Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

NAME : MUHAMMAD MUKRIZ BIN MAHADER AHMAD

COURSE : UCL CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
STUDENT NUMBER : 14054929
COURSEWORK : CHEMICAL REACTION ENGINEERING II | CENG303P CW2 EXPERIMENTATION
_______________________________________________________________________________________

1. Experimental data analysis

i) Overall reaction stoichiometry

Run

vA/vB

1
2
3
4
5
6

0.50
1.00
1.33
1.67
2.00
4.00

Total
Reacta
Reacti Reacta
nt B
on
nt A
NA2S
Volu H2O2
2O3
me
(cm3)
(cm3)
(cm3)
120
40.0
80.0
120
60.0
60.0
120
68.5
51.5
120
75.0
45.0
120
80.0
40.0
120
96.0
24.0

Initial
Temperat
ure
T0(C)

Final
Temperatu
re
Tf(C)

Temperatu
re Change
[TfT0](C)

19.9
20.9
21.3
20.3
20.9
21.0

38.7
49.2
57.0
59.7
50.9
43.8

18.8
28.3
35.7
39.4
30.0
22.8

Initi
al
Tim
e
t0
(s)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Fin
al
Ti
me
tf
(s)
118
141
125
133
107
126

Time
Taken
[tft0](s)
118
141
125
133
107
126

Table 1: Experimental results

Graph of Temperature (C) vs Time (s)

70

60

50
RUN 1
RUN 2
RUN 3
RUN 4

30

RUN 5
RUN 6

20

10

1
5
9
13
17
21
25
29
33
37
41
45
49
53
57
61
65
69
73
77
81
85
89
93
97
101
105
109
113
117
121
125
129
133
137
141

Temperature (C)

40

Graph 1 : Temperature (C) vs Time (s)

Time (s)

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

Graph of Temperature Difference vs Mixing Ratio

45

Temperature Difference

40
35

30
25
20
15
10
5

0
0.5

1.33

1.67

Mixing Ratio
Graph 2 : Temperature difference (C) vs Mixing Ratio

The experimental data is observed and based on Graph 1 and 2, the greatest rise in temperature with the overall
reaction stoichiometry ratio of vA/vB = 1.67. this indicates that the stoichiometry of 1.67 is the natural reaction
between the reactants thus creating largest exothermic reaction when the sodium thiosulphate acts as the limiting
reactant.

Run 4 : 5 H2O2 + 3 Na2S2O3 Na2S4O6 + 2 Na2SO4 + 5 H2O

Overall stoichiometry ratio =

VB = 45 cm3 , VT = 120 cm3

Hence, overall stoichiometry ratio =

= 1.67

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation
ii) Reaction enthalpy H

When reactant A is the limiting reactant,

CpvA

= (

) ( )

EQn 1

Such that
CAo = initial concentration of limiting reactant in mol/cm3

Cp = specific heat capacity of the limiting reactant in 3

vA = the reaction stoichiometry of the limiting reactant where a negative vA is applied indicating the
reaction is exothermic reaction
( ) = the change in temperature in the experiment in Kelvin.

H = the specific enthalpy of the reaction with respect to each mol of limiting reactant in

Rearranging the Equation,

HA = (

CpVA
)( )
CAo

Sample Calculation for Run 4:

- The volumes of 75cm3 of Reactant A Hydrogen Peroxide 1M (H2O2) and 45cm3 of Reactant B
Sodium Thiosulphate 1M (Na2S2O3) react to produce a temperature rise of 39.4 C
-

In the case of Run 4, as only reactant B is the limiting reactant, the enthalpy of the limiting reactant
based on the equation and then convert the other enthalpy of the excess reactant from the enthalpy of
the limiting reactant in the following method;.
For example in Run 1, as the limiting reactant is H2O2, we will be able to calculate HA.

HA =

4.187 3 1.67
403
0.001 3 1203

18.8 = 394,365.2

22

And from HA we will be able to calculate HB via stoichiometry.

HB = HA * vB/vA = 394,365

22

* 1.67 = 658,589.8

For Run 4,

1. Ao =
= 1

753
1 753

= 0.000625
1203
1000 3 1203
3

2. Bo =
= 1

453
1 453

= 0.000375
1203
1000 3 1203
3

mol of Na2S2o3

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

3. For the specific heat capacity, since the initial concentration of reactants are extremely small, with
bulk of the solution mainly in water, we can assume that the specific heat capacity of reactants will be
4.187

[1] which is equivalent to 4.187

with the density of water is 1g/cm3.

