Department of Chemistry

Physical Chemistry Lab I

CHEM 355

Fall 2020

Determination of ideality of solutions

Students names:

Lulua Al Janahi 201600103

Date of experiment: 31/8/2020

Section: 52

Instructor: Joanna Pajak

Introduction:

Liguids contains layers. The interactions between these layers create a resistance to
any flow that is made because of the applied forces, so this is what is called
“Viscosity”, it’s the measure of a liquid frictional resistance. When a force is applyied
to the liquid it flows, but there will be force of fraction between the layers which
cause resistane to the flow. To measure the force of friction (F) we use :

η (eta) is the proportionality constant known as the coefficient of viscosity. It has

specific value for each liguid. We can determine the viscosisty from Piosewlle’s
equation:

Where V is the volume of the liquid flowing through the capillary in time t, P the
pressure-head, r is the radius of the tube and L its length.

A mobile liquid means it has low vicosity, so F ( fluiity ) is the reciprocal of the
viscosity coefficient.
F= 1\n

According to these equations, we can determain if the

solutions are ideal solutions or not. If the theoretical and experimental equations are
equal, the solution will be ideal.
Ostwald viscometer is used to measure the viscosity or more specifically to measure
the flow times which is the time required for the liquid meniscus to pass between the
upper and lower fiducial marks of the viscometer.

In this experiment, we are going to measure and analyze the viscosities of ideal
( toluene / p-xylene ), non-ideal ( metanol / water ) binary solution and their
components using ostwald viscometer. After measuring the flow time using ostwald
viscometer we will be able to recognize the differences between them.
2
Experimental Method:

Procedure:

Part I:

In the first part we prepared “water/methanol” in couple of concentrations 0, 20, 40, 60%, 80
and 100%. Then we took 10mL of each solution depends on the concentration that we have
and measure the viscosity by inserting the solution inside the viscometer and let the volume
passes through the two lines and measure the time required by using stopwatch. After that
we repeated this step two times to take the average time. In addition, we did some
calculations to know the viscosity and compare the theoretical and experimental Fluidity in
order to discover the ideal from the non-ideal solution.

Part II:

We do this part of the experiment under the fume hood. We measure the flow
times of toluene / p-xylene solutions, which are 0, 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100% by
volume toluene. We follow the same procedure as in part I. Lastly, we collect the
data and results in the table.

3
 Results & Calculations:

Part I: Reference fluid viscosity (water):

𝝶= 9.95 ×10−3 p

Part I: Sample calculation (20% methanol):

−3
ηr∗ρ∗tav (9.95 x 10 )( 0.9724)(13.75) g
1. η= = =0.0125 .s
ρr∗tr (0.9978)(10.71) cm
1 1
2. F exp= = =105.26
η 0.0125
( volume of water ) ( density ) ( 8 ) ( 0.9978 )
3. moles of water= = =0.443 mole
molecular wieght 18
( volume of methanol ) ( density ) ( 2 )( 0.7914 )
4. moles of methanol= = =0.049 mole
molecular wieght 32
moles of methanol 0.049
5. X methanol= = =0.9
total mole 0.049+ 0.443
moles of water 0.443
6. X water= = =0.1
total mole 0.443+0.049
7. F theo =X methanol Fmethanol + X water F water=( 0.099 )( 153.1 ) +(0.9)(105.26)

% methanol T1 T2 (s) Tav (s) ρ η Fexp X met X wat Fth

(s) (g/ml) (g/cm.s) (cm.s/g)

0(water) 10.65 16.75 10.7 0.9978 0.0095 105.26 0 1 105.26

20 13.75 13.75 13.75 0.9724 0.0125 80 0.099 0.9 109.89

40 17.12 17.03 17.08 0.9449 0.015 66.67 0.22 0.77 115.73

60 16.28 16.40 16.34 0.9066 0.014 71.43 0.41 0.59 124.87

80 13.18 13.43 13.31 0.8561 0.0106 94.2 0.65 0.35 136.35

100 8.81 8.90 8.86 0.7914 0.00653 153.1 1 0 153.1

4
 Figure (1): F Theoretical Vs X methanol

F theoretical Vs X methanol
180
160
140
FTheoretical
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Xmethanol

Figure (2): F experimental Vs X methanol

F experimental Vs X methanol
180
160
140
120
100 Fexperimental
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

5
 Xmethanol

Part II: Sample calculation (20% toluene):

