Register to read the introduction…
Fill the flat beaker with water. 6. Place a plastic bag over the top of the cylinder and place it, upside down, in the flat beaker. Make sure the bottom of the beaker is always underwater. 7. Fasten the beaker in place using the stand, clamp and boss. 8. Place one end of the tube inside the large beaker and fasten the other to the cynical flask’s arm. 9. Quickly pour the CaCO3 into the cynical flask, plug in the rubber stopper and start the stop watch. 10. Every 10 seconds, record the amount of gas inside the beaker. Record 11. Repeat steps 2-10m, but keep the mass of the CaCO3 the same as the first experiment.
Results
Time passed (sec) | Chips (cm3) | Granules (cm3) | Powder (cm3) | 10 | 0.5 | 15 | 30 | 20 | 0.5 | 30 | 50 | 30 | 0.5 | 45 | 60 | 40 | 0.5 | 60 | 70 | 50 | 1 | 72 | 75 | 60 | 1.25 | 95 | 80 …show more content…
For the chips, the first 10 seconds seemed to go the fast but then slowed down tremendously. Then, after 40 seconds, more gas was produced, at the same rate as the first 10 seconds and then slowed down, the next 10 seconds, to half the speed. The average rate of the gas produced, for the first 60 seconds is 0.2 cm3 for every 10 seconds. For the granules, the pattern shows that the gas is produced at a constant rate, at approximately 15 cm3 every 10 seconds. The powder result pattern is a quick start which then slows down quickly, probably as the powder clumped together. The average speed for the powder experiment was 13 cm3 every 10 seconds. If you compare the 3 results, you can clearly see how the chips are, by far the slowest reaction while the powder is the fastest during the first 30 seconds. The granules seem to have a more steady production of gas while the powder had a very quick start and then slowed down. The reason why the chips were so slow was because it had a very small surface area to volume ratio. Each granule had a high surface area to volume ratio and each powder had a very high ratio. The reason why the difference between the granules and the powder was not a lot was because each granule was pretty flat, and quite a lot of calcium carbonate molecules were accessible by the hydrochloric acid. If the granules had been less flat, the difference would be higher. The graph of the powder shows how a lot of gas produced in
Results
Time passed (sec) | Chips (cm3) | Granules (cm3) | Powder (cm3) | 10 | 0.5 | 15 | 30 | 20 | 0.5 | 30 | 50 | 30 | 0.5 | 45 | 60 | 40 | 0.5 | 60 | 70 | 50 | 1 | 72 | 75 | 60 | 1.25 | 95 | 80 …show more content…
For the chips, the first 10 seconds seemed to go the fast but then slowed down tremendously. Then, after 40 seconds, more gas was produced, at the same rate as the first 10 seconds and then slowed down, the next 10 seconds, to half the speed. The average rate of the gas produced, for the first 60 seconds is 0.2 cm3 for every 10 seconds. For the granules, the pattern shows that the gas is produced at a constant rate, at approximately 15 cm3 every 10 seconds. The powder result pattern is a quick start which then slows down quickly, probably as the powder clumped together. The average speed for the powder experiment was 13 cm3 every 10 seconds. If you compare the 3 results, you can clearly see how the chips are, by far the slowest reaction while the powder is the fastest during the first 30 seconds. The granules seem to have a more steady production of gas while the powder had a very quick start and then slowed down. The reason why the chips were so slow was because it had a very small surface area to volume ratio. Each granule had a high surface area to volume ratio and each powder had a very high ratio. The reason why the difference between the granules and the powder was not a lot was because each granule was pretty flat, and quite a lot of calcium carbonate molecules were accessible by the hydrochloric acid. If the granules had been less flat, the difference would be higher. The graph of the powder shows how a lot of gas produced in