Chemistry HL IA 20 24
Chemistry HL IA 20 24
Chemistry HL IA 20 24
Ex: 5/6
An: 5/6
Ev: 5/6
Cm: 3/4
Total: 20/24
IB Chemistry HL
Internal Assessment
1 Introduction
Chemical reactions occur when reactants have enough kinetic energy and react Transition state
with the correct orientation, which allows chemical bonds to first be broken, and
then reformed, to create the products in a reaction (University of North Carolina,
2010). This minimum kinetic energy required for a successful chemical reaction
to occur is known as the activation energy (Ea) (Gregerson, 2015), or as shown
in Figure 1.1, the energy between the reactants and what is known as the
“transition state”, the highest-energy state of the reaction (Bui, 2016). The
reaction involving the decomposition of hydrogen peroxide by tartrate ions in
the absence of a catalyst is kinetically slow and hence hard to observe as it
occurs at an unmeasurable rate due to the reaction having a high activation Figure 1.1 (sourced from (Clark, 2013)):
shows an “activation energy diagram” which
energy. Therefore, cobalt (II) chloride is used as a catalyst which provides an labels the activation energy and transition
alternative reaction pathway with a lower activation energy (demonstrated in states of a reaction (endothermic)
Figure 1.2), speeding up the reaction by increasing the amount of successful
collisions between reactants (University of Texas, 2014). This can be observed by
analysing the colour changes of the solution over the duration of the reaction
(Todd, 2016). This is an example of an oxidation-reduction reaction (also known as
a redox reaction), where the complete oxidation of tartrate ions (derived from the
potassium sodium tartrate complex) to give carbon dioxide and water occurs due to
hydrogen peroxide being a strong oxidising agent in the reaction (therefore it is
reduced). The chemical equation is shown in Equation 1.1 below.
Figure 1.2 (sourced from (Clark, 2013)): shows
the effect of a catalyst which lowers the activation
energy of a reaction – comparing the activation
energies of a reaction in the presence & absence
Equation 1.1: shows the chemical equation of this reaction where tartrate ions are of a catalyst. It’s also noted that the catalyst
oxidised and hydrogen peroxide is reduced, reacting to form carbon dioxide, water doesn’t effect the energy of the reactants or
products but only the activation energy of the
~Cm states? and hydroxide ions. Sourced from (Flinn Scientific Inc., 2016) reaction.
The catalyst (CoCl2) in this reaction is known to be pink - but then reacted with both hydrogen peroxide and tartrate
ions, the solution turns orange and green before returning to it’s original colour. This is due to the variable
oxidation states of cobalt which aid in oxidising the tartrate ions in this reaction. The cobalt catalyst starts as a Co
(II) ion, but when added to the reaction mixture, it is oxidised to Co (III) hence turning the solution green (an
activated complex).
According to the theory of (Carey & Sundberg, 2007) a superoxide linkage between two octahedral coordinated
cobalt atoms creates this green activated complex (shown in Figure 1.3) – and when hydrogen peroxide is present,
the cobalt atoms are linked by a peroxo linkage (usually orange in colour) which oxidises to a superoxo complex
(usually green in colour). The orange colour of the peroxo linkage explains why there is an intermediate colour
change evident in-between the pink to green colour transition in the reaction which is still measured, as the peroxo
linkage would be present in the solution briefly before it is oxidised to the superoxo linkage which is green.
When this Co-O-O-Co (superoxo) linkage forms, delocalised electrons are moving across the four atoms as
demonstrated in Figure 1.4 which means the cobalt ions have a 3+ charge (Katz, 2001). The tartaric acid
molecules/ tartrate ions are predicted to coordinate and bond about the cobalt complex (demonstrated in Figure 1.5)
which explains the next stage of the reaction described below - as the tartrate ions are used up they no longer move
about this complex and hence cause the colour change.
Straight after the colour change to green occurs, gas bubbles are produced due to the vigorous oxidation of the
tartrate ions which indicates a rapid increase in the rate of reaction as this occurs within seconds of the cobalt
catalyst being added. The colour of the solution then returns from green back to pink as the tartrate ions are used up
in the reaction and the production of gas bubbles subsides, and the cobalt catalyst is reduced back to the original
Co(II) complex (Flinn Scientific Inc., 2016). This colour change back to pink shows that only Co (II) ions are
present at the end of the reaction - evidence it acts as a catalyst as it does not get used up to form the products.
