This is due to the dissociation of H ions one time the acid is hydrated with H2O solution to go aqueous. There is merely a maximal figure of H atoms in H2O, hydrochloric acid merely consists of one H atom hence it can merely disassociate one time bring forthing merely 1 H+ ion ( proton ) . This proton so bonds with the H2O molecules to bring forth a hydronium ion H3O+ . This leaves the Cl- in solution. HCl is a strong acid due to its full dissociation in H2O. This is really unstable ( really reactive ) as the negative alteration is merely present on the chloride ion. Traveling on to sulfuric acid, it consists of 2 H atoms ensuing in two H+ ions ( protons ) forming, the reactions is extremely exothermal. However, the full dissociation of the acid occurs in 2 reactions due to the 2 H atoms, the first measure is H2SO4 + H2O i? H3O+ + HSO4- . The H attached to the sulfate group in the merchandise reacts with H2O once more forming: HSO4- + H2O i? H3O+ + SO42- go forthing the sulfate on its ain. It is for this ground why sulfuric acid is weaker than hydrochloric acid. The negative charge is ab initio spread into a H ion therefore doing it a weak acid than HCl. And eventually ethanoic acid contains four H atoms, dissociation is really limited and really few H atoms are dissociated this is all due to the acid itself incorporating 4 H ; once more it forms a hydronium ion. In this instance the negative alteration is spread across the -COO- group, which makes this acid a weak acid. Carboxyl acids themselves are known as weak acids due to this dissociation.

From what we know Acid + Metal i? Salt + H

In all three reactions the Mg thread will fade out in the acid bring forthing H gas. Magnesium will respond with these acids because it is higher in the responsiveness serious than H, therefore the Mg will replace the H in the acids organizing the Mg salts.

Chemical reaction between Mg and hydrochloric acid:

Mg ( s ) + 2HCl ( aq ) i? MgCl2 ( aq ) + H2 ( g )

Magnesium + hydrochloric acid i? Mg chloride + H

Chemical reaction between Mg and sulfuric acid:

Mg ( s ) + H2SO4 ( aq ) i? MgSO4 ( aq ) + H2 ( g )

Magnesium + sulfuric acid i? Mg suhphate + H

Chemical reaction between Mg and ethanoic acid

Mg ( g ) + 2CH3COOH ( aq ) i? Mg ( CH3COO ) 2 + H2 ( g )

Magnesium + ethanoic acerb i? Mg acetate + H

In order for Mg to respond with an acid it, both substances must clash. The hit theory merely states that at higher concentrations there is more opportunity of the two species to clash where as if concentration is low, hit is less frequent. This is because at higher concentration there are more atoms in a limited infinite, hence under greater force per unit area. For a hit, therefore a reaction, to happen the species must clash with the precise minimal energy called the activations energy of the reaction. If, for illustration, the species collide with less energy than the activations energy there would be no reaction, they would merely resile off each other.

The changing of concentrations normally changes the rate of the reaction ; from this I was able to place the order of reactions for each experiment. A rate equation shows the consequence of altering concentrations mathematically, there can non be known unless a reaction is carried out and informations is taken.

The rate of reaction is defined as the rate at which reactants are converted into merchandises. If we use the illustration of the reaction between Mg and hydrochloric acid, the rate reaction is the rate at which Mg chloride and H is made and at the same clip the rate at which Mg and hydrochloric acid is used up.

In all my reactions I measured the rate of reactions by mensurating the volumes of gases ( H ) released. The H gas was collected in a gas syringe ; the volume produced can be used to find the rate of reaction. ( see picture below )

After obtaining a sufficient sum of informations I was able to happen the initial rate of the reactions by plotting graphs and ciphering the ignition gradient ( time=0 ) merely by this mathematical equation:

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

This is because the initial rate = the initial gradient

After transporting this out I was able to plot a rate-concentration graph. The form of this graph concluded the order of the reaction.

A rate equation can non be predicted from a reaction from its balanced equation. The lone manner to happen a rate equation for a reaction is by making experiments to happen the consequence of changing the concentrations of reactions.

