The objective of this lab was to calibrate a 10 ml pipette and 50 ml buret as well as
preparea 0.1 M solution of hydrochloric acid and 0.1 M solution of sodium hydroxide.
The purpose of thecalibration is to eliminate the systematic error caused by the
instrument and thus allow for greater accuracy when recording from these instruments.
It is the job of an analytical chemist to be as accurate and precise as possible and limit
these errors. The first type of error is referred to as a random error. This type of error is
impossible to control as it is caused by variables out of a chemists control such as
environment. Having a detailed understanding of the experiment can help reduce the
occurence of errors.These errors can affect precision and accuracy in
measurement.One type of such errors type is referred to as systematic error. This error
can be controlled, to a certain degree by the chemist as it is caused by factors such as
instrumental error, or human mistakes which can be corrected by exercising greater
caution or calibrating the instrument. The calibrating of these two instruments will
allow us to correct systematic errors and thus record values closer to the true value.
There will always be random error in the values taken. That is uncontrollable.
The instruments are calibrated by filling them to the mark which would suggest we
have the exactamount, according to the un-calibrated instruments, of liquid they are
supposed to hold. By taking thetemperature of the water, the density can be found
according to table 1.2.Taking the mass of the water,exact calculated volume can be found
by using the density equation,Density=MassVolumeThis procedure is followed for a
total of 5 trials for greater accuracy. To test for outliers or unacceptabledata, the Q test
was performed on the highest and lowest values. The equation is as follows
Abstract:A 10 ml pipette and a 50 ml buret were calibrated in this lab. Both a 0.1 M
solution ofhydrochloric acid and a 0.1 M solution of sodium hydroxide were
prepared.From the calculations it can be said that the mean value for the volume of the
pipette calibrations was9.955+0.053(relative error of 0.549%) and the mean value for
the volume of the buret calibrations was9.992+0.071ml (relative error of 0.715%). The
molarity of the sodium hydroxide used for solutionpreparation was given, however, the
molarity of the hydrochloric acid used for the 0.1 M solutionpreparation was found to be
2.6 M.
Error analysis is always a difficult area for students. However, the careful
consideration of experimental error is one of the important skills that we need to learn
to be effective scientists. In the following discussion, the errors in a titration
experiment are considered. The first section is a detailed look at how to determine the
most important errors
The purpose of the error analysis section of the lab report is to determine the most
important errors and the effect that those errors have on the final result.
Random errors cause positive and negative deviations from the average value of a
measurement. Random errors cancel by averaging, if the experiment is repeated many
times. Upon averaging many trials, random errors have an effect only on the precision
of a measurement. The effect of random errors is primarily on the precision. Every
non-integer experimental measurement is a source of random error.
Without any changes in the procedure, systematic errors are repeated if the
experiment is repeated. Systematic errors have a biased effect on the final results;
systematic errors make the final result high or low, but not both. Instrument
calibration errors are examples of systematic errors. Environmental effects can also be
causes of systematic error, for example a change in lab temperature changing the
calibration of a balance or the volume of a flask.
Student mistakes are just student mistakes; they are neither random nor systematic
errors. Examples in this category are spills, misreading a device such as a burette,
misinterpretation of the procedure, incorrect handling of a micro-pipettor, and
forgetting to rinse out a beaker when doing a quantitative transfer. These errors are
known and easily preventable, if the experiment is repeated. Systematic errors occur
with each repetition of the experiment, assuming no changes in instrumentation
The precision is dominated by the random error of the volume readings of the burette
and volumetric pipette. The other volumetric glassware contribute insignificant
random error. The accuracy is determined by the systematic error in the visual
detection of the end point. The visual end point is at a volume larger than the
equivalence point, giving a higher final result than the true concentration value.
