inlet at the bottom, water outlet at
the top) and adjust the water volume to a mild, uniform flow.
10 Drop in a few boiling chips through the top of the condenser to allow for
smooth boiling.
11 Mix together 25 mL of 1-butanol, 30 mL of ethanoic acid and 10 drops of
concentrated sulfuric acid in a 250 mL beaker. Place a funnel into the top of
the condenser and pour in the reaction mixture.
12 Heat the flask in a water bath heated by a Bunsen burner or a hot plate.
13 Stop heating and allow to cool. Carefully disassemble the apparatus. Pour
the refluxed mixture into a separatory funnel. Add 50 mL of water and
shake. Drain off the lower aqueous layer and discard. Repeat twice with two
more 50 mL portions of water. The butyl ethanoate remains in the
separatory funnel.
14 Carefully smell the butyl ethanoate and describe it. Does it smell anything
like the original reactants?
If time permits, the butyl ethanoate can be further purified by fractional
distillation. Pure butyl ethanoate has a boiling point of 126.5°C.
Macarthur Girls High School 35

Practical Reports

Risk assessment:
● Alcohols and alkanoic acids are volatile. They can rapidly evaporate
so they should be kept away from flame.
● Substances used in experiment are highly corrosive so safety
glasses/gloves worn
● Sulfuric acid is corrosive. Clean up spills immediately

Variables:

Independent: amount of alcohol and acid added

Dependent: amount of ester produced

Controlled: water bath, temperature of environment, well ventilated area

Results:

Reactants Products Smell

Ethanoic acid Butyl ethanoate Smelt like
acetone.
However, after it
was placed in
water, it smelt like
vinegar.

Butanol
Macarthur Girls High School 36

Practical Reports

Conclusion:

From the results it can be seen that mixing alcohol and alkanoic acids produce an
ester and water

Discussion:

The experiment was deemed successful as it answered the aim. Limitations to
this experiment include time management and human error. This experiment
was deemed reliable because other groups in our class got same results as us.
The apparatus was uncontaminated as it was washed before using it. Thus, this
experiment can be deemed accurate. There are no real variables which were
altered, so validity of the experiment can be argued.

Concentrated sulfuric acid was used because it speeds up the rate of reaction
and it is a dehydrating agent. The boiling chips were placed into the pear shaped
flask because it prevents bubbling and spreads the heat evenly. Reflux was used
to prevent the escape of any volatile vapors, allowing us to perform the reaction
at higher temperatures, boost the reaction rate and shift left or right to favour
ester yield. Water bath was used to ensure safety, and prevent any volatile
substances like the reactants from igniting because of the flame.

Chem. Monitoring &
Management

Tests for Anions
Macarthur Girls High School 37

Practical Reports

Introduction:

There are many different types of chemical reactions. Some of them include
precipitation reactions, and acid carbonate reactions. Each of these can be
visible at a macroscopic level. This experiment tests for common anions, through
chemical reactions.

Aim:

To conduct a series of reactions to identify for specific anions.

Materials:
Test solutions: ● Na2SO4 ● distilled
• Pb(NO3)2 ● Na2CO3 water
• Ba(NO3)2 ● Na3PO4 ● water
• HNO3 ● NaCl bath
• AgNO3 ● 4 test ● test tube
• NaOH tubes holders
● test tube
Anion solutions: rack

Variables:
Independent: test solution changes

Dependent: type of visible changes that occur

Controlled: adding 10mL of both the anion solutions and test solutions, same
height and width of test tube, distilled water, water bath, test tube holders, same
environment

Risk Assessment:
Risk Hazard Prevention

Some chemicals are They can burn the skin To prevent it, wear safety
corrosive and poisonous glasses and wash hands
if it contacts with it.
Macarthur Girls High School 38

Practical Reports

Method:
1. Add 10 drops of each of the anion solutions to each of 4 test tubes.
2. Add 10 drops of HNO3 to each of the test tubes and warm gently.
3. Record the results.
4. Use these results to describe a test for one particular anion.
5. Thoroughly clean all test tubes with distilled water between tests.
6. For the remaining three anions, put 10 drops in each of 3 test tubes,
add 5 drops of HNO3 and then add 5 drops of Ag+.
7. Record the results in the table below. Write NP if no precipitate
forms, and write ppt if precipitate forms and give its colour.
8. Repeat steps 6–7 with Pb2+ and then Ba2+
9. After the Ba2+ test add 10 drops of NaOH to each of the test tubes
and record any changes

Results:
Test Solutions

Anion H+ Ag+ Pb2+ Ba2+ Ba2+
and OH-

Carbonate Small Cloudy Cloudy Remains Turns
Bubbles precipitate precipitat cloudy cloudy
produced sinks to the e sinks to white
bottom the when
bottom added to
each
other.

Chloride No Turned Solution No Turned
reaction cloudy turned a reaction cloudy
before bit clear white
heating. with with
Greyish bubbles white
precipitate with precipitat
after white e
heating precipitat
e at the
bottom.
Cloudy

Sulfate No Turned light Cloudy at No Cloudy
reaction purple top and reaction
Macarthur Girls High School 39

Practical Reports

White
precipitat
e formed
at the
bottom

Phosphate No Cloudy Cloudy cloudy cloudy
reaction yellow white white white
liquid with liquid liquid liquid
dense with with with
yellow dense dense dense
precipitate white white white
formed precipitat precipitat precipitat
e formed e formed e formed

Discussion:
This experiment involves testing anions by reacting them with cation solutions.
Each anion reacted with a test solution.

Solutions were measured with dropper, so it is not precisely accurate. However,
this experiment doesn’t require a great deal of accuracy so it can be justified.
The experiment can be deemed valid as the variables (chemical composition)
changes. Moreover, there were many controlled variables. This increases the
validity. The experiment can be deemed reliable as other group got the same
results as us. Further improvements to this experiment can include using
uncontaminated bottles, like the sodium carbonate bottle. To avoid this, shaking
the bottle can prevent the occurrence of a white precipitate in the bottle.
Limitations to this experiment is human error and time management.

Conclusion:
From the results, it can be seen that different anions produce different
substances.

Test for Cations

Introduction:
Qualitative analysis is the process of identifying the substances present in a
sample of matter. There are many possible tests, and in this experiment several
Macarthur Girls High School 40

Practical Reports

tests including flame tests and precipitation reactions will be used. Some metal
ions emit characteristic colours of light when heated in the blue flame of a
Bunsen burner. Flame tests are therefore useful in identifying some cations. In
precipitation reactions two ionic solutions are mixed with a solid precipitate being
formed. The nature of chemical tests for identifying ions must be such that no
two ions give the same results. By conducting appropriate tests, the identity of
the ion or ions in an unknown sample may be determined.

Aim:
To identify cations, present in the solution using precipitation reactions.

Materials:
Cation solutions:

● Pb(NO3)2
● Ba(NO3)2
● FeSO4
● CuSO4
● CaCl2
● FeCl3

Test solutions:

● Na2SO4
● HCl
● NaOH
● Acidified KMnO4 (additional test)
● NaCl
● KI

● 6 watch glasses
● 5mL 4M HCl

Variables:
Independent: cation solutions

Dependent: any observable reaction (colour, appearance, precipitates)

Controlled: amount of each solution added, same width, height of test tubes,
environment, temperature,
Macarthur Girls High School 41

Practical Reports

Risk Assessment:
Risk Hazard Prevention

HCl Is corrosive and can cause burns Prevent direct contact with skin or
on skin clothes

Pb These salts are poisonous Wash hands thoroughly after use
and to avoid contact with skin and
Ba clothes.

Method:
1. Add 10 drops of the Pb2+ solution to each of 6 watch glasses.
2. Add 10 drops of the test solution to each of the watch glasses. If no
precipitate forms, try adding a few more drops.
3. Record the results in the table below. Write NP if no precipitate
forms, and write ppt if precipitate forms and give its colour.
4. Thoroughly clean all watch glasses with distilled water.
5. Repeat steps 2-4 with the other test solutions listed in the materials.

