QLD - Year 12 Chemistry Unit 3 and 4, IA2 student experiment suggestions please

AI Thread Summary
For Year 12 Chemistry IA2 experiments, titration and galvanic cell experiments are both viable options. Titration is generally easier and more straightforward, requiring patience and proper reagents, while galvanic cells can be more complex but offer greater engagement and learning opportunities. The choice may depend on available resources and personal interest in the subject matter. Achieving a perfect score of 20/20 may be less important than gaining valuable experience and impressing the teacher with a more challenging project. Ultimately, the decision should focus on which experiment will provide the most educational benefit.
k1_k1
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Thread moved from the technical forums to the schoolwork forums
Heyy I just started year 12 this year, and my school has already started our IA2 student experiment, I was wondering which experiment would be the best choice for me to do and would help me to achieve a 20/20.

1. Titration experiment
2. Galvanic cell experiment
could you also provide a list of the pros and cons of these experiments?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't think of a reason why one could be better than other. It is more or less as asking which sport is better - tennis, or basketball?

The devil is in the details - what kind of support, hardware, glassware and reagents is available.
 
  • Like
  • Skeptical
Likes WWGD, BillTre and (deleted member)
Electrochemistry tends to be quite tricky and the theory too.

Titration is easy as long as you have patience and a working burette. I'd go for that.
 
  • Like
Likes chemisttree, DrJohn and jim mcnamara
In my experience (now more than 50 years old), the titration experiment is easier. What could go wrong? I remember in my class, one group of students got the base directly from the reagent bottle, rather than the specially prepared solution from the teacher. Consequently, they could not neutralize the solution practically no matter how much base was added. The solution to be titrated was far more concentrated to neutralize, but as long as you use the prepared solution by the teacher, you should be alright.

On the other hand, I think you will find the electrochemistry experiment far more interesting. (I am old now, so forgive me if I do not understand. I figure you are under 20.) Is it really important whether you get a 20/20 rather than say a 19/20 or 18/20. Maybe you can impress the chemistry teacher and get a really good letter of recommendation if you go far the harder experiment. Maybe your instructor will be more impressed and more easily grade the harder experiment. Of course, I cannot even be sure the gavanic cell is the harder experiment. The question really should be in which experiment will you learn more from.

PS, I found titration (in eleventh grade) as stock and trade for a practicing chemist, but I will never forget the excitement I got from electroplating a nail, (in fifth grade), although clearly, your chemistry class will be more advanced than that fifth grade experiment, which did not even require a write-up.
 
  • Like
Likes Marc Rindermann and BillTre
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
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