Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

Effect of Adding Carbon Atoms to Primary Alcohols

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Research Question

How does the addition of carbon atoms to primary alcohols affect their molar heat of
combustion?

1.2 Rationale

The molar heat of combustion (MHC) of a fuel is a measure of the amount of heat released
when 1 mol of the fuel is burned. (LibreTexts, 2019). Fuels can have varying MHCs because
the enthalpy of the bonds in the fuel molecule will be different. Fuels with more carbon
atoms will have a higher energy released when the bonds of the products are formed than the
energy absorbed when bonds are broken. For example, ethanol (2 carbon atoms) has a higher
theoretical absolute value of enthalpy change compared to methanol (1 carbon atom);
methanol is -650 kJ and ethanol is -1609 kJ.

Combustion of methanol: Combustion of ethanol:

C H 3 OH +1.5 O2 → C O2 +2 H 2 O C 2 H 5 OH +3 O2 → 2 C O2+ 3 H 2 O
∆ H products =3∗414 +358+463+ 1.5∗498=2810 ∆ H products =5∗414 +358+463+ 3∗498=4385
∆ H reactants =2∗804+ 4∗463=3460 ∆ H reactants =2∗2∗804 +3∗2∗463=5994
overall ∆ H=2810−3460=−650 kJ overall ∆ H=4385−5994=−1609 kJ

MHC can be derived from experimental data by heating water over a set period of time and
measuring the change in water temperature and the amount of fuel burned. MHC is given by
mc ∆ t
the formula: , where m is the mass of water burned, c is the heat capacity of water
n
(4.18), ∆t is the change in water temperature, and n is the number of moles of fuel burned.
With this chemical theory, alcohols with more carbon atoms should have a higher MHC,
which lead to the research question.
The key findings from the original experiment were that the method was very limited as there
was very high systematic error due to heat loss and incomplete combustion. The original
experiment was limited because only one fuel was tested, therefore it could not be compared
to other fuels and there was not sufficient data to answer the research question. In this
experiment, five fuels were tested so that there would be enough data to answer the research
question. Modifications to the original experiment include using a lid on the can, factoring in

S1152891 Page 1 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

heat absorbed by the can into the MHC calculation, and making the time taken to do each
trial an independent variable.
2.0 Methodology
2.1 Original Experiment

The original experiment is similar to the one on p278-279 of the Pearson 11 Chemistry
Queensland textbook. (Holmes, et.al., 2018).

2.2 Modifications

The experiment was redirected by the use of five fuels, each with an added carbon atom in a
homologous series. This was done in order to test the effect of increased number of carbon
atoms on MHC. This provided sufficient data to answer the research question. Also, the
number of trials were refined to three times, so it reduces random error on the data collected.
These increased measurements of dependent variables. Another refinement was to use a
temperature probe rather than a mercury thermometer. This lowered uncertainty and therefore
improved precision. Reduction of parallax error readings and thus improved accuracy. 
The experiment was refined by using an aluminium foil lid on the can to limit heat loss out
the top of the can. It was also refined by accounting for heat absorbed by the can into the
calculation of MHC.
The experiment was refined by having the burner going till 15℃ increased for each trial so it
is a controlled variable.
This was done to ensure there was a consistent transfer of energy for each trial and will
therefore reduce random error.

2.3 Diagram

Temperature
Lid probe inside can

Can

Laptop with
Loggerpro

Burner

S1152891 Page 2 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

2.4 Risk Management

Equipment Risks
Butanol  Flammable liquid
 Harmful by inhalation and if swallowed
 Irritating to respiratory system and skin
 Risk of serious damage to eyes
 Vapours may cause drowsiness and dizziness
Pentanol  Flammable liquid
 Harmful by inhalation
 Irritating to eyes, respiratory system and skin
Hexanol  Flammable liquid
 Harmful if swallowed.
 Irritating to eyes.
Heptanol  Miscellaneous dangerous good
 Harmful by inhalation, in contact with skin and if
swallowed.
Octanol  Miscellaneous dangerous good
 Irritating to eyes, respiratory system and skin.
Open flame  Burns
Glassware  Shattering

Precautions
Fuel was stored in sealed glassware and was stored with a lid, which greatly decreases the
chance of harmful inhalation or spillage. Chemical goggles were worn to reduce risk of
damage to eyes. Lab coats were worn to reduce the risk of spillage on skin. Tongs were used
to handle the fuel burners and their lid while they were burning. Overall, the risks were not
likely to occur as the precautions listed above were practised very effectively.

S1152891 Page 3 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

3.0 Results
3.1 Raw Data
Mass of Initial burner End burner Min water Max water
can (g) mass (g) mass (g) temp (°C) temp (°C)
  Trial ±0.01 ±0.01 ±0.01 ±0.1 ±0.1
1 183.66 257.83 256.85 21.4 40.5
Butanol 2 162.90 254.46 253.68 19.6 37.5
3 183.66 251.66 250.8 20.0 42.7
1 162.90 268.68 268.38 20.2 27.7
Pentanol 2 183.66 270.11 269.45 19.0 35.3
3 183.66 267.96 267.28 22.3 36.6
1 162.90 253.83 253.05 19.3 40.5
Hexanol 2 162.90 249.82 249.05 21.0 42.1
3 162.90 263.27 262.85 20.6 32.3
1 162.90 274.05 273.66 19.8 30.8
Heptano
2 162.90 272.74 272.34 19.3 30.6
l
3 183.66 269.54 269.11 20.0 31.5
1 183.66 284.22 283.77 20.0 31.4
Octanol 2 183.66 283.78 283.33 19.8 32.8
3 183.66 290.91 290.33 19.1 35.2

3.2 Observations
 A large amount of soot developed under the calorimeter on each trial
 The flame was always yellow or orange instead of blue
 There was a light wind in the classroom due to the windows door open and the fan
turned on to the max. Thus caused the flame to move around
o This was especially true on pentanol trial 1 and 2

3.3 Processed Data

Sample calculations for pentanol trial 1:

Value Uncertainty
Heat absorbed by water: Uncertainty of water mass:
Q=mc ∆ t 2.0
∗100 %=1.0 %
Q=200.0∗4.18∗7.5 200
Q=6270 J Uncertainty of Δt:
0.20
∗100 %=2.7 %
7.5
Heat absorbed by can: Uncertainty of can mass:

Q=mc ∆ t 0.01
∗100 %=0.0061 %
Q=162.9∗0.90∗7.5 162.9
Q=1010 J

S1152891 Page 4 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

Uncertainty of Δt:
0.20
∗100 %=2.7 %
7.5
Number of moles of fuel burned: Uncertainty of ∆m:
∆m 0.020
n= ∗100 %=6.7 %
M 0.30
0.30
n= =0.0034
88.15
Q +Q Total uncertainty:
MHC = can water
n 1.0 %+ 0.0061% +2.7 % +2.7 %+ 6.7 %=13 %
6270+ 1010
MHC = =2200
0.0034

MHC for trial 2 and 3 were found using the same method; trial 2 was 2200kJ/mol and trial 3
was 1900kJ/mol.

2200+2200+1900
mean MHC= =2100
3
%error = |
2100−3329
3329 |
∗100 %=38 %

Uncertainty of the mean= ( 2200−1900

2
÷2100 )∗100 %=7.8 %

Table of processed data

Number of Mean Accepted Average Uncertainty of

Carbon atoms experimental MHC equipment Error the mean
in fuel molecule MHC (kJ/mol) (kJ/mol) uncertainty percentage percentage
4 1692 2670 5.3 37 15
5 2067 3329 8.7 38 7.8
6 2759 3982 6.7 31 1.2
7 3205 4637 9.5 31 1.8
8 3563 5294 8.1 33 6.5

There were no outliers that were omitted from the data.

S1152891 Page 5 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

Effect of number of carbon atoms in fuel molecule on

MHC
4.0
6000

5000 f(x) = 655.6 x + 48.7999999999997

R² = 0.999998231785553
4000
MHC (kJ/mol)

f(x) = 487.950494909389 x − 270.528632466679

3000 R² = 0.987877847947696

2000

1000

0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9

No. carbon atoms in fuel molecule

Experimental MHC Linear (Experimental MHC )

Linear (Experimental MHC ) Linear (Experimental MHC )
Accepted MHC Linear (Accepted MHC)

Analysis of Results

The data indicates that MHC increases as more carbon atoms are added onto the carbon
chain. For example, butanol has 4 carbon atoms and experimental MHC value of 1692±256,
while octanol has 8 carbon atoms and experimental MHC value of 3563±319. The gradient of
the trendline of experimental MHC is 488, which means that each carbon atom added to the
chain adds roughly 488 to the MHC value. The effect of increasing the number of carbon
atoms causing MHC to increase can also be observed in the accepted MHC values. For
example, the accepted MHC of butanol is 2670, but octanol is 5294. (National Institute of
Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce, 2018). The trendline for the
gradient of accepted MHC is 656, which means that the accepted MHC value grows at a
faster rate than the experimental MHC.
The percentage uncertainty of the mean ranges from 1.2 to 15, which is caused by random
error. The range in error from the accepted value is consistent, ranging from 31%-38%. The
error from the accepted value is caused by heat loss and incomplete combustion, which are
systematic errors. The error bars on the graph are small, ranging from ±6.7% to ±15%. The
R2 value of the trendline is 0.9879, which means that the points fit on the trendline very well,
and there are no definite outliers. This also adds to the fact that the experiment had a high
degree of precision. There were no obvious outliers that would have skewed the results. The
maximum uncertainty of the mean is 15%, meaning that the results are fairly close to each
other and there are no results that need to be omitted because they are outliers.
5.0 Evaluation of Experimental Process
Overall, the experiment was reliable. Variables that were able to be controlled were
controlled effectively, such as the volume of water used, time taken to do each trial, and the

S1152891 Page 6 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

distance between the top of the burner and the can. The equipment used had low uncertainty,
such as the scale with an uncertainty of ±0.01g and the temperature probe with an uncertainty
of ±0.1℃. The mean measurement uncertainty for each fuel ranges from 5.3% to 9.5%.
However, the total uncertainty and range of uncertainties between trials could still be
improved. The low measurement uncertainty means the variables that were able to be
controlled were controlled effectively, therefore the experiment was reliable.

While the experiment was reliable, it was not valid. This is because of the 31% to 37% error
of the experimental MHC values compared to the accepted MHC values. This error is mainly
because of 2 major systematic errors – incomplete combustion and heat loss. Much of the
heat being released by the combustion of the fuel went into the surrounding environment
instead of being absorbed by the water. There was also incomplete combustion because there
was not enough oxygen being supplied to the reaction to have a complete combustion.
Ways in which the validity was improved from the original experiment were putting an
aluminium foil lid on the can and taking into account heat absorbed by the can into the
calculation for MHC. The lid reduced heat loss through the top of the can, which eliminated
some systematic error. Additionally, taking into account heat absorbed by the can into the
MHC calculation reduced systematic error from the original experiment, where it was not
included in the MHC calculation. However, for the calculation, it was assumed that the
temperature increase of the can was the same as the temperature increase of the water. Which
may not be the case as the can does not heat evenly and it is not possible to predict what
portion of the heat volume is absorbed by the can, the water and lost to the environment. This
assumption may have affected the experiment’s reliability. The scale and scope of the
experiment is limited because only five fuels were tested, with only three trials for each fuel,
which limits the experiment’s precision.

6.0 Improvements & Extensions

S1152891 Page 7 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

To improve the reliability of the experiment, the water could be weighed by the scale which
has an uncertainty of 1%, compared to the digital scale which would have an uncertainty of
0.005% for 200mL of water. Additionally, fuels with 1 to 8 carbon atoms should be tested
because it would provide more data and therefore the research question would be able to be
answered with greater confidence. The final way in which reliability could be improved for
this experiment is to perform 5 trials for each fuel instead of 3, as the effect of an outlier
would be lessened over 5 trials.

One way in which validity could be further improved would be the use of an oxygen bomb
calorimeter. It would significantly reduce both heat loss and incomplete combustion, which
were the two main sources of systematic error in the experiment. However, an oxygen bomb
calorimeter would not be practical nor safe in a school laboratory setting.
An extension to this experiment would be to test the same phenomenon on secondary and
tertiary alcohols. Adding carbon atoms to secondary and tertiary alcohols could be tested to
determine if it also increases the MHC.

7.0 Conclusion
The data collected from this reliable yet invalid experiment is sufficient to answer the
research question. The addition of carbon atoms to carbon-chain link alcohols increases their
molar heat of combustion. Although the experimental data greatly deviates from the accepted
MHC values, the phenomenon of increased number of carbon atoms in the fuel leading to a
higher MHC can clearly be identified in the data. Butanol, with 4 carbon atoms, has an
experimental MHC of 1692±256, and octanol, with 8 carbon atoms, has an experimental
MHC of 3563±319. When plotted on a graph, the experimental MHC values create a
trendline with a gradient of 488, which means that each carbon atom adds roughly 488 kJ/mol
to the MHC.

The experimental data has a high degree of error from the accepted values, ranging from
31%-38%. This high error is because of variables that were unable to be controlled, such as
heat loss and incomplete combustion, which lead to systematic error. However, since the
experimental data is consistent and precise, the experiment had a high degree of reliability.
For example, the equipment uncertainty was very low, and the trendline R2 value is 0.9879.
In conclusion, this experiment has found that increasing the number of carbon atoms to
carbon-chain link alcohols increases their molar heat of combustion.

8.0 Reference List

S1152891 Page 8 of 9
Baden Forster 11 Chemistry FIA2: Student Experiment

Chemistry LibreTexts. (2019). 17.14: Heat of Combustion. Retrieved from

https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Chemistry/Book
%3A_Introductory_Chemistry_(CK-12)/17%3A_Thermochemistry/
17.14%3A_Heat_of_Combustion#:~:text=The%20molar%20heat%20of%20combustion,a
%20substance%20is%20completely%20burned.&text=In%20this%20case%2C%20one%20mole,and
%20two%20moles%20of%20water.

Holmes, N., et.al. (2018). Pearson 11 Chemistry Queensland. Melbourne, Vic. Pearson Australia.
National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce (2018). NIST
Chemistry Webbook. Retrieved from https://web book.nist.gov/chemistry/

Word count: 1761

S1152891 Page 9 of 9