The general reaction

A + B i? Merchandises

Therefore the rate equation would be:

Rate = k [ A ] m [ B ] N

Rate is measured in mol dm-3s-1 and the concentrations [ A ] and [ B ] are measured in mol dm-3.

Keies:

[ A ] and [ B ] are concentrations of reactants A and B

K is the rate invariable for the reaction at a peculiar temperature

m and N are the orders of reactions with regard to A and B severally

( n+m ) is the overall order of the reaction

In my probe I explored the alteration in rate with changing temperature.

Predicting the order of reactions ( k=constant e.g. temperature ) :

Using hydrochloric acid

Mg ( s ) + 2HCl ( aq ) i? MgCl2 ( aq ) + H2 ( g )

Rate = k [ Mg ] [ HCl ] 2

The reaction is:

Using sulfuric acid

Mg ( s ) + H2SO4 ( aq ) i? MgSO4 ( aq ) + H2 ( g )

Rate = k [ Mg ] [ H2SO4 ]

The reaction is:

Using ethanoic acid

Mg ( g ) + 2CH3COOH ( aq ) i? Mg ( CH3COO ) 2 + H2 ( g )

Rate = k [ Mg ] [ CH3COOH ] 2

The reaction is:

Acid/metal background information:

Acid/metal

Information

Magnesium ( Mg )

Atomic figure is 12

Alkaline Earth metal

Group 2

Period 3

Block s

Solid stage

Hydrochloric acid ( HCl )

Hydrogen chloride solution

Highly caustic

In aqueous solution it contains H3O+ and Cl- ions. A H+ ion from the acid combines with H2O and forms the H3O hydronium ion.

HCl + H2O a†’ H3O+ + Cla?’

Molar mass is 36.46

Phase: colourless liquid at room temperature

Melting point is 247K

Boiling point is 383K

Sulphuric acid ( H2SO4 )

Strong mineral acid

Soluble in H2O at all concentrations

Molar mass is 98.08

Phase: colourless and odorless liquid

Melting point is 283K

Boiling point is 337K

Created in a industry procedure known as the “ contract procedure ( DCDA ) ”

Making aqueous sulfuric acid is extremely exothermal therefore H2O is ever added to the acid instead the frailty versa. Chemical reactions are:

H2SO4 + H2O a†’ H3O+ + HSO4-

HSO4- + H2O a†’ H3O+ + SO42-

Ethanoic acid ( CH3COOH )

Organic, carboxylic acid

Weak acid ( merely partly dissociated in aqueous solution )

Known as acetic acid

Involved in acetum

Colourless liquid

Molar mass is 60.05

Melting point 290K

Boiling point 391K

The H atom on the carboxyl group on the acid ( -COOH ) can be given off as an H+ ion ( proton ) – this give them their acidic character. Again a hydronium ion is formed.

My hypothesis: the rate of reaction for the reaction between hydrochloric acid and Mg will be greater than that of sulfuric acid and the reaction affecting ethanoic acid will be less than both. Increasing the temperature increases the changeless K, therefore the rate of reaction will increase, and diminishing the temperature will diminish the rate of reaction as the changeless K lessenings. The rate of reaction is relative to the concentration

( Test probe )

( What else can be measured )

Hazard appraisal:

( Corrosive ) ( Irritant ) ( Toxic ) ( Flammable ) ( Explosive )

## Name

## Hazard

## Precautions of managing

## Emergency action

## Hydrochloric acid

Corrosive – causes burn

Irritant – can annoy the respiratory system

Toxic – inspiration of HCl vapour can do terrible hurts.

Solutions greater of equal to 6.5M are caustic.

Solutions between 2M and 6.5M are irritant

Avoid heat and fires.

Wear safety spectacless or face mask

Wear baseball mitts

Wear lab coat

Eye contact – rinse eyes out instantly and seek medical advice

Hazard country must be isolated

If spilt, air out the country. The acid must be neutralized with an alkaline, and so absorbed with a chemical immune kit and topographic points in a disposal bag.

Ingestion – wash oral cavity out, imbibe plentifulness of H2O, and seek medical attending.

Remove contaminated vesture

## Sulphuric acid

Corrosive – causes serious Burnss

Toxic and irritant- harmful by inspiration, consumption and by skin contact.

Can do terrible Burnss on tegument, chronic exposure can take to lung harm and lung malignant neoplastic disease.

Flammable

Explosive

Solutions stronger or equal to than 1.5M are caustic.

Solutions between 0.5M and 1.5M are irritant.

Dangerous with H2O

Wear oculus protection ( safety goggles ) .

Take excess attention with higher molar concentrations.

Wear baseball mitts to non let the acid to come into contact with tegument.

Whilst diluting, ALWAYS add cold H2O to the acid, NEVER frailty versa. Stir often to guarantee a mix.

If gets into eyes use an exigency oculus wash, flood the oculus with the H2O for approximately 10 proceedingss.

Wash custodies if gets on tegument ( wear cyanide baseball mitts if supplied ) .

Clean up country if split, little sums may be flushed down the ill with a big volume of H2O following it. Large sums of spillage must be neutralized with either calcium hydroxide or sodium carbonate ash before flinging.

Remove contaminated vesture.

## Ethanoic acid

Flammable

Caustic

Toxic

Solutions stronger or equal to 4M are caustic

Solutions between 1.5M and 4M are irritant

Keep away from fires

Wear goggles

Spills can be cleaned up utilizing paper towels, go forthing paper towels to dry in fume closet before disposal. Proceed by cleaning site with plenty sum of H2O.

Contact with eyes or clamber – wash with big sum of H2O.

Remove contaminated vesture

## Magnesium and its salts

Highly flammable, nevertheless hard to light and hard to snuff out.

Powdered Mg must non be blown, can light in presence of a Bunsen fire.

Contact with mouth – wash oral cavity out instantly, drink H2O. Medicine attending must be obtained as side effects such as diarrhea can demo.

Contact with oculus – inundation oculus with H2O, medical attending must be obtained

Spillage – removed from country, country must be washed.

Equipment used:

Several beakers with the different concentrations of the different acids

Measuring cylinders

Pipets

Ruler

Pencil

Scissorss

100ml conelike flasks

Magnesium thread

3M of Hydrochloric acid

3M of Sulphuric acid

3M of Ethanoic acid

Water armored combat vehicle

Stopwatch

100cm3 gas syringe, attached to a gum elastic hosiery and a hung.

I was provided with merely 3M acids, I had to therefore thin the acids to acquire the concentrations I needed. I did this by the undermentioned stairss:

To obtain 2.5M from the 3M acid I:

Disinfected and cleaned several beakers and mensurating cylinders

Poured a sensible sum of the acid into a beaker

Then I poured 90cm3 of the acid into a measurement cylinder and set it into another fresh beaker

Using another cylinder I obtained 75cm3 of cold distilled H2O

Carefully I poured the cold distilled H2O to the acid stirring gently leting a good mix

Obtaining the remainder of the concentrations I merely had to change the volumes from stairss degree Celsiuss and vitamin D, the remainder of the stairss are precisely the same. The tabular array below shows the volumes used.

Concentration ( mol cm3 )

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

Volume of acid ( cm3 )

120

120

120

120

40

Volume of H2O ( cm3 )

0

100

80

120

120

Method:

Use swayer and scissors to cut up 3cm Mg threads

Pour some acid into a beaker

Carefully step out 20cm3 of acid utilizing a measurement cylinder

Put the 20cm3 of acid into the 100ml conelike flask

Prepare stop watch

At the same clip topographic point the Mg thread into the flask, seal the flask utilizing the spile connected to the syringe and get down the stop watch.

Take readings of gas produced in the gas syringe every 5 2nd intervals till no more gas is produced and all the Mg has reacted

I used a H2O armored combat vehicle to change the temperature of the environment. This variable may alter the activation heat content and rate of reaction between the Mg thread and the acid.

I have used a big ( 100cm3 ) gas syringe to let plentifulness of infinite for the gas to roll up.

( Above ) Figure 1 the setup I used to mensurate the rate of the H gas produced utilizing a gas syringe

( consequences )

Consequences for reactions between Mg and hydrochloric acid

Using Hydrochloric acid at room temperature:

Mg ( s ) + 2HCl ( aq ) i? MgCl2 ( aq ) + H2 ( g )

I was able to cipher the rate of each reaction for each concentration. I did this by taking the initial gradient of each of all 3 trials and happening out the mean gradient. The initial gradient is taken from when t=0 ( clip = 0 ) . The initial gradient equals the initial rate.

Calculations:

Using 3M HCl:

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial 1

H2 gas produced trial 2

H2 gas produced trial 3

5

20

18

20

10

35

28

40

15

45

32

41

20

47

38

42

25

53

39

42

30

55

39

42

35

55

39

42

40

55

39

42

45

55

39

42

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

25?5 = 5cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

17.5?5 = 3.5cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

20?5 = 4cm3s-1

Interpretation of all 3 graphs:

The graphs are steep at first, their gradient give the rate of reaction. The steeper the gradient, the faster the reaction. All 3 reactions are at their fastest points at the start, when the concentration of hydrochloric acid is high, before it gets used up. The graphs increasingly flatten out, the ground for this is that the hydrochloric acid gets used up and the Mg thread disappears. Once the line becomes horizontal this suggests that the reaction has come to a halt.

Reasoning the 3M HCl reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 4 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 3.5 cm3s-1 Therefore the norm is 4.2 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 4 cm3s-1

## Using 2.5M HCl

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial 1

H2 gas produced trial 2

H2 gas produced trial 3

0

0

0

0

5

20

19

21

10

32

25

27

15

47

30

37

20

48

35

38

25

52

40

42

30

52

46

47

35

52

46

52

40

52

46

52

45

52

46

52

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

20?5 = 4cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

19?5 = 3.8cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

21?5 = 4.2cm3s-1

Interpretation of all 3 graphs:

Reasoning the 2.5M HCl reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 4 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 3.8 cm3s-1 Therefore the norm is 4 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 4.2 cm3s-1

The initial abruptness of the graphs does n’t last every bit long as the graphs of the 3M, this is expected at the rate of reaction would be slower due to lower concentration. The graph becomes steadier sooner and stabilizes at an earlier clip but longer continuance.

## Using 2M HCl

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial 1

H2 gas produced trial 2

H2 gas produced trial 3

5

11

10

10

10

25

19

19

15

27

23

28

20

35

29

35

25

38

38

38

30

42

38

38

35

42

38

38

40

42

38

38

45

42

38

38

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

11?5 = 2.5cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

10?5 = 2cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

10?5 = 2cm3s-1

Interpretation of all 3 graphs:

Again as expected, all graphs took less clip to stabilise. However, remarkably graph for trial 3 took longer clip ( abruptness of the line remained the same for 15seconds ) boulder clay it started to flatten. This may be a systematic mistake.

Reasoning the 2M HCl reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 2.2 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 2 cm3s-1 Therefore the norm is 2.1 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 2 cm3s-1

## Using 1.5M HCl

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial 1

H2 gas produced trial 2

H2 gas produced trial 3

5

9

9

6

10

16

11

10

15

30

16

15

20

35

20

20

25

40

25

23

30

43

30

29

35

47

35

30

40

50

36

32

45

51

37

35

50

52

38

37

55

52

38

38

60

52

38

39

65

52

38

39

70

52

38

39

75

52

38

39

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

9?5 = 1.8cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

9?5 = 1.8cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

6?5 = 1.2cm3s-1

Interpretation of all 3 graphs:

The rate of reaction evidently has decreased significantly, the reaction takes up to 75seconds to complete and this all supports my hypothesis. Steepness of all 3 gradients of all 3 graphs has decreased and the continuance to which the line flattens has besides decreased.

Reasoning the 1.5M HCl reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 1.8 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 1.8 cm3s-1 Therefore the norm is 1.6 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 1.2 cm3s-1

## 5 ) Using 1M HCl

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial 1

H2 gas produced trial 2

H2 gas produced trial 3

10

6

5

4

20

10

9

9

30

16

16

16

40

21

20

19

50

26

24

24

60

28

27

28

70

35

33

32

80

39

34

36

90

42

39

38

100

46

43

42

110

48

45

45

120

52

50

47

130

55

53

50

140

56

55

54

150

57

57

56

160

58

59

58

170

59

59

59

180

59

59

59

190

59

59

59

200

59

59

59

## Initial gradient = initial rate

## Therefore, the gradient =

## Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

## 6 ? 10 = 0.6cm3s-1

## Initial gradient = initial rate

## Therefore, the gradient =

## Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

## 5 ? 10 = 0.5cm3s-1

## Initial gradient = initial rate

## Therefore, the gradient =

## Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

## 4 ? 10 = 0.4cm3s-1

Interpretation of all three graphs:

Reasoning the 1M HCl reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 0.6 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 0.5 cm3s-1 Therefore the norm is 0.5 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 0.4 cm3s-1

Readings were taking at 10second intervals as the reaction time-rate was excessively slow for 5second intervals

The reaction took 200seconds to finish. This all supports my hypothesis and suggest that the rate of reaction is decreases with the lessening of concentration. The graphs are all less steep and take longer to flatten.

## .

From all these computations of changing concentration of hydrochloric acid responding with Mg at room temperature I can make a rate-concentration graph to place the order of reaction.

Rate

On the left is a tabular array of rate to concentration from the consequences I have calculated above and in old pages.Concentrations

0

0

0.5

1

1.6

1.5

2.1

2

4

2.5

4.2

3

This graph concludes that the reaction was a first order reaction at it presents a additive line

Using Hydrochloric acid at 70oC

Mg ( s ) + 2HCl ( aq ) i? MgCl2 ( aq ) + H2 ( g )

To increase the ambiance and reaction temperature I place the conelike flask with the 20cm3 of hydrochloric acid into a H2O bath and put it to 70 grades. Using 2 thermometers ( on inside the conelike flask and the other on the H2O ) I was able to trap indicate the exact point which I could transport out the experiment. Once the temperature in the conelike flask, therefore the acid, reached 70oC I turned off the electricity so the temperature would n’t increase and started the experiment. The follow aer my consequences and readings:

Using 3M HCl at 70oC

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced test no. 1

H2 gas produced test no. 2

H2 gas produced test no. 3

5

22

30

25

10

35

40

35

15

42

42

42

20

42

42

42

25

42

42

42

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

22 ? 5 = 4.4cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

30 ? 5 = 6cm3s-1

## Initial gradient = initial rate

## Therefore, the gradient =

## Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

## 25 ? 5 = 5cm3s-1

Reasoning the 3M HCl at 70oC reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 4.4 cm3s-1 ( These gradients are steeper than the room temperature gradients. )

Test no.2 i? 6 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 5.1 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 5 cm3s-1

This 3M HCl at 70oC has a higher rate than the 3M HCl reaction at room temperature.

Using 2.5M HCl at 70 oC

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced test no. 1

H2 gas produced test no. 2

H2 gas produced test no. 3

5

19

23

21

10

32

35

31

15

41

40

40

20

45

43

43

25

45

43

43

30

45

43

43

35

45

43

43

## Initial gradient = initial rate

## Therefore, the gradient =

## Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

## 19 ? 5 = 3.8cm3s-1

## Initial gradient = initial rate

## Therefore, the gradient =

## Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

## 23 ? 5 = 4.6cm3s-1

## Initial gradient = initial rate

## Therefore, the gradient =

## Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

## 21 ? 5 = 4.2cm3s-1

Reasoning the 2.5M HCl at 70oC reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 3.8 cm3s-1 ( These gradients are steeper than the room temperature gradients. )

Test no.2 i? 4.6 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 4.3 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 4.2 cm3s-1

This 2.5M HCl at 70oC has a higher rate than the 2.5M HCl reaction at room temperature.

## Using 2M HCl at 70oC

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced test no. 1

H2 gas produced test no. 2

H2 gas produced test no. 3

5

16

16

15

10

30

29

30

15

40

36

39

20

45

42

44

25

45

44

44

30

45

44

44

35

45

44

44

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

16 ? 5 = 3.2cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

16 ? 5 = 3.2cm3s-1

Cm3

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

15 ? 5 = 3cm3s-1

Reasoning the 2M HCl at 70oC reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 3.2 cm3s-1 ( These gradients are steeper than the room temperature gradients. )

Test no.2 i? 3.2 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 3.1 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 3 cm3s-1

This 2M HCl at 70oC has a higher rate than the 2M HCl reaction at room temperature.

## Using 1.5M HCl at 70oC

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced test no. 1

H2 gas produced trial no.2

H2 gas produced test no. 3

5

13

12

11

10

23

21

21

15

29

27

29

20

34

35

36

25

39

39

41

30

42

42

43

35

42

42

43

40

43

42

43

45

43

42

43

50

43

42

43

Cm3

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

13 ? 5 = 2.6cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

12 ? 5 = 2.4cm3s-1

Reasoning the 1.5M HCl at 70oC reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 2.6 cm3s-1 ( These gradients are steeper than the room temperature gradients. )

Test no.2 i? 2.4 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 2.4 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 2.2 cm3s-1

This 1.5M HCl at 70oC has a higher rate than the 1.5M HCl reaction at room temperature.

Cm3

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

11 ? 5 = 2.2cm3s-1

## Using 1M HCl at 70oC

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial no.1

H2 gas produced trial no.2

H2 gas produced trial no.3

5

10

9

9

10

20

18

20

15

25

24

28

20

32

30

35

25

37

35

41

30

42

40

43

35

45

43

44

40

47

44

44

45

47

44

44

50

47

44

44

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

10 ? 5 = 2cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

9 ? 5 = 1.8cm3s-1

Reasoning the 1M HCl at 70oC reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 2 cm3s-1 ( These gradients are steeper than the room temperature gradients. )

Test no.2 i? 1.8 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 1.9 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 1.8 cm3s-1

This 1M HCl at 70oC has a higher rate than the 1M HCl reaction at room temperature.

Besides here, unlike in the room temperature experiment of 1M HCl, the intervals were 5seconds apart as the rate-time reaction was evidently faster.

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

9 ? 5 = 1.8cm3s-1

From all the rate consequences above for the reaction between hydrochloric acid and Mg at 70oC I was able to pull a rate-concentration graph which concludes the order of reaction.

Rate

Concentrations

0

0

0.5

1

1.6

1.5

2.1

2

4

2.5

4.2

3

This graph concludes that the reaction was a first order reaction at it presents a additive line

( talk about the outlier )

Consequences for reactions between Mg and sulfuric acid

utilizing sulfuric acid at room temperature

Mg ( s ) + H2SO4 ( aq ) i? MgSO4 ( aq ) + H2 ( g )

I carried out these experiments in the same mode as the hydrochloric acid experiments, plotting volume-time graphs and ciphering the initial gradients therefore the initial rates which allowed me to bring forth a rate-concentration graph in which I can reason the rate of reaction. I can compare the rate of reaction for this acid with the hydrochloric acid rate and support by hypothesis based on my consequences.

## Calculations:

## Using 3M H2SO4 at room temperature.

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial no.1

H2 gas produced trial no.2

H2 gas produced trial no.3

5

15

20

17

10

22

27

24

15

26

31

28

20

29

33

30

25

30

34

31

30

32

35

32

35

32

35

32

40

32

35

32

Here, unlike the hydrochloric acid consequences, the sulfuric acid took longer clip to halt reacting. Approximately 5 – 10 seconds longer. Hydrochloric acid stopped responding at approximately 25seconds into the reaction and its graphs flattened at an earlier phase. However, sulfuric acid reactions stopped responding at about 30 seconds, back uping my hypothesis.

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

15 ? 5 = 3cm3s-1

This rate is lower than the HCl 3M conc. at room temperature proposing its lower inclination of dissociation

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

20 ? 5 = 4cm3s-1

This rate is equal to 2 of the HCl rates at 3M conc. nevertheless, this is likely an mistake and the overall rate would propose this.

Reasoning the 3M H2SO4 at room temperature reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient, therefore the mean rate of reaction:

Test no.1i? 3 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 4 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 3.5 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 3.4 cm3s-1

The overall rate for HCl 3M at room temperature was 4.2, here we can see a important difference. This is all due to the responsiveness difference between hydrochloric and sulfuric acids. Graph test 2 may hold shown some kind of mistake, this may be a systematic mistake or otherwise ground unknown. If I were given more clip in the research lab I would remake a few more experiments for this peculiar reaction to get the better of this mistake.

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

17 ? 5 =3. 4cm3s-1

Rate here is lower than the rates of the 3M conc. HCl once more, more grounds back uping my hypothesis

## Using 2.5M of H2SO4 at room temperature.

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial no.1

H2 gas produced trial no.2

H2 gas produced trial no.3

5

14

16

15

10

21

23

23

15

27

29

30

20

31

33

33

25

34

36

35

30

36

37

36

35

38

38

37

40

39

39

38

45

39

39

38

50

39

39

38

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

14 ? 5 =2.8cm3s-1

Again, here the rate is lower than the 2.5M conc. for HCl. back uping the chemical thoughts and my hypothesis.

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

16 ? 5 =3.2cm3s-1

Reasoning the 2.5M H2SO4 at room temperature reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient by adding up all 3 trial gradients and spliting by 3:

Test no.1i? 2.8 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 3.2 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 3 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 3 cm3s-1

Again there is a important difference between the 2.5M H2SO4 and the 2.5M HCl. one time more this is likely due to the lower inclination of dissociation of the H ions when the acid is in solution.

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

14 ? 5 =3cm3s-1

## Using 2M of H2SO4 at room temperature

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial no.1

H2 gas produced trial no.2

H2 gas produced trial no.3

5

11

15

14

10

21

23

22

15

27

28

29

20

30

30

34

25

31

31

36

30

32

32

37

35

32

32

37

40

32

32

37

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

11 ? 5 =2.2cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

15 ? 5 =3cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

14 ? 5 =2.8cm3s-1

Reasoning the 2M H2SO4 at room temperature reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient by adding up all 3 trial gradients and spliting by 3:

Test no.1i? 2.2 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 3 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 2.7 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 2.8 cm3s-1

## 1.5M of H2SO4 at room temperature

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial no.1

H2 gas produced trial no.2

H2 gas produced trial no.3

5

9

8

5

10

18

16

10

15

26

24

15

20

32

26

20

25

38

27

24

30

42

28

26

35

46

29

28

40

49

30

30

45

50

31

32

50

51

32

33

55

52

32

34

60

52

32

34

65

52

32

34

70

52

32

34

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

9 ? 5 =1.8cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

8 ? 5 =1.6cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

5 ? 5 =1cm3s-1

Reasoning the 1.5M H2SO4 at room temperature reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient by adding up all 3 trial gradients and spliting by 3:

Test no.1i? 1.8 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 1.6 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 1.5 cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 1 cm3s-1

## 1M H2SO4 at room temperature

Time intervals ( s )

H2 gas produced trial no.1

H2 gas produced trial no.2

H2 gas produced trial no.3

10

4

5

4

20

8

12

11

30

12

17

17

40

16

22

23

50

20

26

30

60

23

30

37

70

26

34

43

80

29

38

48

90

32

41

50

100

36

44

52

110

39

47

53

120

42

50

54

130

45

52

55

140

48

54

56

150

51

55

57

160

54

56

57

170

57

57

57

180

58

58

57

190

58

58

57

200

58

58

57

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

4 ? 5 =0.8cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

5 ? 5 =1cm3s-1

Initial gradient = initial rate

Therefore, the gradient =

Change in y-axis ? alteration in x-axis

## =

4 ? 5 =0.8cm3s-1

Reasoning the 1M H2SO4 at room temperature reactions:

I have calculated the mean gradient by adding up all 3 trial gradients and spliting by 3:

Test no.1i? 0.8 cm3s-1

Test no.2 i? 1 cm3s-1 Therefore the mean rate is 0.89cm3s-1

Test no.3 i? 0.8 cm3s-1

This is an unusual consequence, and ground is unknown why. If I was given more laboratory work I ‘d remake these experiments. These reactions reject my hypothesis.