Iodine Clock Reaction Lab Report

Discussion
The hypothesis was partially supported, with the first part of the hypothesis supported by the data found. The second part of the hypothesis was not supported. As seen clearly in graph 1 and 2, there is an obvious trend which shows that as the concentration of the reagents increases, the time taken for the reaction to occur decreased. Furthermore, through analysis of results it can be seen how in graph 5 and 6, the rate of the reaction can clearly be seen increasing with the concentration. Using the data which has been found, the rate law calculations have been used to form a general rate law for the landolt iodine clock reaction. It was found that the landolt iodine clock reaction is a fourth order reaction. This shows how the

The design used in this expiriment was simple and straight forward. One fundamental design flaw was the prevalent error of human error in the measuring of the time taken for the reaction to occur. It occurred multiple times where data had to be not included because the stopwatch had not been started or stopped. Human error also effected the measuring of the chemicals used in the experiments, due to convenience measuring cylinders were used instead of electronic pipettes. This decreases the accuracy of the measured chemicals, as parallax error would of occurred multiple times. Secondly all dilutions were made by hand, not included into the raw data was a multitude of errors which occurred when the dilution was prepared wrong. Potentially the dilutions were prepared correctly, and rather the solutions were not uniform in nature. For example the way the dilution occurred was if the required molarity was 0.05 of A and the supplied was 0.2 molar of A. 10 ml of A could be taken and 10 ml of water could be added, to make a 20 ml 0.1 molar solution of A. Next take 10 ml of the new solution and add 10 ml of water, and the 0.05 molar solution of A is formed. The flaw is thought to be in the third part of the procedure, as 0.1 molar of A is thought to have been taken out of the second solution but rather the 0.2 molar has not been correctly mixed through, and as such the final molarity is not what was calculated. This effects all the data found as the majority of points found used dilution which potentially were not correctly performed. This could also potentially explain the anomalies which occurs in graph 7 at 60 degrees. A major flaw of the expiriment occurred when studying the effect of temperature, due to restrictions on time and equipment, only one of the reagents in the reaction was heated up. This was a major flaw and as such has rendered