Sanjana Chava

TA: Justin Pothoof

Lab Partner: Emily Verran

Due: 2/23/2021

Kinetics Lab

Introduction: This lab focuses on the effect of temperature on the rate of a chemical reaction. In

this lab, the rate of the reaction will be determined by observing the change in voltage over time

of glowsticks at different temperatures. The independent variable for this experiment is the

temperature of the glowstick and the values that are measured and recorded are voltage and time.

This experiment is done by using a photodiode, which is connected to the multimeter, to measure

the intensity of the light of the glowstick through emitted photons. The measurements for time

and voltage are important because, theoretically, by plotting the voltage and time values on

Python as a linear function, the rate constant can be determined as the value of the slope. Then

by plotting the natural log values of the rate constants, and the inverse of the temperature of the

−𝐸𝑎/𝑅𝑇
glowsticks, and by using the Arrhenius equation, which is 𝑘 = 𝐴𝑒 , to fit the data we can

determine the activation energy of the reaction. This is because the slope of the plot will be

-Ea/R, in which R is the gas constant. The A value in the Arrhenius equation, for this

experiment, will be the maximum voltage value for each temperature.

Procedure: I started by placing three glowsticks in water baths of different temperatures

(66.9℃, 12.8℃, 1.5℃). Then I began constructing my spectrometer by inserting the photodiode

into one end of the 3D-printed spectrometer so that the wires on the end of the photodiode stick

out and the rest of it cannot be seen. I attached the resistor to one end of the photodiode by
wrapping the wires together. I then attached an alligator clip to the resistor and the other

photo-diode wire. I attached the alligator clip that was connected to the resistor to the red wire of

the multimeter and the other alligator clip to the black wire. I placed one of my glowsticks into

the center opening of the spectrometer, keeping it insulted using aluminum foil, and recorded the

measurements for voltage over 300 seconds. I repeated the steps for the other two glowsticks.

Results:

Time Elapsed (seconds) 66.9℃ water 12.8℃ water 1.5℃ water

10 14.1 30.8 1.7

20 12.8 20.9 1.7

30 14.0 19.0 1.6

40 15.5 17.3 2.0

50 18.0 16.1 2.0

60 17.5 15.3 1.6

70 17.9 15.0 1.7

80 17.3 14.5 1.9

90 19.4 13.9 2.3

100 19.2 13.1 2.6

110 18.6 12.6 2.7

120 18.1 11.9 3.0

130 17.4 11.4 3.1

140 16.8 10.8 3.3

150 16.3 10.3 3.5

160 15.5 10.1 3.7

170 15.0 9.7 3.6

180 14.3 9.6 3.7

210 12.7 8.8 4.7

240 11.4 8.1 4.8

270 10.2 7.6 5.1

300 9.4 7.3 5.5

Table 1. Voltage recorded for glowsticks previously in water baths at temperatures of 66.9℃,

12.8℃, and 1.5℃ over 300 seconds. *My lab partner and I have shared data since I had

originally used the red LED light when conducting my experiment.

Figure 1. Plots of voltage vs time for glowsticks previously in water baths at temperatures of

66.9℃, 12.8℃, and 1.5℃ from 100-200 seconds.

Figure 2. Plot of the natural log of the experimental gas constants vs temperature for glowsticks

previously in water baths at temperatures of 66.9℃, 12.8℃, and 1.5℃ from 100-200 seconds.
 Rate Constant (66.9℃) 0.0037117 mV/s

Rate Constant (12.8℃) 0.00292688 mV/s

Rate Constant (1.5℃) 0.00376274 mV/s

Activation Energy 18216 J

Total number of photons emitted (66.9℃) 1.31*1012 photons

Table 2. Experimentally calculated values for gas constant and activation energy derived from

Python plots, and experimentally calculated value for the total number of photons emitted using

66.9℃.

Discussion: While conducting the experiment I noticed that the voltage values I recorded for the

first 60 seconds were variable and did not follow a proper trend like the later values. This is why

for my plots I entered the voltage values from 100 to 300 seconds so the graph displays the

proper trend. I also noticed that while the voltage values decreased over time for the hot water

(66.9℃) and the room temperature water (12.8℃), the voltage values for the cold water (1.5℃)

increased. Also, the cold water had a larger rate constant than the hot water and room temp

−𝐸𝑎/𝑅𝑇
water. The Arrhenius equation, 𝑘 = 𝐴𝑒 , trend is that as temperature increases or

activation energy decreases the rate constant increases. This is because the number of collisions

will increases with a higher temperature since the particles are moving faster. The data from the

experiment does not follow this trend. For the Arrhenius equation plot, the rate constants for hot

water was 0.0037117 mV/s which is very close to the rate constant for cold water which was

0.00376274 mV/s. While the rate constant for the room temperature water was lower at

0.00292688 mV/s. Due to these varying points, the regression line for the plot was not very

accurate and derived an activation energy of 18216 J. There are multiple causes for this
inaccuracy, one being the construction of the spectrometer. The resistor was not securely

attached to the wire of the photodiode and would sometimes slip off, causing inaccurate readings

on the multimeter. Another source of error could be with the glowstick not being insulated

enough with the aluminum foil, meaning that the actual temperature of the glowstick may not be

the same as what was recorded. I also noticed that a glowstick may not have been cracked as

much as compared to the other glowsticks, which would lead to a lower voltage reading since

less of a reaction would be taking place. When calculating the total photons emitted I got

1.31*1012 photons. I used my data from my room temperature glowstick trial and I made the

assumption that 1 electron per second is equal to two photons per second. I also used the formula

to find the surface area of a cylinder to calculate the surface area of the photodiode since it is

similar in shape. Since the dimensions of the photodiode are small, along with the distance

between the glowstick and photodiode, my value for the number of photons may be inaccurate.

Conclusion:

−𝐸𝑎/𝑅𝑇
The Arrhenius equation, 𝑘 = 𝐴𝑒 , displays the trend that rate constant increases while

temperature increases. This trend was not reflected in the experiment as the rate constant for the

cold water was larger than the rate constants for the hot water and room temperature water. The

voltage values for the hot water and room temperature water decreased over time while the

voltage values increased over time for the cold water. This suggests that the reaction in the

glowstick may have reached the appropriate activation energy in beginning for the hot water and

room temperature water causing the reaction to then slow down over time. While for the cold

water the glowstick reached the appropriate activation energy over time causing the reaction to

speed up. The plot for the natural log of the rate constants vs the inverse of the temperature did

not follow a proper trend and this may be due to errors in the experiment.
Calculations:
 Untitled8

February 24, 2021

[16]: from scipy.optimize import curve_fit

import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
t = np.array([100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300])
v = np.array([19.2, 18.6, 18.1, 17.4, 16.8, 16.3, 15.5, 15.0, 14.3, 12.7, 11.4,␣
,→10.2, 9.4])

def linear(t, a, b):

return a*t + b

params, cov = curve_fit(linear, t, np.log(v))

print("fit parameters:", params)
linear_fit = linear(t, params[0], params[1])

plt.scatter(t, np.log(v), s=5, color='black')

plt.plot(t, linear_fit, lw=1, color='red')
plt.ylabel("Voltage (mV)")
plt.xlabel("Time (s)")
plt.title("Voltage vs Time (66.9 C)")
plt.show()

fit parameters: [-0.00371117 3.33476448]

1
[15]: from scipy.optimize import curve_fit
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
t = np.array([100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300])
v = np.array([13.1, 12.6, 11.9, 11.4, 10.8, 10.3, 10.1, 9.7, 9.6, 8.8, 8.1, 7.
,→6, 7.3])

def linear(t, a, b):

return a*t + b

params, cov = curve_fit(linear, t, np.log(v))

print("fit parameters:", params)
linear_fit = linear(t, params[0], params[1])

plt.scatter(t, np.log(v), s=5, color='black')

plt.plot(t, linear_fit, lw=1, color='red')
plt.ylabel("Voltage (mV)")
plt.xlabel("Time (s)")
plt.title("Voltage vs Time (12.8 C)")
plt.show()

fit parameters: [-0.00292688 2.81003877]

2
[14]: from scipy.optimize import curve_fit
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
t = np.array([100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 210, 240, 270, 300])
v = np.array([2.6, 2.7, 3.0, 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 3.7, 3.6, 3.7, 4.7, 4.8, 5.1, 5.5])

def linear(t, a, b):

return a*t + b

params, cov = curve_fit(linear, t, np.log(v))

print("fit parameters:", params)
linear_fit = linear(t, params[0], params[1])

plt.scatter(t, np.log(v), s=5, color='black')

plt.plot(t, linear_fit, lw=1, color='red')
plt.ylabel("Voltage (mV)")
plt.xlabel("Time (s)")
plt.title("Voltage vs Time (1.5 C)")
plt.show()

fit parameters: [0.00376274 0.64570566]

3
[34]: from scipy.optimize import curve_fit
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import math
k = np.array([0.00371117, 0.00292688, 0.00376274])
T = np.array([66.9, 12.8, 1.5])
A = np.array([19.2, 13.1, 5.5])
plt.scatter(1/T, np.log(k), s=5, color='black')

def arrhenius(A, T, Ea):

return np.log(A)-(Ea/(8.31*T))

params, cov = curve_fit(arrhenius, 1/T, np.log(k))

linear_fit = arrhenius(A, T, params[0])

plt.plot(1/T, linear_fit, lw=1, color='red')
plt.ylabel("ln(k) (1/s)")
plt.xlabel("1/T (C)")
plt.title("Arrhenius Plot")
plt.show()
#print("fit parameters:", params)

4
[ ]:

[ ]:

[ ]: