Chemistry Practical Report

EXPERIMENT 4: DEGREE OF HYDRATION OF COPPER (II) SULFATE

Contents Page

Contents Page.................................................................................................................................2
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................1
2. Apparatus....................................................................................................................................1
3. Procedure....................................................................................................................................1
4. Protocol Diagram........................................................................................................................2
5. Safety, Ethical and Environmental Issues...................................................................................2
6. Analysis......................................................................................................................................2
6.1. Qualitative Analysis.............................................................................................................2
6.2 Tabulation of Quantitative Data............................................................................................3
6.3. Experimental Value of x in CuSO4 xH2O..............................................................................7
7. Graph of Data Sets......................................................................................................................7
8. Evaluation...................................................................................................................................8
9. Conclusion..................................................................................................................................9
10. Bibliography.............................................................................................................................9
1. Introduction
When some ionic compounds undergo crystallization in a saturated aqueous solution, they
incorporate the water molecules from the solution into their chemical structure (P. Brown, n.d).
This results in the compound becoming a hydrated salt, which exist in the form of crystals. One
such ionic compound is copper (II) sulfate, CuSO 4, whose anhydrous form is white and pale in
colour. Its hydrated form, CuSO 4 xH2O, in contrast, is bright blue in colour. This change is
caused by the incorporation of water molecules into the structure of CuSO 4. In the chemical
formula of the hydrated form of the salt, x is representative of the number of moles of water of
crystallization per mole of CuSO 4. In this experiment, our aim is to determine the value of x, also
known as the degree of hydration of copper (II) sulfate. In order to do this, we were tasked to heat
the hydrated crystals for long enough, so as to remove all the water of crystallization from CuSO 4
xH2O. Based on the assumption that all the water is driven off from the crystals after heating, only
the anhydrous CuSO4 salt will be left behind. Hence, using my acquired knowledge in
Stoichiometry, I aim to find the degree of hydration of CuSO 4. I will also evaluate the accuracy
and reliability of this experiment by comparing the experiment value with the literature value of
x, which is 5. Stated below is the stoichiometric equation between the anhydrous salt, the
hydrated crystals and the water of crystallization.

Stoichiometric CuSO4 xH2O → CuSO4 + xH2O

Equation:
Hydrated salt Anhydrous salt Water
Mole ratio: 1 mole 1 mole x moles

2. Apparatus
1. 1 crucible with lid
2. Hydrated copper sulfate crystals
3. A pair of crucible tongs
4. 1 Bunsen Burner
5. An electronic balance with an uncertainty of ±0.001 g
6. 1 Tripod Stand
7. 1 Clay Triangle

3. Procedure
Firstly, a dry crucible was weighed using the electronic mass balance that was provided to us.
The lid of the crucible should not be added to the top pan of the balance. Once this had been
recorded, copper (II) sulfate crystals were slowly added to the crucible, until about 1g of it had
been added. The mass of the crucible with its contents was then recorded. Then, with the aid of a
tripod stand and the porcelain triangle, the crucible containing about 1g of hydrated copper (II)
sulfate crystals were heated over a non-luminous flame for about 2 minutes, with the lid covering

PAGE | 1
half the crucible’s opening. After letting the crucible and its contents cool down to room
temperature, the mass of the crucible and the copper (II) sulfate crystals after the first round of
heating was recorded and any observations or changes to the crystals were identified and noted
down. Then, we proceeded to the second round of heating, this time around, with the lid removed.
This was done to ensure that all the water of crystallization in the crystals had been driven off.
After the crucible and its contents had cooled down to room temperature once again, the mass of
the crucible and its contents were measured again and recorded down. Any changes that were
observed on the contents of the crucible were then noted down. Once this data had been collected,
all the data sets of our class conducting the experiment were tabulated and the anhydrous copper
(II) sulfate was disposed and the crucible was washed clean.

4. Protocol Diagram

🔺Figure 4 The diagram of experimental setup

5. Safety, Ethical and Environmental Issues

One potential hazard in this experiment is getting scalded or burnt by the non-luminous flame of
the Bunsen Burner. This can be avoided by using the crucible tongs to lift crucible from the
tripod stand and by being extremely careful when closing the hole in the Bunsen burner before
turning off the gas tap. To protect ourselves from the flame, we should also practice wearing a lab
coat and a pair of safety goggles while carrying out the experiment. Also, we should be careful
not to consume any of the small copper (II) sulfate crystals as it would result in negative
implications.

6. Analysis
6.1. Qualitative Analysis
As the blue copper (II) sulfate crystals were heated over the Bunsen burner flame in the first
round of heating, with the lid of the crucible covering half the crucible’s opening, the colour of
the crystals gradually faded over time. By the end of the first round of heating, the colour of the
copper (II) sulfate was a very pale blue. Some of the crystals had also been overheated to the
extent that they had decomposed.

