This is only possible because aspirin decomposes to salicylic acid in a 1:1 ratio. ln[aspirin] was also calculated so that the plot obtained will show a linear relationship with time and allows us to analyse trends between the two variables. Although the data is a little sporadic, there is a visible trend of a gradual increase of salicylic acid concentrations and a decrease in aspirin concentrations. Fig 4. Plot of ln[Aspirin] against time The plot in Fig.
To determine the percent difference we used the formula Abs[((Value 1 - Value 2) / average of 1 & 2) * 100], substituted the values (Abs[((320.5 - 315.8) / ((320.5 + 315.8) / 2)) * 100]) and solved to get (1.58%). For the second station we had to determine the distance required to balance the system and the percent difference. To find the unknown distance we set up the equation Fleft*dleft = Fright*dright. We then plugged in the values (11.35 N * x cm = 48cm *
We did have some inconsistency amongst the dignified and hypothetical complexities to the middle of pressure. The percentage fault of complexity to the middle of pressure reached from 1.78% to 49.42%. Subsequent is the graphs for the hydrostatic pressure and the expanse to the center of pressure for together incompletely and completely
The major error in the present measurement were statistical error; error in determining intrinsic and geometric efficiencies, Photo fraction, energy resolution of the detector, EB absorption in target compound, air, aluminum can etc,. And beta source strength. In determining these errors we have followed the methods adopted by Liden-Starfelt  and Shivaramu . Overall error estimated to be varies between 4% to 12% from low to high energy end of the spectrum. To determine the attenuation of EB in BaCl2, BaCO3, BaTiO3,
12. The TLC data obtained is provided in a table below. The TLC data was conducted solely in a 9:1 hexane/ethyl acetate solvent solution as opposed to the 1:1 and pure hexane solution as well. This was due to the lack of time, but as explained in number 7, a very polar solvent (1:1 solution) or non-polar solvent (pure hexane) is not ideal when obtaining
Calculate difference between the expected value and observed value (also known as residual). The square of number is used to avoid negative values. Divide this answer by the expected value in order to normalize. Evaluate this for each cell in the table, and after that take sum of all values. X2 =((20-25)2/25) + ((30-25)2/25) + ((30-25)2/25) + ((20-25)2/25) =(25/25) + (25/25) + (25/25) + (25/25) =1 + 1 + 1 + 1 Chi-square value =4 The Chi-square value and degrees of freedom is used to obtain p-value.
Another issue I had with the experiment was that the results in the second test the modification did not improve the experiment at all. Recommendations What recommendations/ modifications would improve the design of the solar cooker? In further recommendation I would take away the black plastic bag due to the fact that it did not improve with the modification that was added to solar cooker. I believe that the modification did not improve because the transmission of heat was being stoped. Due to the material for the black plastic bag being too thick for the absorption of heat to heat the water.
We tried to minimize the effect of the heat loss by using chilled water instead of room temperature, although not much correction was done. Also, incomplete combustion (carbon monoxide and carbon are made instead of carbon dioxide) was a severe hindrance to the lab. The lack of lab resources and a changing environment were the main limitations to finding accurate values during the combustion
When the results for the first test tube were recorded, then the next solution/mixture was prepared. The second test tube was exactly the same as the first, the only difference being that the SPM was this time set to 35oC. The temperature of the SPM gets increased by 1oC for every test tube solution, until test tube 7 with an SPM temperature of 40oC. After all the absorbencies for the varying temperatures had been recorded – the product concentration of each test tube solution was calculated using the absorbency readings at 10 minutes for each respective test tube mixture. The product concentration was calculated using Beer-Lamberts’ law of A = ECL.