• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Experiment - The Empirical Formula of Magnesium Oxide

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The Empirical Formula of Magnesium Oxide Experimental Design Focus Question What is the empirical formula for magnesium oxide? Hypothesis The combustion of magnesium will generate data which can be used to calculate the empirical formula of magnesium oxide. Theory The following combination reaction was used in this experiment: Magnesium + Oxygen � Magnesium Oxide The Law of Conservation of Mass can be used to determine the amount of oxygen which has reacted with a given amount of magnesium in order to produce a measured amount of magnesium oxide. These masses can then be converted into moles in order to determine the simplest molar ratio and thus the empirical formula for magnesium oxide. Variables Variables identified Type of variable Treatment Amount of magnesium used Independent variable Different groups will use different masses. Masses will be small enough to ensure that the reaction can occur without requiring the lid to be lifted too often. Mass of magnesium oxide Dependent Variable The mass of this product will be measured after it has been observed that no further reaction will occur. Container used Controlled Variable A crucible with a lid will be used in order to allow the combustion in a closed environment, preventing the loss of magnesium oxide powder. Surface area of magnesium Controlled Variable Magnesium ribbon will be used in all cases. Concentration of oxygen in the container Controlled Variable The experiments will all be performed on the same day, in the same laboratory, i.e., the atmospheric conditions and oxygen concentration will be the same. ...read more.

Middle

Percentage yield = actual mass of the product/ theoretical mass of the product * 100% Theoretical mass = number of moles of the product * molar mass According to the balanced equation: 2Mg + O2 � 2MgO, it can be deduced that 1 mole of magnesium with excess oxygen will produce 1 mole of magnesium oxide. Therefore, if n (Mg) = 0.006 mol, actual m (Mg) = 0.221g, n (MgO) = n (Mg) = 0.006 mol Theoretical mass (MgO) = 0.oo6*(24.31+16.00) = 0.247g Percentage yield = 0.221/ 0.247 * 100% = 89% Only 89% of the magnesium reacted with the oxygen. Presentation *The percentage uncertainties of the number of moles were the percentage uncertainties of the mass of each element (explained in Sample Calculation Section). The final value was the greatest percentage errors in Table 2. *The values of some of the absolute uncertainties are 0.000. This does not mean that there were no uncertainties; it was only because the uncertainties were so small that when they were rounded up to 3 decimal places, they became 0.000. *Trial 4 seemed to be anomalous. Thus, when calculating the average, the results from Trial 4 were excluded. It is noticed that Ave. of n (Mg) is 0.006 and Ave. of n (O) is 0.004; their ratio seems to be 3:2. However, all the calculations were done by Excel and rounded up to 3 decimals. As a result, the Ave. ratio calculated is 1:1. ...read more.

Conclusion

Random errors reduced: the masses of the objects will be accurate. Lid-lifting causing loss of mass of the products Random error Lift the lid every 3 minutes instead of irregular time intervals to ensure the reaction taking place thoroughly. This prevents the reactants in the crucibles from escaping. Random errors reduced; thus, a more accurate empirical formula of magnesium oxide will be gained. Experimenter's lack of experience Random error Practice the procedures to perform the experiment, i.e., increase trials (3 trials) so that the experimenter will be familiar with the method. Random errors reduced: fewer mistakes would be made during experimenting, such as weighing the masses; therefore, more accurate results, like the masses of the reagents can be obtained to draw better graphs. Precision of the balance Systematic error The balance should be calibrated regularly. The actual masses of the apparatus and reagents will be measured. No systematic errors will be involved. Weighing the actual experimenting equipment and substances Human error causing random error *In the experiment, it was required to weigh the mass of the crucible, its lid and magnesium oxide. It was observed that some of the products (white powder) left on the lid. If a different lid rather than the experimenting lid was taken to be weighed, then the results would be inaccurate because the lids have different masses. Make sure there is only one set of each apparatus so that two pieces of the same apparatus will not be mistaken. The actual magnesium oxide produced will be measured. No human errors will be involved; reduction of random error. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Chemistry section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate Chemistry essays

  1. Empirical Formula of Magnesium Oxide

    Heat the bottom of the crucible with a gentle flame 7. Gradually increase the flame intensity until all the magnesium turns into a white powder. Remove the burner and lift the lid after you observe no more smoke coming from the burner.

  2. An Experiment to Determine the Empirical Formula of Lead Iodide

    10) Approximately 1.2 g of potassium iodide (KI) was weighed. 11) Potassium iodide was transferred to a clean 150 cm3 beaker. 12) 60 cm3 of distilled water was added to this beaker. 13) This beaker was heated until it steams. 14) The solution was cooled slightly. 15) 1/3 of this solution was poured into beaker #1,2 and 3.

  1. Hesss Law Lab, use Hesss law to find the enthalpy change of combustion of ...

    190 22 200 24 210 26 220 28 230 30 240 31 250 32 260 33 270 34 280 35 290 36 300 37 330 37 360 38 390 39 420 39 450 38 480 38 EXPERIMENT 2 B time/s(�1sec)

  2. Lab Experiment : The change in mass when magnesium burns. (Finding the empirical formula ...

    3.Number of moles of magnesium. = 0.0162 Mole (the number of moles of magnesium = mass / atomic weight . the atomic weight of magnesium is 24.3 g / mole ) 4.Number of moles of oxygen atoms that were used.

  1. Empirical Formula of Magnesium Oxide

    When that crucible and its cover had cooled, we folded the magnesium ribbon and placed it in the crucible. Before we heated the crucible again, we recorded the mass of the crucible, the lid and the magnesium together. COMBINED MASS OF THE OBJECTS BEFORE = 33.279g �0.002g 6.

  2. Bomb calorimetry. The goal of this experiment was to use temperature data over ...

    - (-4983.1522 kJ/mol) = -86.8478 kJ/mol However, ± 2% is the accuracy on the fairly simple apparatus used, hence, âfHonapthalene is âfHonapthalene = -86.8478 ± 1.736956kJ/mol Percent Error (ΔHcombustion,naph(s)) The literature value for the enthalpy of naphthalene combustion from NIST Chemistry WebBook (2008)

  1. To determine the standard enthalpy of formation of Magnesium Oxide using Hess Law.

    Same thermometer has been used for all the temperature readings. Ruler Different rulers have different systematic and random errors. Same ruler is used to measure all the strips of magnesium strip. Time interval between each reading of temperature If readings are taken inconsistently, maximum temperature might be incorrectly determined because

  2. Finding thr Percentage Composition of Magnesium Oxide

    Bunsen burner clamped to the retort stand 7. Clay triangle 8. Tongs 9. Dropper bottle containing distilled water 10. One 8cm strip of magnesium ribbon 11. Spark lighter Procedure The materials were selected and brought to the station. Safety protocol was followed and safety glasses were worn throughout the experiment.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work