Results:
TEST SOLUTIONS

Cations Cl- SO42- OH- EXCESS OH- Mno4

Pb2+ Milky white milky white White White No reaction
ppt ppt powdery powdery
ppt ppt

Cu2+ No reaction No reaction Cloudy blue Cloudy blue Nothing
milky milky happens
precipitate precipitate
forms forms

Ba2+ No reaction Cloudy No reaction White ppt No reaction
white ppt formed
formed
Macarthur Girls High School 42

Practical Reports

Ca2+ No reaction No reaction Cloudy Cloudy Pinkish-purple
(clear) white with white with colour
powdery thicker
precipitate powdery
precipitate

Fe 2+ Yellow→ No reaction Powdery Thick Dark orange,
clear green powdery yellow
(clear) precipitate dark green
precipitate

Fe3+ No reaction No reaction Dark yellow Dark cloudy Hot pink
liquid. Small yellow ppt colour
white ppt formed
forms

Conclusion:
From the results it can be seen that the cations have distinct precipitates when it
reacts with test solutions

Discussion:
This experiment deals with reacting cation solutions with test solutions. When
they react, certain cations like lead produce a precipitate which are distinct to
others. The results demonstrate how most of the precipitation reactions produce
a white precipitate. This means that some cations can be hard to deduce from
these tests.

This experiment can be called valid as only one variable changed and the others
remained same. The experiment can also be considered reliable as other groups
got the same results as us. Accuracy does not really matter in this experiment
because it is a qualitative experiment except for the fact that the drops were
from the dropper. Limitations to the experiment includes using test/cation
solutions which may have been contaminated by other students. Further
improvements to this experiment can include effective time management, and
placing the watch glass on top of a white paper so that the precipitate can be
easily seen.

Flame Tests
Macarthur Girls High School 43

Practical Reports

Aim:
To observe a range of colours that cations produce in flame tests

Materials:
● Bunsen Burner
● Matchbox
● 6 spray bottles each containing 0.05M aqueous (iron III chloride,
Calcium chloride, barium nitrate, barium chloride, copper II chloride)

Variables:
Independent: chemical composition of solutions being tested

Dependent: colour of flame it emits

Controlled: one spray of each solution, blue flame, same temperature,

Risk Assessment:
Hazard Risk Prevention

FeCl3 Harmful if swallowed. ● To prevent
Irritating to the skin, risk this risk, use low
or serious damage to concentrations of
eyes. solution for flame
testing.
● Wear safety
glasses
● Wash hands
if solution comes in
contact with skin.

BaCl2 Harmful if swallowed and ● To prevent
irritating to the eyes, this risk, use low
skin, lungs concentrations of
solution for flame
testing.
● Wear safety
glasses
● Wash hands
if solution comes in
Macarthur Girls High School 44

Practical Reports

contact with skin.

Method:
1. Set up a Bunsen burner to blue flame, like
the one shown in diagram.
2. Spray iron III chloride in the blue flame.
3. Observe the colour and record results.
4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 for other solutions.

Results:
Compound Ions Present in Colour
compound

FeCl3 Fe3+, Cl- Orange – yellow. Keeps
fluctuating

CaCl2 Ca2+ , Cl- Orange-red

Ba(NO3)2 Ba2+, NO3- Apple Green

BaCl2 Ba2+, Cl- Apple green

CuCl2 Cu2+, Cl- Blue, yellow, green (aqua)

Conclusion:
From the results it can be seen that different cations produce different colour
flames.