PAGE | 2
 🔺Figure 6.1.0 First round of heating 🔺Figure 6.1.2 Contents after first round of heating

After the second round of heating, which was done without the lid on, the copper (II) sulfate
crystals were completely dehydrated as they had now certainly turned white in colour. However,
a few more crystals had decomposed as well.

🔺Figure 6.1.3 Contents after second round of heating

6.2 Tabulation of Quantitative Data

Raw Data

Trial Mass of Mass of crucible Mass of crucible Mass of crucible

Number crucible / g and copper (II) and copper (II) and copper (II)
(±0.001) sulfate before sulfate after first sulfate after
heating / g heating / g second heating / g
(±0.001) (±0.001) (±0.001)
1 29.486 30.520 30.131 30.131
2 29.633 30.635 30.289 30.269
3 29.725 30.725 30.345 30.310
4 23.710 24.710 24.325 24.297
5 28.733 29.747 29.391 29.379
6 28.175 29.197 28.799 28.796
7 27.605 28.687 28.272 28.267
8 26.803 27.822 27.416 27.406

PAGE | 3
 🔺Figure 6.2.1 Table of raw data

Processed data to determine moles of water of crystallization

Trial Mass of water of % uncertainty of Moles of water of % uncertainty of

Number crystallization / mass of water of crystallization moles of water of
g (±0.002) crystallization crystallization
1 0.389 0.514 0.0216 0.514
2 0.366 0.516 0.0203 0.516
3 0.415 0.482 0.0230 0.482
4 0.413 0.484 0.0229 0.484
5 0.368 0.543 0.0204 0.543
6 0.401 0.499 0.0223 0.499
7 0.420 0.476 0.0233 0.476
8 0.416 0.481 0.0231 0.481
🔺Figure 6.2.2 Table of processed data to determine moles of water of crystallization
Sample calculations for mass of water of crystallization (trial 1):
Mass of water of crytsallization=Mass of crucible∧copper ( II ) sulfate before heating−Mass of crucible∧cop
Sample calculations for % uncertainty of mass of water of crystallization (trial 1):
0.002 0.002
% uncertainty of water of crystallization= × 100= × 100=0.51414 ≈ 0.5
mass of water of crystallization 0.389
Sample calculations for moles of water of crystallization (trial 1):
Mass of water of crystallization 0.389
Moles of water of crystallization= = =0.021587 ≈ 0.0216 mol
2 ( 1.01 )+ 16.00 18.02
Sample calculation for % uncertainty in moles of water of crystallization (trial 1):
% uncertainty ∈moles of water of crystallization=% uncertainty∈mass of water of crystallization=0.514 %

Processed data to determine moles of anhydrous copper (II) sulfate

Trial Mass of % uncertainty of Moles of % uncertainty of

PAGE | 4
 Number anhydrous mass of anhydrous copper moles of water of
copper (II) anhydrous (II) sulfate crystallization
sulfate / g copper (II)
(±0.002) sulfate
1 0.645 0.310 0.00404 0.310
2 0.636 0.314 0.00398 0.314
3 0.585 0.342 0.00366 0.342
4 0.587 0.341 0.00368 0.341
5 0.646 0.310 0.00405 0.310
6 0.621 0.322 0.00389 0.322
7 0.662 0.302 0.00415 0.302
8 0.603 0.332 0.00378 0.332
🔺Figure 6.2.3 Table of processed data to determine moles of water of anhydrous copper (II)
sulfate
Sample calculations for mass of anhydrous copper (II) sulfate (trial 1):
Mass of anhydrous copper ( II ) sulfate=Mass of crucible∧copper ( II ) sulfate after second heating−Mass of cru

Sample calculations for % uncertainty of mass of anhydrous copper (II) sulfate (trial 1):
0.002 0.002
% uncertainty of mass of anhydrous copper ( II ) sulfate= ×100= ×
Mass of anhydrous copper ( II ) sulfate 0.645
Sample calculations for moles of anhydrous copper (II) sulfate (trial 1):

Mass of anhydrous copper ( II ) sulfate 0.645

Moles of anhydrous copper ( II ) sulfate= = =0.0040408 ≈ 0.00404
63.55+32.07+ 4(16.00) 159.62

Processed data to determine degree of hydration of copper (II) sulfate

Trial Moles of water of crystallization in % Absolute % error

Number one mole of hydrated copper (II) uncertainty uncertainty
sulfate
1 5.35 0.8 ±0.04 7.00
2 5.10 0.9 ±0.05 2.00
3 6.28 0.8 ±0.05 25.6