4. Note, for ( ) , 1C = 1K.

5. Note, for all equations, vA and vB are -1.67 as the reaction is exothermic and the chosen overall
reaction stoichiometry is 1.67 for each reactant based on the equation below:
Stoichiometry
vA/vB

Experiment Reaction

Literature Reaction
Enthalpy
H (J/mol Na2S2O3)
-432,500

1.67
5 H2O2 + 3 Na2S2O3 Na2S4O6 + 2 Na2SO4
+ 5 H2O
Table 2: Literature Data of Experiment Reaction of Stoichiometry Ratio 1.67 [based on experimental brief]
6. Enthalpy per mole of reactant B
CpvB
HB = (
) ( )
CBo
HB =

4.187 3
1.67

0.0003753

39.4 = 734,656.6 mol of Na2S2o3

7. Enthalpy per mole of reactant A

from HB we are able to calculate HB via stoichiometry,

HA = HB * vB/vA = 734,656.6 22 / 1.67 = 439,914.1 mol of Na2S2o3

Note: For runs 3-6, reactant B is the limiting reagent hence calculate HA from HB
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6

Temperature
HA(J/mol of
CAo(mol/cm3) CBo(mol/cm3)
Change
H2O2)
[Tf-T0](K)
0.000333
0.000667
-394365.2
18.8
0.000500
0.000500
-395763.6
28.3
0.000571
0.000429
-348428.7
35.7
439914.1
0.000625
0.000375
39.4
0.000667
0.000333
-377207.2
30.0
0.000800
0.000200
-477318.0
22.8
Ave reaction Enthalpy HB (J/mol
of Na2S2O3)
Table 3: HB of Na2S2O3 for Runs 1-6

HB(J/mol of
Na2S2O3)
-658589.8
-395763.6
-581875.9
734,656.6
-629936.0
-797121.1
-632990.5

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation
iii) Arrhenius parameters: Pre-exponential factor A and activation energy E
Based on the equation provided from the experimental brief, (Equations 9 12)

Assuming the reaction is irreversible and first order with respect to each reactant, the kinetic expression is
with A as the limiting reactant

= = exp( )

EQn 2

With the overall equation being

1
()[()()]

Let

= /

1
()[()()]

EQn 3

z= /

1
ln ( ) = ( ) ( )

1
= ( ) ( ) +

Which is similar to = +
Hence plot lnz vs 1/T to find the Pre exponential factor A and activation energy E.
Where,
= vA/ vB
= -A vA vB Cp / H
1. =

2.

5
3

0.00533

0.005

i+1
i+1

EQn 4
EQn 5

= 1.67

which refers to the temperature change per unit time.

For Run 4 where at t=38s

Run 4
vA/vB = 1.67
Temp ( )
Time (s)
40
33.8
41
34.6
Table 4: Data from Run 2

(34.633.8)
(4140)

= 0.8

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

3. At t=40s,
( ) = 59.7 C 33.8 C = 25.9 C = 25.9 K
4. ( ) = 33.8 C 20.3 C = 13.5 C = 13.5 K
5. Hence, Solve for z,

1
=
= 0.8 [
]
( )[( ) ( )]
25.9 [1.67 (39.4) (13.5)]
1
= 5.906 104

1
6. = ln(1.902 103) = 7.434
1

7. Plotting graph of lnz vs (1/T) 1

Graph of In z vs 1/T
0
0.00295

0.003

0.00305 0.0031 0.00315 0.0032 0.00325 0.0033 0.00335 0.0034 0.00345

-2
Run 1
Run 1 : y = -15845x + 45.961
Run 2 : y = -20562x + 61.568
Run 3 : y = -13478x + 36.825
Run 4 : y = -10266x + 25.662
Run 5 : y = -12770x + 34.408
Run 6 : y = -12488x + 33.365

In z (1/Ks)

-4

-6

Run 2

Run 3
Run 4
Run 5
Run 6
Linear (Run 1)
Linear (Run 2)
Linear (Run 3)

-8

Linear (Run 4)
Linear (Run 5)
Linear (Run 6)

-10

-12

1/T (1/K)

Graph 2: Runs 1-6 plot of ln z (1/Ks) against 1/T (K^-1)

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

8. From plot of Run 4, comparing the linear plot to the equation = ( ) () +

( ) = 10266

= 25.662

9. Hence, = 25.662 = 1.396 1011

As = -A vA vB Cp / H where in run 4, H = 734,656.6 (J/mol of Na2S2O3),
Rearrange for A,
1

1.396 1011 734,656.6

=
=

5 3 4.189 3
= 1.632 1015

10. Hence ( ) = 10266K

Where R = 8.314 [4]

Rearrange for E, = 10266 8.314 = 85351.5

3

Run

1
2
2
1
3
1.33
4
1.66
5
2
6
4
Average

A'

2.840 E+30
5.175 E+25
1.140 E+20
1.632 E+15
1.649 E+14
1.471 E+19
4.733 E29

131735.3
170952.5
112056.1
85351.5
106169.8
103825.0
118348.4

Table 5 : Arrhenius Parameters: Pre exponential factor A and Activation energy E Calculation from runs 1-6

Hence, the Average Pre exponential factor A and activation energy E from runs 1-6 are as follows:
3
A = 4.733 E29

E = 118348.4

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation
2. Error analysis

If y=f(xi) is a function of N independent variables and is the uncertainty of the ith variable
Then the resulting combination is being calculated using the formula below:

= (
=1

Variable
Temperature
Volume

)2

Uncertainty ( )
= 0.05
= 0.5
Table 6: Variables and uncertainties

Dependent variables and partial derivatives are given in the table below,
Dependent variable
Partial derivatives
1. =

( 0 )( + )

( 0 )

2
( 0 )

( + )

( + )

=
0

2. =

ln

3. =

ln
=

ln
=

Table 7 : Dependent variables and partial derivatives

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

1. Error of &
Common sense method is used to calculate the errors of concentration for reactant A&B
Sample calculation for Run 2:

0, = 0.0005 3

1
60 + 0.5

0, =

= 0.000506
= 1.2%
1000 120 0.5
3
1
60 0.5

0, =

= 0.000494
= 1.2%
1000 120 + 0.5
3
=

Run 0, ( )
3
1
0.000333
2
0.000500
3
0.000571
4
0.000625
5
0.000627
6
0.000800

0, (3)
0.000338912
0.000506276
0.000577406
0.000631799
0.000673640
0.000807531

Run 0, ( )
3

0, (3)

0, (3)

0, %

1
2
3
4
5
6

0.000673640
0.000506276
0.000435146
0.000380753
0.000338912
0.000205021

0.000659751
0.000493776
0.000423237
0.000369295
0.000327801
0.000195021

0.995527341
1.255230126
1.432737416
1.534170153
1.775415583
2.510460251

0.000667
0.000500
0.000429
0.000375
0.000333
0.000200

1.2% + 1.2%
= 1.2%
2

0, %
0, (3)
0.000327801 1.775415583
0.000493776 1.255230126
0.000564315 1.121866504
0.000618257 1.087866109
0.000659751 0.995527341
0.000792531 0.941422594
Table 8: Errors of CA

Table 9: Errors of CB

0, %

Average

1.561312350
1.244813278
1.170691296
1.078838174
1.086800998
0.933609959

1.668364
1.250022
1.146279
1.083352
1.041164
0.937516

0, %

Average

1.086800998
1.244813278
1.343469808
1.521438451
1.561312350
2.489626556

1.041164
1.250022
1.388104
1.527804
1.668364
2.500043

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

2. Error of
Based on given experimental brief, the Enthalpy change is calculated from the equation given below,
( 0 )
=
0
When mixing ratio is smaller than 1, hydrogen peroxide is the limiting reactant, and when it is larger than 1
thus sodium thiosulphate is the limiting reactant.

Provided that 0 =

:
=

( 0 )( + )

2
2
2

= (
) + (
0 ) + (
) + (
)

The sample calculation for Run 1 ;

= 1, = 1, = 4.189/3 , 0 = 18.8, + = 1203

=
=
=

4.1891119.2
0.001402
4.189119.2

0.00140
4.1891120

= 3937.66 3

= 25134

0.00140
4.1891120

= 98.4415

0.00140

( + )

= 25134

) + (

( + )

0 ) + (

( 0)

) + (

( 0)

= (83780.05)2 + (83780.05)2 + (1340.480.5)2 + (1340.480.5)2

=17773.51302
2.69872279%

The combination errors for all runs are given in the table below:

Run

Mixin
g ratio

0.5

1.33

1.67

-658589.8
-98.4415
32.9301944
4
-581875.9
95.6133837
7
734,656.6
88.0248533
3
-629936.0
-39.271875
-395763.6

-3937.66
1975.81166
7
6549.51678
8

25134

22015.1824
8

-6601.864

20107.2

-20107.2

-3141.75

12567

-12567

8378

-25134

17773.5130
2

(%)

2.69872279

5924.96449
-8378
7
22015.1824 15570.5296
8
4

1.49709687
7

14221.7694
7
8887.59949
8

1.93583906
7
1.41087340
6

2.67591932
2

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation
6

Averag
e

-797121.1

10.3634114
6

-994.8875

5236.25

-5236.25

3702.92206
3

0.46453695
2
1.78049806
9

Table 10: Errors of enthalpy change

The average percentage error for all six runs is 1.78% from the table above.
In order to calculate the errors of E and A, standard errors of the fitting line have to be obtained, the
sy .x

y yest 2 ,

sy .x 2

y 2 a y b xy

N
N
formula for standard error is given as
For our convenience, and also for higher accuracy, LINEST Function in Excel is used in our calculation.

