Empirical Formula of a Hydrate-CE Essay

Conclusion and EvaluationAspect 1 Based on the interpret data of group A, the empirical grammatical construction of aluminum chloride did not stay the identical. The expected empirical formula was. In group A the empirical formulas argon as followedGroup NameEmpirical formulaLaurie & JordanRica, Victoria & StephanieVince & JoshJane & KaitylnSo, as a group, we whole had a incompatible outcome of the empirical formula but the percent composition of peeing is the homogeneous for all. 11.2% for hydrogen and 88.8% for oxygen as shown in table 7.3.A random error would be the measurement of the hydrate crystal. A scoopula was employ to measure 3g. Also an other one would be the electronic labyrinthine sense having an uncertainty of 0.001g. A systematic error would be heating the evaporating ravisher through a wire mesh or else of a carcass triangle.You notice that the theoretical yield and experimental yield values are shown in a pie graph. Both of the pie graphs are the exact s ame as both percentages are 11.2% and 88.8%. In these pie graphs, neither trends nor patterns apply.Aspect 2 The procedural weaknesses are stated above. For example the measurement of the hydrate crystal wouldve modify the lab. There wasnt an accurate measurement so that couldve assumeed the angle of the final product or the reaction of the product. Another weakness was that the evaporating hit was being het up(p) through a wire mesh instead of a ashes triangle. The wire mesh had a white surface on it, so therefore the evaporating dish was being heated indirectly and the wire mesh would absorb the heat itself. This would affect the heating summons of the evaporating dish and the substance inside of it. There were a few assumptions do in this particular lab. They are as followedAssumptionPossible found on the resultAll of the moisture was removed from the evaporating dishIf all the moisture wasnt removed, then an accurate and precise reaction isnt obtained.The aluminum chl oride was pureIf impure aluminum chloride was exercised then other products could have formedThe only substance reacting with the aluminum chloride was itself as a hydrate formThis could have had other reactions which therefore will affect the products formed.All of the aluminum chloride hydrate evaporatedCould possibly effect the measurement of the lading3g of aluminum chloride was added to the evaporating dishObviously if there were less or more(prenominal) than 3g added, it will affect the outcome resultThe quality of the data was fair. The clearcutness and accuracy of the aluminum was absent since it was measured by a scoopula and estimation. Although, the same balance was used to weigh all the masses, therefore the accuracy of those measurements were empower with the exception of the uncertainty0.001g.Aspect 3 If this lab were to be redone, I think that everything should stay the same besides 2 factors which are the use of wire mesh and the measurement of the hydrate cryst al. If we were to use a clay triangle instead of the wire mesh, the evaporating dish would have been directly heated instead of being indirectly heated. This would remove the systematic error. A relegate precision and accuracy would be obtained if we actually used a amount device. For example, a measuring spoon wouldve been more accurate than the scoopula. Using the same balance for all masses would obtain greater control of variables and bring down the random error.