Sutchai Wonda Sana

Student #: 7745986

Experiment 2: Determination of
the Identity of an Unknown Liquid
Performed on: Wednesday, Oct. 1, 2014

Student #: 7745986
Section B05, Rotation 2
Rm. 222, Locker 835
Submitted on Monday, Oct. 6, 2014 to D2L

Purpose:
The purpose of this experiment is to identify an unknown liquid by
measuring its density and boiling point in comparison to the table of
known substances in the laboratory manual (Krystyna Koczanski, James
Xidos).

Results/Calculations:
Part A: Determination of density using glassware:
1. Using a graduated cylinder:
Finding: Mass liquid (g) = [Mass cylinder + liquid(g)] [Mass empty
cylinder(g)]
(Density = Mass/Volume)
Finding: Density of liquid (g/mL) = Mass liquid(g) / Volume of
Liquid(mL)
Trial 1:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 11.21g/15.20mL
= 0.738g/mL
Trial 2:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 23.10g/30.00mL
= 0.770g/mL
Trial 3:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 34.81g/45.20mL
= 0.770g/mL
Average density of liquid (g/mL) = [(Density Trial 1) + (Density Trial
2) + (Density Trial 3)] / 3
= [(0.738g/mL) + (0.770g/mL) +
(0.770g/mL)]/3
= 0.759g/mL
2. Using a volumetric pipette:
Finding: Mass liquid (g) = [Mass beaker + liquid(g) Mass empty
beaker(g)]
(Density = Mass/Volume)
Finding: Density of liquid (g/mL) = Mass liquid(g) / Volume of
liquid(mL)
Trial 1:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 7.68g/10.00mL

= 0.768g/mL
Trial 2:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 15.24g/20.00mL
= 0.762g/mL
Trial 3:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 22.88g/30.00mL
Average density of liquid (g/mL) = [(Density Trial 1) + (Density Trial
2) + (Density Trial 3)] / 3
= [(0.768g/mL) + (0.762g/mL) +
(0.763g/mL)]/3
=0.764g/mL
3. Using a Burette:
Finding: Volume of liquid added (mL) = Final burette reading (mL)
Initial burette reading (mL)
Finding: Total volume of liquid in beaker (mL) for Trial 1 = Final
burette reading (mL) Initial burette reading (mL)
Finding: Total volume of liquid in beaker (mL) for Trial 2 = Total
volume of liquid in beaker for Trial 1 (mL) + Volume of liquid added
for Trial 2 (mL)
Finding: Total volume of liquid in beaker (mL) for Trial 3 = Total
volume of liquid in beaker for Trial 2 (mL) + Volume of liquid added
for Trial 3 (mL)
Finding: Mass liquid (g) = [Mass beaker + liquid(g) Mass empty
beaker(g)]
(Density = Mass/Volume)
Finding: Density of liquid (g/mL) = Mass liquid(g) / Volume of
liquid(mL)
Trial 1:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 9.78g/13.04mL
= 0.750g/mL
Trial 2:
Density of liquid (g/mL) = 19.53g/26.00mL
= 0.751g/mL
Trial 3:

Density of liquid (g/mL) = 29.53g/39.07mL

= 0.756g/mL
Average density of liquid (g/mL) = [(Density Trial 1) + (Density Trial
2) + (Density Trial 3)] / 3
= [(0.750g/mL) + (0.751g/mL) +
(0.756g/mL)]/3
= 0.752g/mL
Average Density Overall: (0.759g/mL) + (0.764g/mL) +
(0.752g/mL)/3 =0.758g/mL

Part B: Determination of boiling point of an unknown liquid

Average boiling point (oC) = [(Boiling point Trial 1) + (Boiling point
Trial 2) + (Boiling point Trial 3)] / 3
= [(76.0oC) + (77.1oC) + (76.2oC)]/3
= 76.4oC

Mass VS. Volume in Determing Density of Unknown Liquid

50
40
30
Volume (mL) 20

Linear ()

10
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Mass (g)

Discussion:
Based on the results and calculations of density and boiling point of
unknown liquid X68, there are two possible identities referring to
the table in the Laboratory Manual (p46 Krystina Koczanski, James
Xidos). With the experimental density value of 0.758g/mL and
boiling point of 76.4oC, they compare to the literature density value
of cyclohexane (0.779g/mL) and ethanol (78.5oC) respectively. Both
experimental values differ from the literature value about 0.02.
Both cyclohexane and ethanol are close in numbers to the
experimental density and boiling point values. Analyzing which
numbers have less of a difference, ethanol would be the closest to

the experimental values indicated. Looking at ethanol, its physical

characteristics best match my observations of an alcoholic-like
scent and clear colour. While cyclohexane is clear in colour, its smell
is more detergent-like. All data taken down from volume of liquid
and mass of liquid was necessary in determining the density of the
unknown liquid.
Using three different measuring devices was helpful in a sense of
trying different methods to measure density of the unknown liquids,
although not all three devices were completely accurate or precise.
With the use of the graduated cylinder, it is more likely to be
inaccurate every single trial because we are pouring the unknown
liquid in ourselves. The calibration marks are more spread out and
so sometimes we may have to do a little estimation of approximate
volumes to be more precise. The use of the burette was easier to
read and more precise because there were more calibration marks
and less of having to estimate where the bottom of the meniscus of
the liquid was. However, I observed every trial was not always the
same because the amount of liquid getting dispensed depended on
the turning of the knob. The device I found to be the most precise
and accurate was the volumetric pipette. Because the volumetric
pipette is specifically supposed to be used for one volume, there is
only one calibration mark and it was very easy to control where the
meniscus stopped and to make sure it was at that calibration mark.
The volumetric pipette accounts for the little drop of liquid left at
the very tip and thats why I say it is the most accurate and precise.
Compared to the uncertainty levels of a graduated cylinder (0.5)
and burette (0.04) the uncertainty level for the use of a volumetric
pipette is 0.01 (p44 Krystyna Koczanski, James Xidos). If this
experiment were to be conducted again, I would say the use of a
volumetric pipette would lead to more accurate results.
Discussing the sources of error in this experiment, there could have
been many.
While doing my first trial in the determination of boiling point, I may
have placed the capillary tube in my test tube wrong side down,
hence the reason for no liquid being able to get sucked up. The
cotton plug may have been stuffed too hard in the test tube,
defeating its purpose of preventing water from getting in the test
tube. As well as the placement of the thermometer may not have
been attached properly with the use of the rubber band and so it
may not have had an accurate reading of the boiling point of the
unknown liquid. For the determination of density, the room
temperature of the lab may not have been 20oC like stated in the
literature values in the lab manual (p46 Krystyna Koczankski, James
Xidos) and so the experimental density values may have not been

so accurately compared. Also when transferring liquids from the

burette to the beaker there may have been a drop or two left on the
tip of the burette causing there to be errors when reading the
initial/final volumes. Although I know I made sure to tap the
volumetric pipette against the glass of the beaker, if this was not
done it could cause an error when calculating the density of the
unknown liquid since volume would not be exactly 10.00mL. Also
when weighing all masses of the liquids and graduated cylinder and
beakers, there is always constant movement of students in and out
of the balance room, which could cause inaccuracy of the mass that
was recorded. All sources of error in this experiment may have
contributed greatly to the reason why I was left with two possible
conclusions instead of one obvious conclusion.
Possible improvements for this experiment could include pressing
tare on the balance and waiting for a couple of seconds to make
sure its at tare. Also making sure there are no disturbances. Also the
cleaning of the equipment plays an important role (rinsing with
distilled water and drying).