η r∗ρ∗t 9.95 x 10−3 x 0.862 9 x 4 4 .56 g

1. η20 % = = =7.1 4 ×10
−3
ρr∗tr 0.9978 x 56.03 cm . s
1 1 cm . s
F exp= = =140
2. η
7.172 ×10−3
g g
cm . s
3.
g
M oles of toluene=
( volume of toluene ) ( density )
=
(
( 2 ml ) 0.8650
ml ) =0.018 8 mole
molecular wieght g
92.14
mol
g
4. M oles of xylene=
( volume of xylene ) ( density )
=
(
( 8 ml ) 0.8626
ml ) =0.065 mole
molecular wieght g
106.16
mol
(moles of Toluenen) 0.018 8
5. X toluene= = =0.22
total moles 0.018 8+0.065

( moles of xylene) 0.065

6. X −xylene= = =0.78
total moles 0.065+ 0.0188

7. F theo =X toluene F toluene + X xylene F xylene =( 0.22 ) (1 61 ) + ( 0.78 ) ( 140 )=1 44.62 cm . s /g

% toluene T1 (s) T2 (s) Tav (s) ρ η (g/cm.s) Fexp X tol X xyl Fth
(g/ml) (cm.s/g)

0(xylene) 46.53 46.38 46.48 0.8626 7.14x10-3 140 0 1 140

20 44.50 44.65 44.56 0.8629 6.84x10-3 146 0.2 0.78 144.62

2
40 43.93 43.97 43.95 0.8633 6.75x10-3 148 0.4 0.57 149.03
3
60 42.72 42.75 42.74 0.8638 6.57x10-3 152 0.6 0.37 153.23
3
80 41.78 41.84 41.81 0.8644 6.43x10-3 155 0.8 0.18 157.22
2

6
100(toluene) 40.34 40.30 40.32 0.8650 6.21x10-3 161 1 0 161

Water 56.03 56.03 56.03 0.9978 9.95x10-3 100.5 - - 100.5

Figure (1): F theoretical Vs X toluene

F theoretical Vs X toluene
165

160

155

150
Ftheoretical

145

140

135

130

125
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Xtoluene

Figure (2): F experimental Vs X toluene

7
 F experimental Vs X toluene
165

160

155

150
Fexperimental

145

140

135

130

125
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Xtoluene

8
Discussion:

In this experiment, we used an Ostwald Viscometer to measure and analyze the

viscosity of ideal (toluene \ p –xylene) and non-ideal (methanol \ water). However, we
used the viscosity of water as a reference in both parts.

In part I, we measured the viscosity of the non- ideal solution (methanol/ water).
Clearly, we recognized that the density decreases as the volume of methanol
increases, however, its viscosity increases. The first graph shows a linear relationship
between theoretical fluidity and the mole fraction of methanol. However, the second
graph shows a deviation from the theoretical value, and that can be due to errors
during our experiment.

In part II, we measured the viscosity of the ideal solution (toluene/ p-xylene) using the
density and the average time of the solution to pass the capillary and using water a
reference. We noticed that the time for a solution to pass the capillary is decreasing
while the amount of toluene is increasing. However, toluene and p-xylene is an ideal
solution because toluene has a similar structure to xylene, but it is less viscous than
xylene because the xylene is bulkier than toluene. As a result, the viscosity decreases
when more toluene is added to the solution. Considering fluidity is inversely
proportional to the viscosity, the fluidity increased as we added more toluene to the
solution. Besides, we recognized that the density increases as the volume of toluene
increases. From the graph, the experimental fluidity vs. the mole fraction of toluene,
we can verify that the theoretical fluidity is directly proportional to the mole fraction
of toluene. Nevertheless, the second graph, experimental fluidity vs. mole fraction of
toluene, showed similar results with a bit of deviation from linearity which could be
due to errors.
In this experiment, different types of errors can alter our final results. For instance,
any random errors during the preparation of any solutions as well as recording the
flow time while using the viscometer can directly alter our results.

Finally, this experiment was completed successfully, and the main objective was
achieved successfully. We were able to excellently measure and analyze the

9
viscosities of ideal (toluene / p-xylene) solution, and the non-ideal (methanol/water)
binary solution, and their components. Then, using the Ostwald viscometer we were
able to identify the differences between them by measuring the flow time.

Reference:
Physical Chemistry Lab I Manual “CHEM 355”

10