In Part A of this investigation, the effect increasing the concentration of the CoCl2 catalyst has on the time taken for
each colour change (pink to orange, orange to green and green to pink) in this reaction is being investigated. This
will be measured by videoing the reaction, before analysing it using the programs ColourAssist and ImageJ to
identify the colour changes using RGB values and the corresponding time in seconds it took for the solution to
change to this colour. The pink colour was classified as RGB value 216, 16, 178, the orange colour 191, 175, 22
and the green colour 24, 69, 22. A concentration versus time graph will then be plotted using this data to determine
the trend found.
In Part B of this investigation, excel will be used to generate a ln(concentration) versus time graph for each colour
transition which will then be processed using LoggerPro. The tangent of the first two points will be identified, and
the negative of the slope will be equivalent to the rate of the reaction as the reaction of hydrogen peroxide and
sodium tartrate is a first order reaction. This value will be the experimental rate of reaction, which will be
compared to the theoretical rate of reaction and percentage error will be calculated to analyse how far it was from
the “true” value and hence how accurate the data is. The theoretical data has been sourced from a simulation of this
experiment (adapted from (Yenka , 2017)) which suggested that the theoretical reaction rates (all with units of
± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1) are calculated to be 0.38 for the pink to orange transition, 0.26 from orange to green and 0.34
for green to pink.
+PE further evidence of creativity using a
simulator to obtain theoretical data.
1.1 Research Question
~Ex why not use a spectrophometer?
a) What effect does increasing the concentration of the CoCl2 catalyst from 0.1mol.dm-3 to 0.5mol.cm-3
have on the time taken for each colour change in the reaction between hydrogen peroxide and tartrate
ions?
b) What is the calculated “experimental” rate of reaction for each colour change and how does it
compare to theoretical data taken from a Yenka simulation?
gxt091 2
+Ex enhancement of the RQ and justification of design
+PE personal input/initiative
Figure 1.1b: shows how the RGB values for each colour change were determined -
the cursor was placed over the solution and the RGB value is identified in the top
left hand corner of the application (as seen in the red box). The video of the reaction
is uploaded into ImageJ, where the time is shown in the bottom left hand corner in
order to determine how long each colour change occurred for. This was deduced
using the RGB values - for example the pink to orange colour change was
determined by measuring the time taken for the RGB value of the solution to change
from the pink value of 216, 16, 178 to the orange value of 191, 175, 22.
Beaker B
Beaker A
1.2 Hypothesis
Figure 1.1d – Yenka simulation for the potassium sodium tartrate and hydrogen
a) It is predicted that increasing the concentration of peroxide reaction catalysed by cobalt chloride which produced theoretical values for
the CoCl2 catalyst will decrease the time taken this investigation. The concentration of cobalt chloride was increased varying from
between each colour change. This is expected due to 0.1mol.dm-3 to 0.5mol.cm-3 in each trial and added in Beaker A each time along with
the idea that catalysts speed up chemical reactions as the hydrogen peroxide and potassium sodium tartrate – therefore a rate of reaction
graph was deduced using the time taken versus the volume of products being
they create an alternative reaction pathway with a produced. Beaker B was the control without the cobalt chloride catalyst.
lower activation energy, leading to more successful
collisions of reactants and allowing for easy product formation. This is because catalysts cause a redistribution of
electron densities in the reaction molecules - where the bonds between reactant molecules are weakened (Volland, 1999).
The weakened bonds are easier to break as less energy is required to complete this process, hence the reaction occurs at a
faster rate. When the concentration of the cobalt (II) catalyst is increased, (Volland, 1999) also suggests that the reaction
will “occur at a faster rate as opportunities for successful collisions between the catalyst and reactants to then bind to
create products is increased as there is more catalyst available to be utilised”. This means the data from this experiment
should demonstrate a decrease in the time taken for each colour change as the CoCl2 concentration is increased.
gxt091 3
+Ex variables considered to improve reliability of design
b) As described in section 1.1a of this report, a simulation was created for this investigation which modelled the
experimental design in order to generate theoretical data. The results (as adapted from (Yenka , 2017)) suggested that the
theoretical reaction rates (units of ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1) are calculated to be 0.38 for the pink to orange transition, 0.26
from orange to green and 0.34 for green to pink. Therefore, it is expected that the experimental values will be close to
this. This value is determined by using the ln(conc) versus time graphs for each colour change and undergoing analysis
using Logger Pro – where the slope of the tangent of the first two points on the graph will give the experimental rate of
reaction (according to the initial rates method) (shown in Equation 7.1). Percentage error will then be calculated to
determine how far each value was from the “expected” values (as seen in Equation 7.2).