PAGE | 5
 4 6.22 0.8 ±0.05 24.4
5 5.04 0.9 ±0.05 0.80
6 5.73 0.8 ±0.05 14.6
7 5.61 0.8 ±0.04 12.2
8 6.11 0.8 ±0.05 22.2
🔺Figure 6.2.4 Table of processed data to determine moles of water of crystallization in one mole
of hydrated copper (II) sulfate

Sample calculations for moles of water of crystallization in 1 mole of hydrated copper (II) sulfate
(trial 5):

Moles of water of crystallization 0.0204

Moles of water of crystallization ∈1 mol of hydrated CuS O 4 = =
Moles of anhydrous copper ( II ) sulfate 0.00405
Sample calculations for % uncertainty (trial 5):
% uncertainty=% uncertainty of moles of water of crystallization+% uncertainty of moles of anhydrous coppe

Sample calculations for absolute uncertainty (trial 5):

Absolute uncertainty=% uncertainty ×moles of water of crystallisation∈one mole of hydrated copper ( II ) sulfa

Sample calculations for percentage error (trial 5):

5.04−5
% error= ×100=0.8 %
5

6.3. Experimental Value of x in CuSO4 xH2O

5.35+5.10+6.28+ 6.22+ 5.04+5.73+5
Average moles of water of crystallization∈1 mole of hydrated CuS O 4 =
8

0.04+ 0.05+0.05+0.05+0.05+ 0.05+0.04+ 0.05

Average absolute uncertainty= =0.0475 ≈ ±0.05
8

6.28−5.04
Average Spread of values= =± 0.62
2

∴ Spread of values> Average absolute uncertainty

PAGE | 6
 Range of values 6.28−5.04
Absolute uncertainty due ¿ range= = =0.219 ≈ ± 0.2
2 √( number of trials) 2√ 8

∴ Final experimental value=( 5.7 ±0.2 ) mol #

7. Graph of Data Sets

In order to further evaluate the experiment, we need to find out whether the random errors caused
by the uncertainty of the instruments used overwhelms systematic errors and other random errors
caused by imperfections in technique and vice versa. Hence, I am going to find out whether the
average percentage error or the average percentage uncertainty of this experiment is greater.

Average percentage uncertainty=0.8 %

Average percentage error =13.6 %

Hence, we can see that the average percentage error is greater than the average percentage
uncertainty, suggesting that the results are not within the margin of error caused by the
uncertainty of the instruments used in this experiment. This can be easily visualized using a graph
as well.
6.50
No. of moles of water

6.00

5.50

5.00

4.50

4.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Trial number

Number of moles Average

Theoretical
🔺Figure 7 Graph of number of moles of water of crystallization per mole of copper (II) nitrate
against trial number
As we can see from Figure 7, there are individual trials such as trials 2 and 3, that gave extremely
inaccurate results that had contributed to the high percentage error. Hence, I will be identifying
some problems and discussing what can be done to alleviate them in the next section.

8. Evaluation
Source of error and Improvements
1. One source of error is the fact that some of the copper (II) sulfate crystals burn and
decompose over the course of the experiment. This will result in a negative systematic

PAGE | 7
 error on the mass of the anhydrous salt left in the crucible after heating and a positive
systematic error on the mass of the water of crystallization as well. This will result in a
significant positive systematic error on the degree of hydration of copper (II) sulfate.
Hence, this is one reason why the percentage error of this experiment is very high. One
measure that we can take to reduce this error is by ensuring that the crucible is placed on
the centre of the clay triangle, so that all the copper (II) sulfate crystals will receive heat
evenly from the Bunsen burner flame.
2. Copper (II) sulfate also absorbs the moisture in the air because of its hydrophilic
properties. This means that during the period of time when the anhydrous copper (II)
sulfate is cooling down, it may have absorbed moisture from the surroundings, resulting
in an increase in mass of the anhydrous salt and decrease in mass of the water of
crystallization. However, this error was well dealt with as the air-conditioners in the
laboratory were turned off, reducing the humidity of the room and preventing the
anhydrous salt from absorbing too much water.
3. There also is the possibility that some copper (II) sulfate crystals had not been driven off
of their water of crystallization as the Bunsen burner does not evenly heat all the crystals
in the crucible. Hence, a heating oven could be used in this experiment instead of a
Bunsen burner in order to increase the accuracy of this experiment.

9. Conclusion
In conclusion, this experiment was not the most accurate way to measure the degree of hydration
of copper (II) sulfate as there were many random and systematic errors caused by environmental
factors.

10. Bibliography
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.docbrown.info/page01/AqueousChem/AqueousChem5.htm

PAGE | 8
PAGE | 9