Diego Sampieri

3/12/2020
IB CHEM SL
Lab Work

Determine the enthalpy change for reaction of Zn and CuSO4

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the value of enthalpy change for the reaction of 0.500 mol
dm- 3 CuSO4 with 3.00 g Zinc?

Procedure:

1. Using a measuring cylinder, measure 50.0 cm3 of 0.500 mol dm- 3 CuSO4
2. Using a mass balance, measure exactly 3.00g of Zinc.
3. Insert a temperature probe into the CuSO 4 inside a beaker, start the collection of data, and
record the temperature every 30 seconds.
4. After 30 minutes, add the 3.00 g of Zinc to the beaker with the CuSO4, and stir.
5. Continue to record the temperature every 30 seconds for 6 minutes approximately.
6. Repeat the process three times for three different trials and determine the average change in
temperature, using graphs.

Raw data: Trial 1:

Trial 2:
Calculations:

Changes in temperature:

Trial 1: final temperature - initial = 29.4 - 21.4

∆T = 8oC

Trial 2: final temperature - initial = 28.4 - 20.2

∆T = 8.2oC

Calculate the heat released:

Heat released for trial 1

Q = mc∆T

Q = 50 cm3 x 4.18 J g-1 oC-1 3 x 8oC

Q = 1672 Kj / 1000 = 1.672 J

Heat released for trial 2

Q = mc∆T

Q = 50 cm3 x 4.18 J g-1 oC-1 3 x 8.2oC

Q = 1713.8 Kj / 1000 = 1.714 J

Use the equation to determine the limiting reactant

Zn + CuSO4 ZnSO4 + Cu

Moles of Zinc = 0.046 moles

Moles of CuSO4 = 0.31 moles

Zinc is the limiting reactant

2. Calculate the enthalpy change for the reaction between one mole of Zinc and
CuSO4(aq) in kJ.mol-1

∆H = Q/moles of limiting reactant for trial 1

∆H = 1.672 J / 0.046 moles

∆H = -36.35 kJ mol-1

∆H = Q/moles of limiting reactant for trial 2

∆H = 1.7138 J / 0.046 moles

∆H = -37.26 kJ mol-1

3. Temperature change and enthalpy change for the reaction of Zinc and Copper(ii)
sulfate

Temperature change and enthalpy change for the reaction of Zinc and Copper(ii)
sulfate

Trial 1 Uncertaint Trial 2 Uncertaint Average

y y
 Temperature 8 ±0.2 8.2 ±0.2 8.1
change/oC±0.2

Enthalpy - 36.35 ±1.4 -37.26 ±1.4 -36.81

change/k /
KJ.mol-1±1.4

Qualitative Observations:

Trial 1 In this trial the copper sulfate started off being blue and then the zinc was added. The
color changed into a gray color almost until completely black. The compound had a different
color and you could see the small pieces circling around the beaker.

Trial 2 in this trial the tape that was holding the polystyrene lid would not completely hold and
there was a small gap. This caused the temperature to do a slight change. The copper sulfate
also changed from blue to a darker grey.

4. Uncertainties:

Temperature change in trial 1 = (0.2/8)x100 = ±2.5%

Mass of solution CuSO4 = (0.5/50)x100 = ±1%

Mass of Zinc weighed off = (0.01/3)x100 = ±0.3%

Total percentage uncertainty of trial 1: 2.5% + 1% + 0.3% = ±3.8 %

absolute uncertainty trial 1 = (3.8 x -36.35)/100 = ± 1.4

Propagated Uncertainty in enthalpy change = ±1.4

Propagated Uncertainty in temperature change = ±0.2

5. Interpretation: the literature value for the reaction is – 217 kJ mol -1 Calculate the
percentage error

= 116.8% error trial 1

= 117.2% error trial 2

Trial 1 (( Theoretical - actual) / actual)x100 = ((-36.35 – 217)/– 217)x100

Trial 2 (( Theoretical - actual) / actual)x100 = ((-37.26 – 217)/– 217)x100

1. Conclusion: In conclusion after doing this experiment I can say for my group that we
accomplished and manage to see the change in temperature when you mix Zinc and
CuSO4. We got the Enthalpy change and obtained a devastating high percentage error of
116.8% on the first trial and on the second trial 117.2%. The data then could not be valid
due to the big uncertainty. During this experiment We had many strengths and
weaknesses, the biggest strength we had as a team was that we were always focused and
kept a good communication on what each member had to do or what was his role in the
experiment. The biggest weakness would be that no one was 100% clear on the
instructions on how to use the probe and the computer program to measure temperature.
Three weaknesses would be the misuse of the computer program, not timing well as we
only had chance to do 2 trials and last not being able to do the third and last trial to see if
we could have improved, all of these errors were definitely systematic errors.

2. Evaluation: This experiment had almost accurate results due to small uncertainties.
Thanks to the small uncertainties in lab equipment (Temperature probe ±0.2, Mass scale
±0.01 and the Measuring cylinder ±0.5) there was a minimum amount of variation giving us
the accurate results. The lab had several mistakes that were both systematic and random.
The lid of the chamber of polystyrene was not big enough to cover entirely the beaker,
causing temperature to loose and not be as accurate as possible when measuring. Both
trials had almost the same results which don't come as near as the accepted value was,
that could mean zinc was not the best metal option when measuring reaction with copper
sulfate.

4. Improvements and extensions: An improvement would be to do this experiment

with the air conditioner turned off. This is because temperature could've been
compromised because of the winds and change of temperature. Have better polystyrene
chambers to guard the beakers from room temperature and use different measuring
probes. Having more expertise and more knowledge of how to use the program as my
group had some trouble doing the third trial since we did not know how to use the program.
Calculating the exact density of water with copper sulfate, which would be 3.6g/cm³.