2 Variables
Table 2.1 – Independent, dependent and controlled variables for this experiment
Variable Range Units/How it’s controlled
Independent Concentration of cobalt (II) chloride (0.1, mol.dm-3 (± 0.05)
0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5)
Volume of cobalt (II) chloride 3cm3 of cobalt (II) chloride was used for each trial. This was to
ensure the same amount was catalysing the hydrogen peroxide
and potassium sodium tartrate reaction, resulting in a fair test
and eliminating the possibility of varying amounts varying the
rate of the reaction.
Volume of hydrogen peroxide 20cm3 of hydrogen peroxide was used every trial to ensure
altering amounts of reactants weren’t inferring with the results
of the experiment and creating invalid data. This is because
altering the volume changes the speed and hence the rate of the
reaction.
Mixing speed of the reaction The magnetic stirrer was set to the highest speed for all trials.
This is because having a faster or slower mix rate would have
affected how fast the rate of reaction was, and therefore would
give unreliable and inaccurate data collection.
Amount of potassium sodium tartrate 5g of potassium sodium tartrate was used for each trial. This
was to ensure all trials had same amount of potassium sodium
tartrate reacting with hydrogen peroxide and being catalysed by
cobalt (II) chloride therefore eliminating the effect of varying
amounts of reactants increasing the reaction rate.
Size of Beakers
100cm3 beakers were used in all trials to ensure the
uncertainties were kept as low as possible throughout the
experiment which ensures accurate and reliable data.
Temperature of the solution when cobalt Each trial was heated to and then maintained at 70°C in a water
(II) chloride was added bath measured by a thermostat, as changing the temperature
impacts the reaction rate and hence would have altered the
results of this experiment. This ensured consistent and reliable
data collection.
Method of identifying each colour All colour changes were quantified by RGB values (ie. The
change/ method of using ImageJ and time taken for the colour change was identified based on when
ColourAssist the solution turned a specific RGB value, for example the
colour change from orange to green was determined when the
RGB value of 24, 69, 22 was identified) on the ColorAssist app
and the ImageJ program to ensure consistent and reliable
results.
gxt091 4
+Ex full consideration of safety
4 Safety
• Hydrogen peroxide (sourced from (Chemical Safety International Pty Ltd, 2016)): Handle with care as skin and
eye contact can result in burns, blistering, redness, itching and tissue damage. If this occurs wash with
disinfectant soap (skin) or flush with cold water (eyes). Inhalation or ingestion may produce severe irritation to
mouth and respiratory tract – symptoms of this are coughing, choking or shortness and breath – if this is
prevalent contact emergency services immediately/ get medical advice. Recommended to wear personal
protective equipment such as lab coat, safety glasses and gloves. Also tie long hair back. Keep away from
ignition sources and store in a cool, well ventilated room as is corrosive and highly flammable.
• Potassium sodium tartrate (adapted from (Laboratory Reagents & Fine Chemicals , 2016)): Keep away from
electrical sockets and heat as may be slightly flammable and combustible at high temperatures. No major risks
but can irritate skin and eyes – if it comes in contact immediately flush affected area with cold water for 15
minutes. Wear protective clothing such as gloves and safety glasses for precautionary measures.
• Cobalt (II) chloride (according to (Fisher Scientific , 2007)): Use in a moderately ventilated room and avoid
contact with skin, eyes and inhalation/ingestion. Known to cause allergic reactions, irritations and possible
burns to skin and eyes – if this occurs immediately flush with water and seek medical assistance. If swallowed
do now induce vomiting but call emergency services immediately. If inhaled remove affected person away from
contaminated area/ into fresh air. Wear gloves and safety glasses for prevention. Do not dispose down sinks or
drains as it is dangerous for the environment and is known to cause long-term adverse effects to aquatic animals
and/or toxicity to surrounding marine animals and habitats.
