METHODOLOGY

The first part of the experiment was done to determine the effect of
concentration on the rate of reaction. A beaker, with an X mark at the outer-bottom
side, was filled with the required volumes of Sodium Thiosulfate and water. Enough
HCl was then added to the solution and the time it took for the X mark to be
covered by a cloud of precipitate was recorded. This was done for 3 Runs (runs 13; refer to table 1). For the next 3 runs (runs 4-6), required amounts of HCl was
added into the water (Refer to table 1). Required volumes of Sodium Thiosulfate
were then added to the solutions and the time it took for a cloud of precipitate to
cover the X mark was recorded. Take note that only 1 beaker must be used
throughout the experiment and that there should be only one (1) observer.
Table 1.1 Determination of the Effect of Concentration on the Rate of
Reaction
Run
Vol. of 0.15 M
Vol. of water,
Vol. of 3M HCl ,
Na2S2o3 , mL
mL
mL
1
10.0
3.0
2.0
2
5.0
8.0
2.0
3
2.5
10.5
2.0
4
5.0
1.0
1.5
5
5.0
1.5
1.0
6
5.0
2.0
0.5
Next was the determination of the effect of temperature on the rate of
reaction. Specified volumes from Run 3 (Table 1) were used to conduct this part of
the experiment. Sodium Thiosulfate and water were mixed together in a 50-mL
beaker with X mark while HCl was put in a test tube. Both solutions were put
inside a water bath of desired temperature (cold, ambient, hot). It took about 5 to
10 minutes for the temperature to remain constant and this temperature was
recorded. After this, HCl was added to the thiosulfate solution. Keep in mind that
the 50-mL beaker was still submerged in water bath. The time it took for the
cloudy precipitate to cover the X mark was recorded. Waste from the first part and
this part was filtered. Precipitate was collected ad submitted in a vial while the
filtrate was disposed of in the Inorganic Waste bin.
The last two parts of the experiment dealt with Catalysis. For the first, a hot
bath was prepared and its temperature was kept at around 65 0C. Two 6-inch test
tubes were then prepared. Both test tubes contained 5mL of 0.3M sodium tartrate
and 2mL of 6% Hydrogen peroxide. An additional 8 drops of 0.3 M CoCl 2 was
added to test tube 2. After that, both test tubes were placed in the hot water bath
and the time it took for the solutions color to change was recorded. Keep in mind
that the temperature must be kept around 65 0C since the reaction mixture may
overflow at higher temperatures. Waste from this part was disposed of in the
Peroxide Waste container.
For the last part, 1 mL of saturated Na 2C2O4, 5 drops of water and 1 mL of
3.0 M H2SO4 were mixed in a 4-inch test tube. This mixture was then split into two,
leaving us with Test Tube 1 and Test Tube 2. A drop of 0.01 M KMnO 4 was added to
test tube 1 and the time it took for permanganate to decolorize was recorded.
Another drop of 0.01 M KMnO4 was added to test tube 1 and again, the time it took

for permanganate to decolorize was recorded. To test tube 2, 5 drops of 1% MnSo 4

was added and then mixed thoroughly. A drop of 0.01 M KMnO 4 was then added to
the mixture and the time it took for permanganate to decolorize was recorded.
Waste from this part was diluted with 0.1M NaOH and was disposed of in the
Inorganic Waste bin.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The experiment proceeded without much variation from what should happen
according to the procedure. The equation below (Equation 1) presents the
balanced net ionic equation of the reaction and the table below (Table 1.2) shows
the results from the first part of the experiment.
S2O32-(aq) + 2H+(aq) SO32-(aq) + S(s) + SO2(g) + H2O(l) (1)
Table 1.2 Results for the reaction of thiosulfate
Run
Time (s)
1/Time (s-1)
[S2O32-] initial
[H=]initial(M)
(M)
1
25.09
0.03986
0.5
3.0
2
62.29
0.01605
0.9375
3.0
3
108.48
0.00922
0.3571
3.0
4
31.97
0.03128
0.15
4.5
5
34.0
0.02941
0.15
2.0
6
41.29
0.02422
0.15
0.75
It can be observed that a change in molarity of the reactants has happened. This is
reasonable considering that there would be an initial reaction of water with
Sodium Thiosulfate or Hydrochloric acid.This information is necessary to us
because we can identify its rate constant now. The rate can now be expressed as
that of the rate law (Equation 2):
Rate = k [S2O32-][H+]2 (2) ; where 1/t = rate
We use 1/t as the measure of the initial rate of reaction. This is possible because of
the assumption that all our reactions proceed to completion and is composed of the
same reactants and produce the same products.[1] What is the substance that
causes visibility to change? you may ask. As stated in the methodology, a
precipitate causes the clear solution to be cloudy. This is because of the Sulfur
solid produced. Although the data seems right, there are still some sources of error
in the methods done. The observer might not have been able to start or stop the
stopwatch once acid was added. Second is that they mightve had the timer
stopped at different concentrations of the cloudiness (although it was stated that
there should only be one observer, there will still be some human error from that
observer on how he/she perceives the cloudiness).
The second part of the experiment discusses how temperature affects the
rate of reaction. A table below is used to present the data gathered:
Table 2 Results for determination of the effect of temperature to rate of
reaction
Temperature (K)
1/Temperature
Time (s)
1/Time (s-1)
-1
(K )
303.65
0.00329
77.14
0.01296

