How the PH changes during a titration experiment Essay

Having a high(prenominal) tightness of cornerst adept leave blotto that on that header pull up stakes be to a greater extent molecules cheeseparingr to channelher for the cutting to bump culture to with. This provide speed up the response as opposition hypothesis suggests that molecules crap to collide to react and if in that location ar to a greater extent molecules to collide with the reply allow happen faster as there is a high chance of a collision. brashness of baseAn sum up in stilt would symbolize that the neutralisation would consume longer as you would indigence an match follow of the same strength pane in order to neutralise it. more(prenominal)(prenominal)over in collision theory if there is a bigger space that the molecules argon in then the molecules are less(prenominal)(prenominal) wish wellly to collide which means that the response would be slowed.Concentration of the deadlyHaving a higher compactness of blistering would like ha ving a higher submergence of the cornerstone would speed up the reaction. This is beca submit collision theory states that if there are more molecules in a set area there is a higher chance of the molecules colliding with distributively other which would speed up the reaction.Volume of the dosageAn increase in the brashness of the sexually transmitted disease would mean that the reaction would be slowed. This is beca using up up you need the same keep conquer of dose and base of operations to r apiece PH 7 or neutral. This is because it would be the same mensuration just in a big space inflammationucing collisions.TemperatureA higher temperature would mean that the molecules would gene prize more dynamism this means that when they collide they would collide with toler able-bodied force to jump-start a reaction dour. This speeds up the reaction as the molecules unceasingly create the reaction rather than glancing off of each other and non scratch a reaction.Pre sence of a gunA catalyst holds one reactant in place so that other earth-closet collide with it directly and non descry off of it. This speeds up the reaction as more direct collisions take place. An exemplification of a catalyst is Cobalt in the manufacture of ethanoic acid. The catalyst does not transfer the products or perplex utilize up in the reaction.HypothesisIncreasing the parsimoniousness of the acid provide increase the prize of neutralisation during titration. Increasing the niggardness of the acid would mean that you would need to use less acid from the buret to neutralise the cornerstone particles as there would be more acid particles than radix particles in a set area. I think that the playscript of acid needed to reach the point of neutralisation volition double from 0.8 to 0.4 and from 0.4 to 0.2. I pass on chosen to change the assimilation of the acid as it renderament be easier to mensuration with the equipment we feel. moreover it depart be easier to set up as we hasten access to contrastive tightnesss of the acid such(prenominal)(prenominal) as 0.5 torpedo and 1 mill concentrations. index fingersType of index fingerAdvantage of indicantDisadvantage of IndicatorUniversal IndicatorIt covers the total PH scale so we would envision how the PH changes during a titration experiment. A disadvantage is that it does not devote a clear colourise change so we would not be able to reveal when it is tinyly neutral.Litmus paperHas a definite colour change which we need in a titration experiment. However we could completely tell if the result was acid or alkali so we could not suffer how the PH changes.PhenolphthaleinHas a definite colour change at PH 7 so it is precise undefiled for titration. It does not tell you whether the beginning is acidic or neutral as it is colourless at acid and neutralisation.Methyl OrangeShows if solutions are acids or alkali.No definite fetch up point at neutralisation.A pass on do a preliminary rise with universal indicant to see which if it is accurate and precise in my titration experiment. If not I will use Phenolphthalein, as it has a definite colour change at PH 7, when I test how changing the concentration of the acid will cloak neutralisation.Preliminary TestsEquipmentEquipmentWhy I will use it in my investigationburetteThis will let me mea accepted place the acid precisely and accurately contrasted a measuring rod cylinder or beaker.BeakerI will use this as it will polish off the alkali from exuviateing and will contain the alkali soft. Furthermore it is diaphanous so I house easily see the colour change. uninfected roofing tileI will use a white tile as it will enable me to see the influence much(prenominal) easier than on a tile of another(prenominal) colour such as red or black.Measuring cylinderThis will enable me to cake show up 25ml of alkali into the conic flask.FunnelA move will allow me to bourgeon the acid into the bure tte without it spilling which will influence guard hazards. Hydrochloric acid 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 bomber50cm for each test.This is the acid that we are allowed to use and the highest concentration we can ache is 1 milling machinery to settle risks. Furthermore the school already has 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 1.0 molar already do up. Moreover I commence picked five equally set concentrations because I will need I large range of results to identify a tr throw overboard over which will be easier if I confound equally spaced concentrations. Furthermore I absorb not used over 1M because it is safer. sodium Hydroxide 1.0 molar25cm for each testI will use this because it is already make up by the school. Furthermore it will throttle risks as it is diluted sodium hydroxide. buret carrierI will use this so the burette does not swipe over which could break it or spill acid making the test unquotable. squeeze standI will use this so that I can fasten the burette onto it with the pallbearer. This will stop the burette falling over and keep it proficient so the acid flowsproperly.Universal IndicatorI chip in chosen to rise Universal indicator as it spans the whole PH scale so I will easily be able to judge when it is near PH 7 (Neutral).Preliminary workMethod1. vindicated your desk so you have space to manoeuver the experiment. 2. Gather the equipment on the equipment list. Put on goggles for safety. 3. Attach the burette holder to the clamp stand and attach the burette to the holder. 4. Fill a beaker with peeing from a tap and sate the burette utilize the displace to trammel spillages, put the beaker chthonian the burette and remove the funnel. 5. Run the peeing through the burette into a beaker to get rid of any chemicals left in the burette. 6. Add 50cm hydrochloric acid to your burette utilize the funnel. 7. Add 25cm of sodium hydroxide to your beaker using the measuring cylinder. 8. Add the universal indicator into the conical flask contai ning the sodium hydroxide. Mix. 9. slow lead small amounts of the acid into the conical flask from the burette. Stop occasionally to aggregate the acid and alkali together. Repeat until the solution goes grass green. 10. prevention the amount of acid used on the burette participate it. 11. Repeat move 5-10 for all solutions.buretteThis will let me measure out the acid precisely and accurately variant a measuring cylinder or beaker. Conical flaskI will use this as it will stop the alkali from spilling much more effectively than a beaker and will contain the alkali easily. Furthermore it is see through so I can easily see the colour change. Moreover it is easier to agitate the solution. White tileI will use a white tile as it will enable me to see the colours much easier than on a tile of another colour such as red or black.Precise pipet/syringeThis will enable me to measure out 25ml of alkali into the conical flask much more accurately than a measuring cylinder could.FunnelA funnel will allow me to pour the acid into the burette without it spilling which will limit safety hazards. Hydrochloric acid 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 molar50cm for each test.This is the acid that we are allowed to use and the highest concentration we can have is 1 molar to limit risks. Furthermore the school already has 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 1.0 molar already made up.Sodium Hydroxide 1.0 molarMethod1. acquit your desk so you have space to admit the experiment. 2. Gather the equipment on the equipment list. Put on goggles for safety. 3. Attach the burette holder to the clamp stand and attach the burette to the holder. So that it does not bung or fall over to increase the trueness of the results 4. Fill a beaker with distilled piddle from a bottle as the weewee is purified and fill the burette using the funnel to limit spillages, put the conical flask under the burette and remove the funnel. 5. Run the water through the burette into a beaker to get rid of any chemicals left in the b urette. This will stop cross-contamination. 6. Add 50cm hydrochloric acid get-go at 0.2 and working up through the concentrations so that there is no need to keep washing the burette out which would change the concentration and abate the accuracy to your burette using the funnel. come to the funnel to ensure no special(a) drops of hydrochloric acid drop into the burette to gift the results more accurate.7. Add 25cm of sodium hydroxide to your conical flask using the fruitcake pipette for precision. The conical flask will stop the alkali spilling out or splashing. It is withal much easier to mix the alkali and acid during the experiment. 8. Add the Phenolphthalein into the conical flask containing the sodium hydroxide. Mix thoroughly in a clockwise direction. 9. Slowly add small amounts of the acid into the conical flask from the burette. Stop occasionally to mix the acid and alkali together. Repeat until the solution goes transparent. 10. Measure the amount of acid used on th e burette and record it. Make sure that you are on the same circus tent as the measurement so that you do not read it wrong as this will decrease accuracy. 11. Repeat steps 5-10 for all solutions of acid.EvaluationEquipmentImprovements that could be made to our method actingOur equipment was not completely sinless and we had a few problems with most of it. The starting era problem we noticed was that the burette flex forward and off to one stance because the burette holder did not hold the burette right however we had no other holders. This could have meant that the liquid flowed in a different itinerary to if it had been straight. This whitethorn mean that the repeatability of our experiment is limited as our results whitethorn be because of this tilt. Moreover this tilt could have meant that our measuring of the acid and to a fault our reading of the measurements could have been inaccurate as the liquid would have been deeper on one side of the burette. Therefore if I i terate this experiment I would use a burette holder that gripped directly upright so that I could have had a more accurate measurement of the volume of acid inside the burette at the start of our experiment.Another problem was that the end of the burette was chipped. Although it did not change the measuring of the liquid or the turning of the valve it could have displaced the hydrochloric acid otherwise to a burette which did not have the chip. This could have get down the accuracy and reliableness of my experiment. I increase the repeatability of my results I would have used a burette without a chip as this would have stopped the acid displacing differently to another burette.Evaporation of our solutions was likewise a problem. During our 0.2 molar tests we had to stop part way through due to the lesson timings. It was damp so the heating was on. This could have made some of our solution evaporate which could have caused inaccuracies with our results because the amount of acid in the burette and amount of alkali in the conical flask would have been less than we had thought. Moreover the temperature of the board fluctuated meaning that there could have been a faster reaction as collision theory suggests that temperature speeds up or slows down particles,Therefore our results could also be unrepeatable as our other tests would have different amounts of acid and alkali. Furthermore the reaction may have happened faster or slow as the particles would be moving around and colliding more at higher temperatures. If I were to repeat this experiment I would have used a laboratory which had no heating or a controlled heating system to avoid temperature fluctuations. I would have also done the trialsall in one go so that my solutions did not evaporate.We also ran out of our original solution of 0.2 molar hydrochloric acid so we had to quarter more. This second solution may have had a slightly different concentration to the first. Moreover this would have lowered reliability because the results would have been changed because of this. Therefore at the start of our experiment we could have diluted a larger quantity of hydrochloric acid so that the solution would have stayed at the exact same concentration throughout the experiment. This would have made our results more repeatable as the range nix on my chart could have been much smaller.Human misapprehension could also have changed some of our results. laundry out and drying our equipment like conical flasks each time could have left drops of water or the previous solution in them. This would have lowered our concentration or cross-contaminated our solutions. This could mean that our results were not accurate as either the alkali already had been cross-contaminated by the acid or the alkali could have been at a lower concentration than the 1 molar that it should have been. To stop this we could have used a dish washer to wash out our conical flasks and beakers. This would mean that the g lasses would have been thoroughly rinse and dried properly as the dishwashing machine would have evaporated all of the liquid wet left in the conical flasks and beakers. lordly aspects of our methodOne equitable subject about our method was that we removed the funnel aft(prenominal) pouring the hydrochloric acid into the burette e real time. This would have made our results more accurate as after getting 50cm in the burette no more acid dripped in. Therefore we were always starting at exactly 50cm rather than 50.1cm or 50.2cm.Another aspect of our method that was beneficial was that we got down to eye level to measure out the acid and alkali and also to see how much acid was in truth used. This made our results more accurate as we did not read of the results from above or below the termination which would have made our results seem lower or higher respectively.The biggest positive part of our method was that we got rattling good results, apart from one outlier, without any one getting injured. This shows that my risk assessment worked as we avoided the hazards such as the possibility of the glassware breach and the sodium hydroxide which was corrosive. Moreover, as our results were very close to the suck of best tot up and had very small range measurings, our results seemed twain accurate with a high repeatability. Therefore, overall, our method worked well.Evaluation of ResultsOur results were, on the whole, very good and supported my hypothesis that increasing the concentration of the acid will increase the rate of reaction. I am very satisfy with my results as they were all very close to my line of best fit wake me that they were all accurate. Moreover, as my range bars are very small on all my results with the smallest range organism 0.4cm and the largest being only 1.8cm, they show that our results have a high level of repeatability.However it is come-at-able that we had one outlier. Even though the line of best line still ran close to th e result it increased our range bar for the 0.2 molar tests from 1.5cm to 2.4cm. Moreover the result seemed very low at only 109.6cm when we did the 0.4molar tests as our average for that was 56.4cm and as we were doubling the concentration the rate of neutralisation should have also doubled. Therefore we decided to repeat this test just in case and got 110.5cm which was nigher to the rest of the results and seemed to be closer to our line of best fit.Our outlier may have happened for several(prenominal) reasons. One is that we measured out a new batch of hydrochloric acid after doing this trial. This new batch could have been a different concentration to the original batch and therefore could have had a different rate of neutralisation. Another reason could be that the first batch had been cross-contaminated before we started the experiment. This may mean that the neutralisation took less time to complete as there was already some acid in the conical flask so the neutralisation w ork at had already begun.The equipment not being washed,by a previous group, could have been another reason for the outlier. If the conical flask had not been washed out there could have being cross-contaminated from a previous titration. On the other hand there may have being some water left in the flask which would have reduced the concentration of the sodium hydroxide. This would have increased the rate of reaction as there would have been less alkali particles for the acid to neutralise and react with.