• Glassware (recommendations by (McIntosh, 2010)): Handle glassware with care to avoid breakages which lead
to cuts and other injuries. As (McIntosh, 2010) suggests, “All glassware should be inspected for cracks and
contamination before use. Cracked items should be disposed of, and contaminated glassware should be cleaned.
Broken and other waste glass should be discarded in a container specially marked to indicate its contents. Safety
glasses should be worn at all times in a laboratory to prevent eye damage from broken glassware”.
• No additional ethical or environmental considerations needed to be made during this experiment.
5 Method
1. An electronic balance was used to weigh and add
5g of potassium sodium tartrate into a 100cm3
beaker containing a magnetic stir rod
2. 20cm3 of hydrogen peroxide was then combined,
measured using a 25cm3 measuring cylinder
3. This solution was then mixed (using magnetic
stirrer on highest setting) until the powdered
potassium sodium tartrate was dissolved.
4.
5. Apparatus was then set up for the next part of the
experiment, where the heating plate and water
bath is placed on top of the magnetic stirrer in
order for the solution to be able to heat and mix at
the same time. The water bath was then filled with
150cm3 of tap water and set to heat to 70℃.
6. Once the water bath had reached 70℃
(determined using a thermometer), the beaker
containing the magnetic stirrer and mixed
tartrate/hydrogen peroxide solution was placed in the water bath.
gxt091 5
+Ex the candidate details further development.
~Cm/Ex concise scientific literacy would improve
clarity
7. The magnetic stirrer was turned on to the highest setting before 3cm3 of cobalt (II) chloride solution was added
into the beaker using a 10cm3 measuring cylinder. As soon as the cobalt chloride was added, the video camera
was set to start recording the colour changes of the reaction. The composed video was then processed using
ImageJ and ColourAssist to quantify the colours to RGB values which made it easier to determine when/ at
what time the colour changes occurred. The pink colour was classified as RGB value 216, 16, 178, the orange
colour 191, 175, 22 and the green colour 24, 69, 22. More information on how this was completed is explained
in section 1.1a Development of the Research Question.
6 Results
Table 6.1 – Raw data and calculated averages for the time taken for the colour transition from pink to orange at
increasing concentrations of cobalt (II) chloride
Time Taken for Colour Change from Pink to Orange (± 1 seconds)
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5 Average
Cobalt (II) Chloride
Concentration
(± 𝟎. 𝟎𝟓 mol.dm-3)
0.1 28 23 26 87* 24 25
0.2 15 18 13 12 17 18
0.3 11 15 40* 14 16 14
0.4 13 15 12 14 13 13
0.5 8 11 6 10 9 9
*red values were anomalies and were not taken into account when calculating averages
Table 6.2 - Raw data and calculated averages for the time taken for the colour transition from orange to green at
increasing concentrations of cobalt (II) chloride
Time Taken for Colour Change from Orange to Green (± 1 seconds)
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5 Average
Cobalt (II) Chloride
Concentration
(± 𝟎. 𝟎𝟓 mol.dm-3)
0.1 43 44 40 45 49 44
0.2 33 35 33 31 40* 33
0.3 4* 23 24 23 25 24
0.4 19 18 66* 57* 22 20
0.5 14 13 15 11 5* 13
*red values were anomalies and were not taken into account when calculating averages
60 y = -123x + 61.1
R² = 0.88021
50
40
Pink to Orange
seconds)
Figure 6.1 – Graph showing the relationship between the time taken (in seconds) for each colour change at increasing
concentrations of cobalt (II) chloride.
Ln(concentration) Versus Time Graph for Ln(concentration) Versus Time Graph for Ln(concentration) Versus Time Graph for
Pink to Orange Colour Change Orange to Green Colour Change Green to Pink Colour Change
Time (+/- 1 secs) Time (+/- 1 secs) Time (+/- 1 secs)
0 0 0
ln(concentration)
ln(concentration)
ln(concentration)
0 10 20 30 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
-1 -1 -1
Figure 6.2 - ln (conc) versus time graph Figure 6.3 - ln (conc) versus time graph Figure 6.4 - ln (conc) versus time graph for
for the pink to orange colour change for the orange to green colour change the green to pink colour change
Table 6.4 – Calculated experimental versus theoretical reaction rates for each colour transition and the corresponding
percentage error. The experimental reaction rate calculations are shown in Equation 7.1.
