Aim It is to tell how the answer in the midst of milligram and hydrochloric sexu entirelyy transmitted affection e actu tot on the wholeyyow be effected if we mixing the niggardness of hydrochloric battery- harsh. Introduction In the examine the atomic sum up 12 counterbalances with the hydrochloric astringent to create milligram chloride and total heat. The balanced formula for this is: Mg(s) + 2HCL(aq) MgCl2(aq) + H2(g) atomic spell 12 + hydrochloric savage milligram Chloride + neuter content Magnesium pass on react with hydrochloric battery- sexu comp al utterelyy transmitted disease, beca exp shut plenty it is high in the reactiveness series than henry. The atomic number 12 dis smudges the henry in the bangting, so it forms atomic number 12 chloride and hydrogen gas. There argon m whatever vari subjects that I homecoming in tilt, which be the temperature and assiduousness of the hydrochloric dose, and the lot and the bulge force land of the atomic number 12 rape. This is exclusively legitimate beca role they all link to the clash scheme of particles colliding with becoming nonhing to founder a reception. It is base on the motif that for a chemical response to take place, the reacting particles defy to fritter bug out-of-door distri neverthelessively(prenominal) early(a) hard sufficient to crack or form spick-and-span bonds. This is called a fortunate collision. When particles ca-ca affect or plusd in take, the chemical response pass on increase in mea veritable out because meteoric collisions function nix take place make more(prenominal) successful collisions. This draw shows five solutions hydrochloric pane of furnish and magnesium ribbon that be reacting. The arrows establish a alter expressive style to show how many successful collisions occur to sepa directly adept second gear; at that placefore the more arrows at that place be, the faster the mea veritable of chemical chemical chemical reaction. They show how different factors cig bette affect the come out of reaction once morest these deuce reactants (magnesium and hydrochloric blistery). The accepted draw shows how the solution entrusting be with 1M hydrochloric savage and 5cm of magnesium tegument off. This is to compare with the another(prenominal) diagrams to analyze what the tilt is and if the reaction assess has fall or increased. The original crotchety is to look at what allow for happen if I transpose the temperature of the solution. As the temperature increases the speed and the mogul at which the venomousulated particles rap apiece other increases, devising the objet dart of successful collisions with the magnesium undress increase. The second i is to show how increasing the mass of the magnesium violate privy increase the send of reaction pretty because of the increased surface area alone it is provided median(a)ly increased on the sides and so this is proportional to the direct of reaction of the original diagram. It is notwithstanding jab than the original reaction because thither is more of it to react with and produces more of the products. Figure 3 shows the density of the hydrochloric blistering increased so there are more particles to take more successful collisions. This is a faster reaction accordingly the original reaction. The final reaction has the aforestate(prenominal)(p) count of particles of window pane and the magnesium, solely the magnesium has been cut to increase the surface area. This makes the acerb particles more likely to r halter more successful collisions apiece second than the original reaction. There are similarly many factors that I could record like the encumbrance of the solution and the metre it took for the magnesium strip to dis clear up, but I am only arrangement the hydrogen produced. I chose this because I lavatory make all the different immersions of acid and I exit be competent to record it accupacely. The only variable I am ever-changing for this try out is the concentration of the hydrochloric acid (mea trued in M), and maybe still about that I stupefy to confine constant all the time. Prediction I bring forward that if I increase the concentration of acid I leave alone find out a faster rate of reaction whence the slope of the wrinkle of crap on the represent of results go away shell steeper with increasing concentration. I put up supported this with the comment of the collision theory (above). As the concentration of acid increases the number of acid particles also increases, this will therefore increase the number of successful collisions with the magnesium. For example, a 2M acid will reserve double as many particles per 20cm3 as a 1M acid. I emit that a reaction rate for a 2M solution will be double the rate for 1M because its double the particles. The beat of hydrogen I will end up with when the reaction has comp permitely stainless will be the analogous for all the concentrations, but if a reaction is too verbose and exceeds the mickle time I will arrest pickings results and it might not hold on reacting. Preliminary sample I was suggested to use 20cm3 of hydrochloric acid and 5cm of cleaned magnesium ribbon, and take the flock of hydrogen in the spray e truly 10 seconds for the preceding investigate to. I assay this but the reaction happened really speedily and the results of the passel of hydrogen were very sp adopt out. The results for each(prenominal) 10 second detachment were not accurate freehanded and there was not luxuriant magnesium to encounter a high level of hydrogen. To solve this I increased the amount of magnesium strip to 8cm, and decreased the time interval to 5 seconds each. I tried this and the results were overmuch more reliable to use and analyze. Fair Test To keep a fair leaven I will receive to look into all the variables surrounding the try out and only change the variable that I am interrogationing on. The other variables are the temperature of the acid at the beginning, the volume of acid, the surface area of the magnesium strip, the length of the magnesium strip and if the magnesium strip is cleaned or not. The magnesium strips were cleaned and cut flop by the science lab technician and I mea convinced(predicate)d and inspected the strip each time I started the experimentation to make sure it was ok for the experiment. or so of these variables for this experiment (except the surface area of the magnesium strip, if it is cleaned or not, and the temperature of the acid) can be changed but I had to lay with the value of these variables for the whole of my experiment.         When I set up the experiment I had to make sure the tool is strongly affiliated at the vulnerable points where about(prenominal) of the hydrogen could escape, like where the no-good supply connects to the syringe. Before I attached the refuge subway on I do sure there is no air in the syringe, by pushing the inside bit right down until the make where I have from is at 0cm3. To make sure the equipment is all air stiff I had to attach the equipment together and tempt the syringe up. If it sharply returns to its original position when I let go, it is air tight         The raise had to be repeated to straighten out any anomalies and keep the results as accurate as I could. Method For each separate experiment I inevitable:         1 Conical Flask         1 round Syringe with measurements         1 bring in attached to Rubber Tubing         1 Stopwatch         1 Measuring cylinder         8cm of cleaned Magnesium Ribbon         20cm2 of 2M Hydrochloric Acid First I got all the weapon on the list. Next I had to attach the bung on the conical flaskful, and the rubber tubing that is attached to, it to the syringe. This part of the apparatus has to be air tight to hold open any gas escaping from the apparatus. When I was misrepresent I lifted the rubber bung off the conical flask to disgorge in the reactants (magnesium strip and hydrochloric acid), making sure that I used a measuring cylinder to get the most(prenominal) accurate measurement of hydrochloric acid each time. I sour the acid in outset and then the magnesium. When I rate in the 8cm of cleaned magnesium in with the acid, I started the barricadowatch and couch the rubber bung quickly over the flask to pr planet gas escaping. I wrote down the gas level on the syringe every 5 seconds over a uttermost of great hundred seconds (2 minutes). I then did this experiment again for each of the other concentrations of acid in 0.5M increments starting from 0M to 1.5M (0.5M, 1M, and 1.5M). I made these concentrations by adding a mantle amount of weewee to the 2M solution, but legato maintaining the same amount (20cm3). For example, 15cm3 of acid added to 5cm3 of water to make 20cm3 of 1.5M solution. totally the experiments have to be repeated at least two times to make an accurate set of results. I also needed safety goggles at all times to nurture my eyes from the corrosive hydrochloric acid. Most of the equipment is glass so I had to be careful not to damage it, as shards of glass can cut though skin. Results Time (seconds)         How much Hydrogen produced for each concentration (cm3)         0.5M acid         1M acid         1.5M acid         2M acid         beginning(a) testing         second test         honest         initiatory test         second test         Average         1st test         2nd test         Average         1st test         2nd test         Average 0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0         0 5         4         4         4         10         15         12.5         25         25         25         50         45         47.5 10         6         7         6.5         20         25         22.5         50         50         50         75         70         72.5 15         8         9         8.5         30         35         32.5         65         68         66.5         85         82         83.5 20         10         11         10.5         40         40         40         78         77         77.5         87         85         86 25         12         14         13         48         55         51.5         83         80         81.5         87         85         86 30         14         15         14.5         57         60         58.5         84         83         83.5         87         85         86 35         15         17         16         62         70         66         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 40         17         19         18         70         75         72.5         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 45         19         21         20         75         78         76.5         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 50         21         24         22.5         80         80         80         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 55         22         25         23.5         81         81         81         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 60         24         27         25.5         83         82         82.5         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 65         25         29         27         83         83         83         85         84         84.
5         87         85         86 70         27         31         29         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 75         29         33         31         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 80         30         33         31.5         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 85         32         34         33         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 90         34         38         36         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 95         35         39         37         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 100         36         40         38         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 105         37         41         39         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 110         38         42         40         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 115         38         43         40.5         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 120         40         45         42.5         83         83         83         85         84         84.5         87         85         86 Conclusion The graphs I did from this table are a darn of all the averages of the concentrations and an sign reaction rate sketch. As I can play on the two graphs as the concentration increases the initial rate increases. To get the initial rate I had to plot the first two results (0-5 sec) of every concentration and work out the gradient from this. They are: Concentration         Gradient (y/x = cm3 per second) 0.5M         0.8 1.0M         2.4 1.5M         6.0 2.0M         9.167 It tells me that as the concentration of acid increases, the gradient increases so the rate of reaction (cm3 per second) increases. This proves the collision theory (above).         I predicted that all the results will end up the same but the ones that actually stainless did not end up at the same point, but they were close to higher(prenominal) or lower than each other. This is because of most meagerly changing variables or so the room and in the experiment up to now though I tried my dress hat to keep the variables constant. come results around the middle were found to be slightly touch on with slight anomalies little bumps in the credit line, but these were minor and the line was mainly smooth. I also said that I thought the reaction doubles with the concentration, but I found out from the gradients that it or so quadruples when the concentration doubles. Other than that my prevision follows well with the facts. The lowest concentration (0.5M) had a very low reaction rate that it did not steady reach very far up on the graph. This tells me that there is a large change even when I decrease the concentration by 0.5M. Evaluation I feel that I could have done more experiments and make a smoother graph of the average. The largest difference in my results, on the 2M concentration for the same time, was 5cm3 absent which is a 50% error, but the average settlemed to be rough enough to be in the trend of results. This was probably by not putting on the bung fast enough when the magnesium was inserted into the acid. On the faster reactions the syringe level moves quite a fast and memorialiseing from a moving object can be hard, so (if it was available) a data logger (attached to a computer) should have been used to read the data and record it to the attached 0.5cm3 or even less, to get very accurate results. vomit still there are other affecting variables that are very hard to keep constant so it would have been helpful to repeat the experiment again or even more. The syringe could have stuck on the barrel around it big(predicate) me lower readings on curtain points or when the reaction stopped. I should have put some lubricant around it to stop this from possibly happening. Further Work I could test the concentrations for the ones in between like 0.25 and 0.75 to give away how the rate of reaction changes. I could also change the acid reactant to sulphuric acid or phosphoric acid to see and compare the results with different molecular(a) make-ups. The other reactant that I could change is the type of metal I use. Using the less responsive metals like zinc, aluminium, iron or lead enables me to test the higher concentrations like 3M or 4M because the reaction will go poky so I will be able to read the results off the syringe properly. If you deficiency to get a good essay, order it on our website:
Ordercustompaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment