Chemistry Of Zinc Acetate Dihydrate

The mixture was then transferred to a clean centrifuge tube via pipet, carefully not wetting the upper walls of the tube. Zinc granules were then added and the tube was immediately plugged with cotton 1/3 of the way into the tube. The tube was then warmed in a hot water bath for about 5 minutes, the folded red litmus paper was inserted at the top of the tube with a wet crease. After a few minutes, nitrate is indicated on the wet crease of the litmus paper, turning it blue. For the Carbonate test, 25 mg of carbonate sample was added to a centrifuge tube and 3 drops of 6 M H2SO4 was added. A disposable pipet was used to transfer a drop of Ba(OH)2, that hung directly from the pipet over the carbonate solution, and the observations of the drop were recorded.

Beran, J. A. Laboratory Manual for Principles of General Chemistry. 8th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2009

Apparatus: Spectrophotometer (UV-1201), cuvettes, water bath (set at 37°C), 200µl and 1000µl micropipettes and test tube

Note: Your prelab/lab report is to be done in your carbon copy lab notebook (sold in FIU bookstore)

Different physical properties were noted during addition of substances throughout the course of this experiment. From the beginning, it was noted that 2.01 grams of Zn metal was silver and had shiny flakes throughout. The 1.985 grams of I2 was dark gray in color and also appeared to be shiny. Once 5mL of acidified water was added, the solution began to change colors, becoming a dark red orange, which was discovered to be closer to Zn(I3) 2. This reaction was endothermic in nature due to heat that was felt in the duration of the reaction. The heat melted some of the I2 to create the I3 in this solution once the color disappeared. After this point it was found that only 0.541 grams of Zinc was consumed in the reaction, making Zn the excess reagent and I2 the limiting reagent. After the ZnI2 was dried, a light yellow powder was noted, and recorded to be the color of ZnI2 (s). When performing the decomposition, a dark

We began this experiment by obtaining and measuring the mass of a 20 x 150 mm test tube and a 22 x 175 mm test tube with boiling stones. We then weighed out 2 grams of zinc and iodine. First, we added the zinc to the 20 x 150 mm and weighed it out. Then we added the iodine to the 20 x 150 mm and weighed it out. This gave us the amount of each element we were working with before the reaction. Next, we made weak acidified water by adding 18 drops of acetic acid to 25 mL of distilled water in a 50 mL beaker. Then we added 5 mL of acidic solution to the 20 x 150 mm test tube. After the solution is added we swirled the test tube until the liquid became colorless. Once colorless, we poured it into the 22 x 175 mm test tube. We repeated mixing the acid with the zinc and iodine two more times. Then we repeated it 3 more times but poured the solution down the drain. Furthermore, we used a bunsen burner to softly dry off the zinc in the 20 x 150 mm test tube. Once, completely dry we let the test tube

Based solely upon heat transfer properties the 3 materials that were considered were copper, aluminium and zinc alloys. Zinc was immediately discounted due to how easily it undergoes corrosion, which could potentially lead to leaks and system failures. While both metals are quite similar in terms of thermal conductivity, copper is priced at $3.14 AUD per kg while aluminium is priced at $0.94 AUD per kg (Appendix A). However, due to the flimsy nature of aluminium, it is extremely difficult to design a system utilizing aluminium coils to last. It should also be noted that there is a precedence where aluminium coils were used for a time but were extremely difficult to repair and maintain as well as the need for a bulkier housing unit for the system

Solutions of CuSO45H2O (0.506 g in 10mL water, 3.17E-3 mol) and ammonium peroxodisulfate (1.030 g in 10mL water, 4.51E-3 mol) were prepared and mixed

Chemist should prepare Zinc Iodide from its elements instead of from a double replacement this method seems to be more worthwhile. Using its elements cheaper overall because zinc and iodine are very abundant in the natural world and allows you to have a purer product. In order to compare the cost, I calculated how much making 10 grams of ZnI2 would cost when using both methods. When using just elements the cost would be about $.9243, while using the double replacement reaction would cost about $12.20. The price gap between the two is very large giving major points to making ZnI2 using elements. Another factor that makes using elements much better is the fact that the ZnI2 produced is actually much purer than the one produced using a double

ZnO nanoparticles in 100 ml of isopropanol Figure 4.17. TiO2 nanoparticles in 100 ml of isopropanol Then the Wood surfaces were treated with these solutions of ZnO and TiO2 nanoparticles using dip coating as shown in fig 4.18. below and dried at room temperature. Figure 4.18.

Equipment, Materials, and Method The equipment used were a jacketed batch reactor beaker, cooling water circulation system, computer, LabPro temperature probe and conductivity probe, mixing stand and magnetic stir bar. The materials used for this reaction were a 0.08M NaOH solution and a 0.1M ethyl acetate solution. A 20% excess Ethyl acetate was used to ensure NaOH was the limiting reactant.[1] NaOH was chosen for the limiting reactant because of its high conductivity relative to Ethyl acetate. The extent of the reaction was monitored by measuring the conductivity throughout the reaction. With NaOH being the limiting reactant, the change in conductivity is more visible, and the termination of the reaction can

The overall experiment wasn’t difficult but just needed to be preformed carefully. We needed accurate information to get accurate results and answers. Without properly collecting and testing the gas we would have never known the types of gases and liquids that were being released into the environment when the reaction took place. We would have also not been able to know the amount of products needed in order to make this experiment happen since finding a complete chemical formula would have been difficult without having an understanding of what “Zinc Carbonate” really meant. Because of the experiments and the well collected data, we were successfully able to conclude that the overall chemical formula for this experiment was 2ZnCO3 *3Zn(OH)2

In section IV, Experimental results are discussed and analysis is briefed. Finally, Conclusions are drawn.

University of California, Riverside, Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, 900 University Ave, Riverside, CA 92521, USA

ZnO is an inorganic metal oxide with Wurtzite structure. ZnO nanoparticles have been extensively studied in the field of catalysis, paints, cosmetics, solar cells, gas sensors and food packaging materials [1-6]. It is due to their ease of preparation in different morphologies, low cost, UV shielding properties, large surface to volume ratio, chemically alterable physical properties. The effect of zinc oxide nanoparticles on sex hormones and cholesterol in rat has also been reported [7]. Literature shows that ZnO nanoparticles exhibit high toxicity against bacteria but minimum effect on human cells [8-9].