Identifying Substance Z Using Titration Method: Results and Analysis"

  • Thread starter Thread starter paulhunn
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on a titration experiment to identify substance Z, represented as Z2CO3, using HCl. The experiment involved dissolving Z2CO3 in water, titrating with HCl, and calculating the mean titre, which was found to be 26.8 cm³. The calculations led to the determination of the molar weight of Z as approximately 36.14 g, suggesting a close relation to potassium. Concerns were raised about a 3 g discrepancy from the expected weight, prompting a discussion on the significance of this error. Overall, the method was deemed correct, but the error margin was considered larger than preferred.
paulhunn
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Hi

I have been set the following problem. Z2CO3(aq)+2HCl(aq) -> 2ZCl(aq) + CO2(g) + H2o(l)

We did the experiment in class to find the amount of HCl it would take to titrate the soloution. First by measuring an amount of Z2CO3 and dissolving it into 250cm^3 of water and using methl orange indicator to know when the reaction had taken place. We did this three times using 25cm^3 samples and i got a mean titre of 26.8cm^3
We are told that it is a group one element and the concentration of the HCl is 0.1
So using the formula M=number of moles/volume in dm^3 i rearranged and got 0.1*0.0268=2.68*10^-3 meaning that it would be 2.68*10^-2 for the entire soloution.
Knowing it will take 2 moles of HCl to react one mole of substance Z it would mean there was 1.134*10^-2 moles of substance Z in the 250ml soloution and knowing the original mass that was dissolved (1.5g) i can use the formula weight(g)/number of moles=molar weight which gave me 132.275g. Then knowing that the rest of substance Z is CO3 i can subtract their weights (12+16+16+16) which gives 72.275 and then halfing to find the molar weight of Z (because in the formula we have Z2) we get 36.1375. which is relatively close to potassium.

Does my method follow correctly?
And is the 3g that i am off from potassium enough to say there was a significant error in working or is it ok?

Thanks in advance

Paul
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Approach is correct, error is too large for my liking (but it was very likely potassium as you think).

--
 
Ok thanks Borek
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top