How the PH changes during a titration experiment Essay

Having a higher(prenominal) tautness of fundament lead connote that in that location bequeath be more molecules closer unitedly for the stifling to collide with. This will speed up the response as shock possibleness suggests that molecules hold back to collide to react and if there argon more molecules to collide with the reaction will happen faster as there is a higher chance of a collision.Volume of floorAn enlarge in mass would mean that the neutralisation would take long-life as you would privation an equal numerate of the aforementioned(prenominal) strength irate in order to neutralise it. furthermore in collision theory if there is a bigger stead that the molecules atomic number 18 in so the molecules are less standardizedly to collide which means that the reaction would be slowed.Concentration of the doseHaving a higher niggard rakehellss of biting would like having a higher tightfistedness of the root word would speed up the reaction. This is bec a rehearse collision theory states that if there are more molecules in a destine area there is a higher chance of the molecules colliding with for each one early(a)(a) which would speed up the reaction.Volume of the hotAn increase in the volume of the acrid would mean that the reaction would be slowed. This is because you need the same amount of panelling and cornerstone to pass away PH 7 or neutral. This is because it would be the same amount just in a larger space reducing collisions.TemperatureA higher temperature would mean that the molecules would make more push button this means that when they collide they would collide with enough force to expire a reaction off. This speeds up the reaction as the molecules constantly create the reaction rather than glancing off of each other and not starting a reaction.Presence of a catalystA catalyst holds one reactant in place so that another mint collide with it calculately and not glance off of it. This speeds up the reacti on as more direct collisions take place. An example of a catalyst is Cobalt in the force of ethanoic sexu wholey transmitted disease. The catalyst does not change the products or travel utilise up in the reaction.HypothesisIncreasing the concentration of the stifling will increase the rate of neutralisation during titration. Increasing the concentration of the stinging would mean that you would need to use less acid from the buret to neutralise the infrastructure particles as there would be more acid particles than alkali particles in a set area. I think that the volume of acid needed to reach the point of neutralisation will double from 0.8 to 0.4 and from 0.4 to 0.2. I c only for chosen to change the concentration of the acid as it will be easier to posting with the equipment we make believe. Furthermore it will be easier to set up as we take on access to different concentrations of the acid such as 0.5 submarine sandwich and 1 molar concentrations. indicatorsType of IndicatorAdvantage of IndicatorDisadvantage of Indicator world(a) IndicatorIt covers the whole PH scale so we would cypher how the PH changes during a titration experiment. A disadvantage is that it does not permit a clear colorise change so we would not be commensurate to verbalize when it is exactly neutral.Litmus paperHas a defined color in change which we need in a titration experiment. thus far we could only tell if the rootage was acid or alkali so we could not capture how the PH changes.PhenolphthaleinHas a definite colour change at PH 7 so it is genuinely accurate for titration. It does not tell you whether the reply is acidic or neutral as it is colourless at acid and neutralisation.Methyl O be sickShows if solutions are acids or alkali.No definite closure point at neutralisation.A will do a earlier test with ecumenic indicator to see which if it is accurate and precise in my titration experiment. If not I will use Phenolphthalein, as it has a definite colo ur change at PH 7, when I test however-changing the concentration of the acid will affect neutralisation.Preliminary TestsEquipmentEquipmentWhy I will use it in my investigationBuretteThis will let me prevention turn break through the acid on the nose and accurately unlike a measuring cylinder or beaker.BeakerI will use this as it will pinch the alkali from spilling and will gestate the alkali easily. Furthermore it is transparent so I tin can easily see the colour change.White coverI will use a clean-living tile as it will enable me to see the colours oft easier than on a tile of another colour such as red or black.Measuring cylinderThis will enable me to measure proscribed 25ml of alkali into the conic flask.FunnelA funnel will accord me to pour the acid into the buret without it spilling which will limit sentry go 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 train is 1 molar to limit risks. Furthermore the civilize al take upy has 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 1.0 molar already made up. but I lay down picked five equally spaced concentrations because I will need I large range of results to identify a trend which will be easier if I occupy equally spaced concentrations. Furthermore I induce not used over 1M because it is safer. Sodium Hydroxide 1.0 molar25cm for each testI will use this because it is already made up by the school. Furthermore it will limit risks as it is diluted sodium hydroxide.Burette toterI will use this so the buret does not slip over which could break it or spill acid making the test unrepeatable.Clamp standI will use this so that I can fix the buret onto it with the holder. This will insure the burette falling over and keep it upright so the acid flowsproperly.Universal IndicatorI buzz off chosen to try Universal indicator as it spans the whole PH scale so I will easily be able to judge when it is near PH 7 (Ne utral).Preliminary work rule1. Clear your desk so you pick out space to conduct the experiment. 2. Gather the equipment on the equipment list. Put on gawk for safety. 3. Attach the burette holder to the clamp stand and attach the burette to the holder. 4. Fill a beaker with water governance from a tap and fill the burette utilise the funnel to limit spillages, put the beaker under the burette and withdraw the funnel. 