323.15
277.65

0.00309
0.00360

23.43
595.24

0.04268
0.00168

Based on the data presented, the rate of reaction increases as temperature

increases. According to the collision theory, particles must collide together with
enough frequency with sufficient energy. [2] It is known that particles would move
faster once they are heated, leaving us with more possibilities of collision from
these substances. Relating this to Arrhenius equation, the linearity of ln k versus
1/T is ideally 1. Computing for the regression, we end up having an R 2 that is equal
to 0.998. The closer to 1 the regression gets, the better the fit of the line is to the
points. Relating this to the data, it only means that ln k can be equal to 1/T but not
al all times. It is possible that one value might be lower than that of the other. [3]
Once this has been computed we can substitute values to the Arrhenius equation to
get the amount of activation energy (Ea) needed for the reaction. The Ea of this
reaction is positive which is fairly reasonable since rate of reaction increases as
temperature increases. In reactions where rate of reaction decreases as
temperature increases, the Ea would be negative. So the sign of activation energy
not only tells us how much energy is needed to proceed to completion but also
whether an increase or decrease in temperature is necessary.
For the first part of the last experiment, there is one method error that I would like
to bring up; the temperature of the water bath. As much as we want it to be a
constant 650C, sometimes its just not possible to keep it that way for the entire
procedure. We would either have to risk decreasing (taking it from the hotplate) or
increasing (keeping it in the hotplate) the temperature and the only better solution
was to decrease it since an overflow might occur. Moving on to the data, an
equation below shows the balanced equation (Equation 3) for the oxidation of
tartrate by hydrogen peroxide.
C4H4O62- (aq)+ 5H2O2(aq) + 2H+ 4CO2(g) +8 H2O(l) (3)
From the balanced equation, we now know that it is the carbon dioxide that is
responsible for effervescence. What gives the color, though, is the addition of CoCl 2
forming a cobalt complex first that produces the color pink. The color changes
represent how a catalyst creates alternative paths to achieve end point.
For the last experiment, a reaction between permanganate and oxalate
occurred. The equation below is the net ionic equation of the redox reaction
(Equation 4):
2 MnO4-(aq ) + 5 C2O42-(aq ) + 16H+(aq) --> 2Mn2+(aq ) + 10 CO2(aq ) + 8 H2O (4)
Experimentally, it can be proven that the catalyst for the reaction is Mn 2+, taking
only 6.64 seconds to decolorize the permanganate ion. But for the reaction without
the manganese, the second reaction somehow still occurred faster than the first.
This is because of autocatalysis. In the initial process, a complex ion containing
manganese has been formed so when the next drop of permanganate was added,
the reaction proceeded faster. The autocatalyst can be determined by first
determining the catalyst and then looking at the possible products of the initial
reaction. [4]

Appendix:
1. Plot of ln k vs 1/T

2.

References:
[1] Bissonnette, C.; Herring, G.; Madura, J.; Petrucci, R. General Chemistry:
Principles And Modern Applications; 10th ed.; Toronto, 2011.
[2] Padolina, M.; Simon-Antero, E.; Alumaga, M. Conceptual And Functional
Chemistry; 2nd ed.; Vibal Publishing House: Manila, 2010; pp. 268-269.
[3]People.duke.edu,.
Introduction
to
linear
regression
analysis
http://people.duke.edu/~rnau/regintro.htm (accessed Jun 24, 2015).
[4]Chemeddl.org,.
ChemEd
DL
Image
Collection
http://www.chemeddl.org/alfresco/service/org/chemeddl/video/video_images?
id=vid:691&guest=true (accessed Jun 24, 2015).