To calculate the percentage of Cu, we divided the final mass of the penny 0.09 and the initial mass of 2.47 and multiplied by 100. To calculate the percentage of Zn, we divided the final mass of the penny 2.38 and the initial mass of 2.47 and multiplied by 100. During the experiment the hydrochloric acid donated its hydrogen ions in the reaction and then the chloride ions reacted with the zinc ions in the solution. Thus, the zinc dissolved in the highly acidic solution which was caused by the high concentration of H2 ions. Hydrogen gas was generated during the reaction which was seen when bubbles were formed as the penny was dissolved into the beaker.
The powder on the filter paper could've fell and this caused it to have a smaller percent purity, percent yield and also cause a lower absorbance and concentration of pure ASA. Another error would be not using a properly dried sample for the pure ASA in part C when making the crystals, this could have cause tye percent yield error. This would make a lower melting point. To prevent this from occurring next time there could be a dry sample that is completely dry and this would not alter the mass of the sample and this would make the solution have a more
As seen in table 1, the theoretical yield was .712 g of C_17 H_19 NO_3. The % yield of this experiment was 7.51 % of C_17 H_19 NO_3. . This low yield can be explained from a poor recrystallization technique combined with potential contamination. Throughout the experiment, the mixture changed color from green, orange, to yellowish lime, and eventually clear.
9. The melting point range was lower than the given range of the anti-addition product by 2 degrees Celsius. This could have been due to impurities in the product. A likely cause could have been water that still remained in the product after recrystallization (the product shifted upward during melting point analysis due to evaporation). Since water has a low melting point, it could have lowered the melting point range of the product.
(150.22g/mol)(3.5 x 10^-3 mol of nucleophile) = 0.525 g Actual yield = 0.441 g, Percent Yield = (0.441g/0.525g) x 100% = 84% 10. Percent recovery from recrystallization = (0.172g/0.441g) x 100% = 38% 11.
In all trials, some of the precipitate was lost through the filter. Therefor all values are most likely less than the actual values due to
The actual yield of the reaction was 4.411 grams of copper and was obtained through the experiment
3. In this experiment, the percent yield was 90%. This number implies that there was little error in this experiment. However, this result could have been caused by certain external factors.
The last goal was to determine the percent yield of a product formed during a reaction with the unknown compound. Experimental Design The first day of lab consisted of various preliminary tests that helped identify the unknown compound.
The percent recovery of the copper was calculated using the equation, percent recovery = (the mass of the copper recovered after all the chemical reactions/the initial mass of the copper) x 100. The amount of copper that was recovered was 0.32 grams and the initial mass of the copper was 0.46 grams. Using the equation, (0.32 grams/0.46 grams) x 100 equaled 69.56%. The amount of copper recovered was slightly over two-thirds of the initial amount.
Using the Law of Definite Proportions, the mass of this product was used to determine the number of moles of copper and chlorine in the sample, which led to being able to determine the
To better understand this law, Cu(s) was transformed with different reactions only to return back to Cu s). The initial and final mass of Cu(s) was recorded to give the percent recovery of copper product at
Copper Cycle Lab Report Ameerah Alajmi Abstract: A specific amount of Copper will undergo several chemical reactions and then recovered as a solid copper. A and percent recovery will be calculated and sources of loss or gain will be determined. The percent recovery for this experiment was 20.46%.
The final product weight for percent yield was only the solid E product, which missed one half of the final product produce. If both products were weight, the percent yield would have been larger that it was. Instead of 22.33%, it could have been 44.66%. To prove that both products were obtained, but only one of the two products was analyze, a TLC plate of the DCM layer, that contains both products, and of the final product, was obtain.
The actual data is the result on our experiment vs theoretical, which is based on the calculations above. I have also learned to pay more attention to draining out all of the product completely before continuing to test the experiment, as any small drop of contaminant can veer our results into a different