Experimental Theoretical Percentage
Reaction Rate Reaction Rate Error (%)
(± 𝟎. 𝟎𝟓 mol.dm-3s-1)
Colour Transition
Pink to Orange 0.29 0.38 24
Orange to Green 0.19 0.26 27
Green to Pink 0.32 0.34 6
Figure 6.1.1 – solution Figure 6.1.2 – reaction “intermediate” Figure 6.1.3 – solution bubbling and turning
initial pink colour where the solution turned orange green as a result of the Co(III) ions forming
In order to find the value for the “rate” of reaction in this equation, the
ln(concentration) vs time graph for each colour change (refer to figures 6.2, 6.3 and
6.4) was opened in LoggerPro (as seen in Figure 7.1 on the left) and the first two
points of the graph were selected. The tangent was then identified and the slope of
this tangent was the value for the rate of reaction. As the reaction of hydrogen
peroxide and potassium sodium tartrate is a first order reaction, k= -slope, hence in
this example the rate is 0.12 (± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1).
𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 − 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙
= ×100
𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙
0.29 − 0.38
= ×100
0.38
−0.09
= ×100
0.38
= -23.68421….
= 24% (negative disregarded)
gxt091 8
+An thorough analysis of trends and links and justified
through to scientific theory/secondary data
8 Discussion
In the first part of this investigation, the effect increasing the CoCl2 catalyst concentration from 0.1mol.dm-3 to
0.5mol.cm-3 had on the time taken for each colour change in the reaction of hydrogen peroxide and tartrate ions was
being measured. The results indicated that, in the colour transition from pink to orange, the time taken (±1
seconds) decreased from an average of 25 seconds at CoCl2 concentration of 0.1mol.dm-3 to 9 seconds at
0.5mol.dm-3 (as seen in Table 6.1 and Figure 6.1), faster by 16 seconds. The time taken for the colour transition
from orange to green was an average of 44 seconds at 0.1mol.dm-3 CoCl2 concentration decreasing to 13 seconds at
0.5mol.dm-3 (as seen in Table 6.2 and Figure 6.1), faster by 31 seconds. In addition, the time taken for the green to
pink transition was calculated to average at 56 seconds at 0.1mol.dm-3 and 7 seconds at 0.5mol.dm-3 (as seen in
Table 6.3 and Figure 6.1), faster by 49 seconds.
The hypothesis predicted that, as the concentration of the CoCl2 catalyst was increased, the time taken between
each colour change would decrease. The results followed this trend and therefore supported this hypothesis,
demonstrated when the colour transition from pink to orange occurred 16 seconds faster at CoCl2 concentration of
0.5mol.dm-3, 31 seconds faster from orange to green, and 49 seconds faster from green to pink, as stated above and
seen in Figure 6.1 and Tables 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 respectively. As suggested by (Volland, 1999), this trend occurred
with higher catalyst concentrations proceeding faster due to increased opportunities for successful collisions
between the reactants and catalysts to then bind to form products as there is more catalyst available to be utilised.
This is because catalysts cause a redistribution of electron densities in the reaction molecules - where the bonds
between reactant molecules are weakened. The weakened bonds are easier to break as less energy is required to
complete this process, hence the reaction occurs at a faster rate, which is what is suggested in the results of this
experiment.
In the second part of this investigation, the experimental rate of reaction for each colour change was calculated,
determined by using the ln(concentration) versus time graphs for each colour change (as seen in Figures 6.2, 6.3
and 6.4) and analysing them in LoggerPro, with the rate of reaction being equivalent to the slope of the tangent of
the first two points on the graph (sample calculations in Equation 7.1/ Figure 7.1). As seen in Table 6.4, the
experimental rates of reaction where calculated to be 0.29 ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1 for the pink to orange colour
transition, 0.19 ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1 for orange to green, and 0.32 ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1 for green to pink. These were
then compared to the theoretical reaction rates as calculated from a simulation adapted from (Yenka , 2017), which
were calculated to be (all with units of ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1) 0.38 for the pink to orange transition, 0.26 from orange
to green and 0.34 for green to pink. As the rate of a reaction is proportional to the number of collisions experienced
by the molecules of the reactant, this data simply suggested that the orange to green colour transition occurred the
slowest as there were less successful collisions, with the opposite happening for the green to pink colour transition
which had the fastest reaction rate. ~Ev explanation for colour transition differences limited
To further analyse how far the experimental was from the theoretical “expected” rates of reaction, the percentage
error for each was also calculated (sample calculation is seen in Equation 7.2), where the pink to orange colour
transition had a percentage error of 24%, orange to green was 27% error and green to pink was 6% error (refer to
Table 6.4). As percentage error is useful in determining the precision of calculations, a percentage very close to
zero means the results are considered extremely accurate and close to the theoretical value (University of Iowa,
2015). This data therefore implied that the results from the green to pink colour transition was closest to the
theoretical value and hence the most accurate with the lowest percentage error of 6% (as seen in Table 6.4),
whereas the results from both the pink to orange and orange to green colour transitions can be questioned as invalid
with higher percentage errors of 24% and 27% (refer to Table 6.4). This means the validity of results from these
two data sets in this experiment would be questioned due to being over the 0-5% error theoretical range which
determines how valid the data is considered.
When the standard error bars are taken into consideration (as seen in Figure 6.1), it could be argued that there is no
difference between the time taken for the colour changes when the concentration of the cobalt catalyst is increased,
due to the error bars overlapping which indicated a large range and variability in the data. This suggests that the
data contains errors and uncertainties which impacted the measurements and therefore it should be noted that the
data collected my have low reliability. The impact of measurement uncertainty on the data (as seen in Tables 6.1 to
6.4) can also be deduced, where the uncertainty for the concentration of the cobalt catalyst is ± 0.05 mol.dm-3,
which is an uncertainty half the size of the 0.1mol.dm-3 increase suggesting the measurements for this concentration
are not very reliable or accurate compared to the low uncertainty of ± 1 seconds for the time measurement. The
large error bars and uncertainties may explain the large percentage errors counted in the pink to orange and orange
9 Evaluation
9.1 Limitations/Sources of Error
The outcomes of this experiment could be due to limitations within the methodology that affected the results.
Firstly, half way through the experimenters ran out of cobalt (II) chloride solution, so another stock solution was
ordered and a few days later used to conduct the rest of the trials. This indicated that the cobalt chloride catalyst
source and hence experimental concentration may not have remained controlled in all trials – as some trials may
have used the new cobalt chloride which was from a fresh stock solution whereas others would have used the “old”
solution which may have been years old, creating a random error. According to (Todd, 2016), “the action of cobalt
chloride as a catalyst is effected by how old the solution is as it becomes less effective after a certain period of time
as it becomes “deactivated” or “inactive” and will not catalyse a chemical reaction as it should - therefore it is best
to use freshly sourced cobalt chloride when measuring the effect it has as a catalyst”. This theory suggests that the
differing stock solutions of the cobalt chloride catalyst therefore may have had varying levels of effectiveness and
hence would have affected the reliability and validity of the reaction rate data collected. In future experiments, this
error would be avoided by ensuring the same stock solution of cobalt chloride is used throughout the duration of
the experiment - by checking that there is the volume/ amount needed before undergoing data collection. This
therefore means the results recorded would therefore be reliable as this variable would be controlled precisely and
the rate of the reaction would not be affected by differing solutions of cobalt chloride.
-Cm Secondly, the position of the phone not being consistent each trial creating a random error. As collecting data from
a disparate position in the solution may have created shadowing and hence varying amounts of light traveling
through the solution altering the RGB values calculated for the reaction colour changes, this proposes that the
recorded data cannot be reliable as this variable was no longer controlled. This means when the RGB value was
used to classify the solution turning a specific colour, the data may not be accurate at the videos used to process the
RGB values were not taken in the same place with the same lighting and hence the RGB values would be affected
and not reflective of the proposed method. This meant the data for time measured for each colour change can not be
considered reliable either, as the RGB value signifying when to stop recording a colour change was not valid. This
was a result of the phone not being in a fixed position but rather placed on top of the 250cm3 beaker, which can be
altered by using a clamp which secures the phone in the same position throughout the experiment – allowing for
accurate and reliable data collection which is reflective of the proposed design, as the RGB values indicating the
colour changes would be measured consistently from the same position.