Discussion:
The experiment is deemed to be a success because it answers the aim. The
results show that different cations produce different colours in flame tests. The
results are reliable because other group got the same results as us. Moreover,
the experiment can also be considered valid as only one variable changes
(chemical composition of solution). Therefore, it can be said that the flame colour
present is directly as a result of the cations present. The accuracy of experiment
is dependent on the number of sprays squirted into the flame. This limits the
accuracy of the experiment. This is not really considered as the aim was only to
observe the range of colours of different cations.
Macarthur Girls High School 45

Practical Reports

Limitations to this experiment include that flame tests cannot detect low
concentrations of ions. Moreover, flame tests may not be distinguishable as
background light may conceal colours shown in the flame.

Sulfates in fertiliser

Aim:
to use gravimetric analysis to determine the sulphate content of a lawn fertiliser.

Materials:
● 0.6 g solid soluble ● Hotplate
fertiliser ● Glass rod
● 1M hydrochloric acid ● Watch glass
● 15Ml BaCl2 ● Filter paper
● Electronic balance ● Buchner funnel
● 250ml beaker ● Flask
● Burette ● Adaptor
● Tubing

Risk Assessment:

Barium chloride is a toxic solution. To avoid this, wear safety glasses

Variables:

Independent: - none really

Dependent: mass of precipitate

Controlled: environment, pressure, temperature, and everything else.

Method:
1. Weigh out accurately approximately 0.6003 grams of the powdered
lawn fertiliser into a clean 250ml beaker. Record the mass of fertilise. Add
25ml of deionised water. Stir to dissolve the crystals.
Macarthur Girls High School 46

Practical Reports

2. Add 10 drops of 1M hydrochloric acid into the solution.
3. Use a hotplate to heat the mixture until it just boils.
4. Add 7% barium chloride solution from a burette slowly with a
stirring rod to the hot sulphate solution until no further white precipitate
forms. Allow the precipitate to settle and then add a few further drops of
Barium Chloride to check that all the sulphate has precipitated.
5. Gently re-boil the mixture for a further 5 minutes to coagulate the
precipitate. Stand on the bench for 5 minutes to cool.
6. Weigh a circle of filter paper and a watch glass using an electronic
balance. Record these weights.
7. Write the name of your team on the watch glass.
8. Set up the filtration apparatus for vacuum filtration.
9. Filter the warm supernatant and then the suspension of barium
sulfate slowly through the filter paper. Ensure that all the solid is
transferred from the beaker to the filter using small amounts of warm
washing water.
10.When filtration is complete, carefully transfer filter paper and solids
to the weighed watch glass. This will be dried in an oven, weighed and the
results sent to your teacher.
11.Calculate the mass of Barium Sulfate and the number of moles of it.
12.Calculate the weight of sulphate in the sample.
13.Calculate the percentage by weight of sulphate in the fertiliser.
14.Compare your result with the manufacturers and discuss the
sources of error.

Results:

Team Name Pooja and
Aashini

Mass fertiliser 0.6003g

Mass filter paper 0.0920g

Mass watch glass 31.0866g

Mass watch glass and dry 32.1963g
ppt
Macarthur Girls High School 47

Practical Reports

Dry ppt 1.1097g

Ba2+(aq) + SO42-(aq) → BaSO4(s)

For barium Sulfate:

m
n=
Mm

1.1097
n=
233.37

n=0.00475510991moles

For Sulfate:

m
n=
Mm

m
0.00475510991=
96.07

Therefore , m=0.4568234092 grams

Sulfate content in fertiliser:
Macarthur Girls High School 48

Practical Reports

0.4568234092
x 100=76.09918527
0.6003

76.1 (3 sig. fig.)

Conclusion:

From the results it can be seen that about 76% of the fertiliser contains sulfate
ions.

Discussion:
Through conducting physical and chemical tests, the aim of the experiment was
successfully answered.
By placing the precipitate in the oven, any water molecules that are present will
evaporate, and thus accurate results can be obtained.

The experiment can be deemed reliable as other groups received similar mass of
precipitate to us, and hence would have received similar percentage of sulfate
concentration. The experiment is considered valid as there are no real variables
that were changed. The electronic balance was highly accurate (4 decimal
places) so the experiment can be deemed accurate.