3. Error of E
E can be calculated from the gradient of the fitting line, therefore , we use the equation E=-mR
Sample calculation for Run 1,

when E= 131735.33, = 793.2

= (

) = 8.314793.2 = 6594.4
5.18%

Results for all other runs are given in the table below;

Run

Se (slope)

1
2
3
4
5
6
Average

793.2
1798.2
973.9
1323.5
1289.4
2200.4

Se (yintercept)
2.60
5.83
3.18
4.32
4.23
7.31

Slope (1/K)

In y (1/Ks)

-15312.1
-25900.9
-21158.7
-19872.7
-20344.9
-28515.6

43.18
78.93
63.36
59.08
60.70
88.27

Table 11: Errors of E

From the table above, the average percentage errors for all 6 runs are 6.24%

6594.4
14950.0
8096.8
11003.7
10720.3
18294.5

%
5.18
6.94
4.6
6.66
6.34
7.72
6.24

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

4. Errors of A
Pre-exponential factor A is calculated from the equation
ln
=

to obtain the combination error for this variable, the derivatives with respect to the two independent
variables are required, which is and ;
2

= ( ) + ( )

Sample calculation for Run 4;

ln
25.662 734656.6
cm3
=
=
= 1.6321E + 15
.s

534.189
mol

ln
78.93
cm3
=
=
= 2221587255

1 14.189
Js
= (7.291038 5.83)2 + (4.531033 1117.76)2
cm3
= 9.51522E + 15
58.30%
mol
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
Average

7.17932E+24
5.17569E+31
1.13876E+20
1.6321E+15
1.6493E+19
1.47092E+19

17773.51302
5924.964497
15570.52964
14221.76947
8887.599498
3702.922063

-1.0901E+19
-1.30777E+26
-1.95705E+14
-2221587255
-2.61821E+13
-1.84529E+13

4.18559E+30
3.01744E+25
6.63905E+20
9.51522E+15
9.61547E+15
8.57547E+19

Table 12: Errors of A

The average percentage error for all six runs is 248.05% from the table above

%
147.3798787
58.30795123
58.23731419
58.30402729
583.1090545
582.9688668
248.0511821

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation
3. Discussion of analysed results

Based on the error analysis done, it can be observed that there are several errors occurred throughout the
experiment since the percentage errors calculated in comparison with the literature values are quite
significant. Other than that, there are also error in the calculation due to the uncertainties in the measuring
devices such that the thermocouple and measuring cylinder. From the error analysis thoroughly done, it can
be seen that the summary of the average percentage error for 1-6 runs are as follows:
Error

Average percentage error

1.2%
&
1.78%

E
6.24%
248.05%
A
Table 13: Average of the Percentage errors for all six runs

Thus, the limitations that could be the factor towards the errors in the experiment may be as follows:
1. There is a small hole on top of the reactor which may cause some of the heat to be released to the
environment thus fluctuating the temperature
2. Not all the liquid react such that the liquid droplets may be attached on the wall of the reactor
3. Parallax error when measuring the quantity of reactants in measuring cylinder
4. The equipment used in the experiment may contain impurities of other mixtures which are not
removed completely during washing.
5. When transferring the reactants into the reactor, there may be some of the liquid left out in the
cylinder
6. There may be some heat being generated from the from the magnetic stirrer inside the reactor
causing incorrect measurement of temperature
7. Error in different rates of the addition of H2O2 throughout the experiment
Suitable improvements on the experiment;
1. Usage of more technologically advanced adiabatic reactor that insulates the heat of the exothermic
reaction to give stable temperature increase
2. A larger stirrer should be used to ensure uniform mixing and also prevent additional generation of
heat
3. Automatic mechanism for the addition of H 2O2 then the manual method to ensure uniformity
throughout the experiment with the different mixing ratios.

Muhammad Mukriz Bin Mahader Ahmad | SN:14054929

CENG303P CW2 Experimentation

Reference
1. Coulson, J., Richardson, J., Backhurst, J., Harker, J. and Coulson, J. Coulson & Richardson's
chemical engineering. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann vol.1, p.7, 1996.
2. 1. Fogler, S, 2016, Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering, 4th Ed., Prentice-Hall.
3. G.F. Froment, K.B. Bischoff, 2011, J. De Wilde: Chemical Reactor Analysis and Design, 3rd Ed.,
Wiley.
4. 3. O. Levenspiel, 1999, Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3rd Ed., Wiley.
5. 4. Smith, J. M., 1981, Chemical Engineering Kinetics, 3rd Ed., McGraw Hill.
6. 5. Cohen, W. C., and Spencer, J. L., Chem. Eng. Prog., 58, (1962), 40.