Thirdly, due to the vigorous mixing between the reactants and catalyst by the magnetic stirrer, a large layer of
bubbles was present as the solution was transitioning from pink to green, making it difficult to see the colour
change as the bubbles prevented good visibility and the beaker became foggy due to the steam/ gas produced by
these bubbles. This meant the green colour change may have occurred earlier than it was recorded, leading to a
systematic error. This meant that the RGB value being recording may not have been accurate, as well as the
measured time taken for the solution to turn green as it was difficult to determine when this occurred. The accuracy
of the data for the pink to green colour transition can therefore be questioned. In the future, the magnetic stirrer
could be set to a lower speed, and the camera used for recording could also be looking at a bird’s eye view straight
into the solution rather than through the side of the beaker, allowing for better visibility to determine the colour
change. This would increase the accuracy of the results collected and the data would not be affected and be
utilizing the proposed methodology.
Lastly, issues with recording the time as the stopwatch needed to be started at the same time the cobalt (II) chloride
was poured in - resulting in times that could be plus or minus a few seconds or milliseconds due to human reaction
time (random error). This therefore meant that the first few seconds of the reaction may not have been recorded or
taken into consideration when calculating the time taken for the initial pink to orange colour change, meaning the
data may be inaccurate and not reflective of the proposed methodology. As a future improvement, the time should
be recorded on the camera when adding the solution into the beaker - and then recording this value as the “initial”
time the reaction started (for example, the cobalt catalyst was poured in at 3 seconds) to be considered when
calculating the time taken for each colour change. This would allow for accurate and valid data collection and
perhaps decrease the percentage error for the experimental rate of reaction as this error will not impact the data.
gxt091 10
~Ev limited value strengths paragraph to overall
evaluation
9.2 Strengths
While there were limitations that impacted the results, some aspects of this experiment were controlled with
accuracy and precision. All data collection occurred in the same science room so there was little change in
surrounding environmental factors with the room temperature remaining consistent (air conditioner set at 25
degrees/ room temperature) to carry out reliable experimentation. The methodology was also kept consistent
(except for the change of the independent variable – cobalt catalyst concentration) throughout the investigation to
allow for a fair test and to ensure data collection was conducted the same which eliminated extraneous variables.
The same amounts of hydrogen peroxide, potassium sodium tartrate and cobalt (II) chloride, the same
concentrations of hydrogen peroxide and the same temperature were used in all trials as these variables are known
to affect the rate of reaction and hence would have influenced the dependent variable of this experiment. The same
sized beakers were also used in order to eliminate measurement uncertainty as much as possible in this experiment
to allow for increased accuracy and precision.
9.3 Extensions
Extensions to this experiment could include using increasing concentrations of manganese (IV) oxide as a catalyst
instead of cobalt (II) chloride in order to further investigate the effect increasing catalyst concentration has on the
time taken for each colour change. (Flinn Scientific Inc., 2016) also suggests that manganese (IV) oxide creates
different colour changes when it catalyses hydrogen peroxide and tartrate ions compared to the pink, orange, green
colour changes of cobalt (II) chloride. However, no experiments have been conducted to confirm this theory so
another experiment could be designed similar to this to test this hypothesis. The time taken for these colour changes
using a manganese catalyst can also be compared to the time taken for the colour changes in this experiment to
further add to the results found in this experiment. The Yenka simulation created for this experiment could also be
adapted to the manganese catalyst in order to have theoretical data to compare to.
Another aspect of extension could include investigating the rate order of this reaction. Although lots of literature
reviews have found the effect of catalysts on the kinetics and rate of reaction, little evidence has gone further and
experimentally determined the reaction order. According to (Todd, 2016) the reaction is second order in the
absence of a catalyst whereas it is first order with a catalyst present determined by the theory of the Arrhenius
equation as the activation energy is lowered by the catalyst. This theory could be investigated in future experiments
which would further develop understanding of the hydrogen peroxide and tartaric acid reaction’s mechanisms, and
the results could be discussed in regards to kinetics and rate law expressions and added to the research in this
experiment.