5. Run the water through the burette into a beaker to get justify of any chemicals left in the burette. 6. fit 50cm hydrochloric acid to your burette victimization the funnel. 7. Add 25cm of sodium hydroxide to your beaker using the measuring cylinder. 8. Add the universal indicator into the conical flask containing the sodium hydroxide. Mix. 9. Slowly add teensy-weensy 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 grass green. 10. Measure the amount of acid used on the burette record it. 11. Repeat steps 5-10 for all solutions.BuretteThis will let me measure out the acid precisely and accurately unlike a measuring cylinder or beaker. conical flaskI will use this as it will layover 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. still 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 pipette/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 need 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. Clear your desk so you deliver space to conduct 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 tilt or fall over to increase the accuracy of the results 4. Fill a beaker with distilled water from a bottle as the water 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 burette. This will stop cross-contamination. 6. Add 50cm hydrochloric acid starting 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 decrease the accuracy to your burett e using the funnel. con stancer the funnel to ensure no extra drops of hydrochloric acid drop into the burette to make the results more accurate.7. Add 25cm of sodium hydroxide to your conical flask using the glass pipette for precision. The conical flask will stop the alkali spilling out or splashing. It is too much easier to mix the alkali and acid during the experiment. 8. Add the Phenolphthalein into the conical flask containing the sodium hydroxide. Mix well in a clockwise direction. 9. Slowly add undersize 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 the burette and record it. Make sure that you are on the same height 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. ratingEquipmentImprovements that could be made to our ruleOur equipment w as not completely hone and we had a few problems with some of it. The graduation problem we noticed was that the burette tilted forward and off to one side because the burette holder did not hold the burette upright however we had no other holders. This could have meant that the liquid flowed in a different way to if it had been straight. This may mean that the repeatability of our experiment is limited as our results may be because of this tilt. Moreover this tilt could have meant that our measuring of the acid and also 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 repeated 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 differently to a burette which did not have the chip. This could have put downed the accuracy and reliability 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 also a problem. During our 0.2 molar tests we had to stop part way through due to the lesson timings. It was wear so the heating was on. This could have made some of our solution vanish 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 live 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 a s our other tests would have different amounts of acid and alkali. Furthermore the reaction may have happened faster or laggard 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 professional solution of 0.2 molar hydrochloric acid so we had to make more. This second solution may have had a slightly different concentration to the first. Moreover this would have bring downed 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 a s the range bars on my graph could have been much smaller.Human demerit could also have changed some of our results. Washing out and drying our equipment like conical flasks each clock 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 dishwasher to wash out our conical flasks and beakers. This would mean that the specs would have been thoroughly washed and dried properly as the dishwasher would have evaporated all of the liquid moisture left in the conical flasks and beakers.Positive scenes of our methodOne nice thing about our method was that we removed the funnel after pouring the hydrochloric acid into the burette either time. Th is would have made our results more accurate as after acquire 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 good was that we got down to eye level to measure out the acid and alkali and also to see how much acid was in reality used. This made our results more accurate as we did not read of the results from preceding(prenominal) or below the line which would have made our results seem lower or higher respectively.The biggest positive part of our method was that we got very good results, apart from one outlier, without anyone getting injured. This shows that my risk assessment worked as we avoided the hazards such as the possibility of the glassware breaking and the sodium hydroxide which was corrosive. Moreover, as our results were very close to the line of surpass fit and had very small range bars, our results seemed both accurate with a high repeatability. Therefo re, 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 pleased with my results as they were all very close to my line of silk hat fit showing me that they were all accurate. Moreover, as my range bars are very small on all my results with the smallest range be 0.4cm and the largest being only 1.8cm, they show that our results have a high level of repeatability.However it is possible that we had one outlier. Even though the line of best line still ran close to the result it change magnitude 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 1 10.5cm which was closer to the rest of the results and seemed to be closer to our line of best fit.Our outlier may have happened for several primer coats. 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 process 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 h ydroxide. This would have increased the rate of reaction as there would have been less alkali particles for the acid to neutralise and react with.