+Ev justified scope for future research. Why not rate law
10 Conclusion analysis in original design?
The purpose of this experiment was to determine what effect increasing the concentration of the cobalt (II) chloride
from 0.1mol.dm-3 to 0.5mol.dm-3 had on the time taken for each colour change (Part A), as well as to determine the
experimental rate of reaction for each colour transition and compare it to theoretical data taken from a Yenka
simulation (Part B). As stated in the hypothesis, it was predicted that, as the concentration of the cobalt
concentration increased, the time taken between each colour change would decrease. This was due to the theory
that opportunities for successful collisions between the reactants and catalyst to bind to then form products is
increased as more catalyst is available to be utilized, meaning the reaction occurs at a faster rate. In Part B, the
experimental reaction rates were calculated to be 0.29 ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1 for the pink to orange colour transition,
0.19 ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1 for orange to green, and 0.32 ± 0.05 mol.dm-3s-1 for green to pink. These were then
compared to the theoretical reaction rates taken from (Yenka, 2017) where the percentage uncertainties were used
to determine how close they were to the “true” values as well as to analyse the reliability and accuracy of the data.
This data therefore implied that the results from the green to pink colour transition was closest to the theoretical
value and hence the most accurate with the lowest percentage error of 6% (as seen in Table 6.4), whereas the
results from both the pink to orange and orange to green colour transitions can be questioned as unreliable and
inaccurate with higher percentage errors of 24% and 27% (refer to Table 6.4). This meant the results from these
two data sets in this experiment would not be “published” in the real world as they are over the 0-5% range that is
considered to be reliable and valid data. It was therefore concluded that increasing the concentration of the cobalt
catalyst therefore does decrease the time taken for the colour transitions in the reaction between hydrogen peroxide
and tartrate ions, and that the experimental values can be deemed accurate to some extent but limitations and errors
in the methodology needed to be considered and fixed in future experiments.
gxt091 11
+Cm references
11 References
Carey, F. & Sundberg, R., 2007. Advanced Organic Chemistry. Philadelphia : Wiley .
Chemical Safety International Pty Ltd, 2016. Material Safety Data Sheet Hydrogen Peroxide ~ 7.5%. [Online]
Available at: http://www.msdsonline.com.au/msds/msdsview.asp?Std=1&ID=51578296-072f-46f1-bac3-116071415eee
[Accessed 29 April 2018].
Fisher Scientific , 2007. MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET Cobalt(II) Chloride Hexahydrate. [Online]
Available at: https://www.ch.ntu.edu.tw/~genchem99/msds/exp21/CoCl26H2O.pdf
[Accessed 29 April 2018].
Flinn Scientific Inc., 2016. Cobalt Catalyst and the Activated Complex - Reaction Pathways, N/A : Chem Fax .
Gregerson, E., 2015. Activation Energy. [Online]
Available at: https://www.britannica.com/editor/The-Editors-of-Encyclopaedia-Britannica/4419
[Accessed 25 April 2018].
Katz, D. A., 2001. The Oxidation of Tartaric Acid by Hydrogen Peroxide with a Cobalt Chloride Catalyst. Colourful Catalysis, 1(1), pp. 11-13.
Laboratory Reagents & Fine Chemicals , 2016. SDS Potassium Sodium Tartrate Tetrahydrate. [Online]
Available at: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:cryTu9BFuksJ:https://www.lobachemie.com/lab-chemical-msds/MSDS-
POTASSIUM-SODIUM-TARTRATE-TETRAHYDRATE-CASNO-6381-59-05446-EN.aspx+&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=firefox-b-ab
[Accessed 29 April 2018].
Todd, D., 2016. On the Reaction in the Cobalt (lI) Hydrogen Peroxide Tartaric Acid System. Journal of Chemical Education, 55(521), pp. 464-465.
University of Iowa, 2015. Percentage Error. [Online]
Available at: http://astro.physics.uiowa.edu/ITU/glossary/percent-error-formula/
[Accessed 28 April 2018].
University of North Carolina, 2010. Collision Theory: What It Takes for Chemicals to React. [Online]
Available at: http://cssac.unc.edu/programs/learning-center/Resources/Study/Guides/Chemistry%20102/Collision%20theory
[Accessed 25 April 2018].
Volland, D. W., 1999. Effects of temperature, concentration, catalysts, inhibitors on reaction rates. [Online]
Available at: http://www2.chem.uic.edu/marek/apintropage/ap_notes/chapter18/rateseffectstempconcats.htm
[Accessed 15 April 2018].
gxt091 12
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: