Alford – Haque

10A

The Rate of Ionization of Copper II Sulfate when Exposed to Different Levels of Mixing,
Temperature, and Particle Size
Problem Statement:

Determine the effect of copper II sulfate particle size, temperature of water and mixing

method on the rate of ionization.

Hypothesis:

The rate of which copper II sulfate will ionize will be more efficient when mixing

method is high, 1 per second, high temperature, 55-60 ºC, and low particle size, fine powder, are

used.

Materials:

0-3ºC Water, H2O

22-28ºC Water, H2O
55-60 ºC Water, H2O
Copper (II) Sulfate, CuSO4 *5H2O, Fine Crystal
Copper (II) Sulfate, CuSO4 *5H2O,
Powder
Copper (II) Sulfate, CuSO4 *5H2O, Medium Crystal
Scale, 0.0001g Precision
Thermometer Probe, 0.1ºC Precision
10 mL Graduated Cylinder
100 mL Graduate Cylinder
100 mL Beaker
(3) Test Tubes, Large
(3) Test Tube Stoppers
(14) Weight Boat
Test Tube Rack
Tongs
Stop Watch
Hotplate
TI-Nspire Calculator Randomize Function
 Alford – Haque
10A

Procedure:
1. Start hot plate on a setting of 2-3 and gently warm 200 mL of water to 55-60 ºC

2. 5 ºC and 22-28 ºC solutions have already been prepared and are located in the cooler and on
the demo table respectively.

3. A clean dry test tube will be used before each experiment.

4. Using a weigh boat, mass out (3) 0.2 g samples of copper (II) sulfate fine crystal. Note: the
masses do not need to be exact but try to keep them within 0.18-0.22 range. Record the mass
in the data table.

5. Using a weigh boat, mass out (5) 0.2 g samples of copper (II) sulfate medium crystal. Note:
the masses do not need to be exact but try to keep them within 0.18-0.22 range. Record the
mass in the data table.

6. Repeat step 5 for copper (II) sulfate powder.

7. Randomize trials insuring that 1st, middle, and last trial are standards

8. Fill a test tube with 10 mL of desired temperature water using the 10mL graduated cylinder.

9. Transfer the desired form of Copper (II) sulfate to the test tube and apply the predetermined
mixing method.

10. Record the time it takes for the solution to ionize and note any observations in the data table.
(i.e. quality of mixing, color of solution, etc.). Note: if it takes more than 5 minutes for the
solution to ionize, record this fact along with any observations about color and particulate
remaining in the observations section of the data table and move on to the next trial.

11. Empty the contents of the tube. Rinse and dry the tube.

12. Repeat steps 8-10 to complete the D.O.E.

 Alford – Haque
10A

Diagram:

100 mL Graduated Test Tube

Medium Crystal Powder Cylinder Rack

Fine Crystal
Weigh Boats

Thermometer
Probe

Hot Plate
Scoopula

Figure 1. Materials Used for DOE

Figure 1 above, shows all of the materials used for this experiment. Does not show Ti-

Nspire calculator, goggles, and analytical balance (0.0001 accuracy).

Figure 2. Treatment Particle Size for Copper Sulfate

Figure 2 above, shows the three treatments used for the DOE. The powder is low, the fine

crystal is standard, and the medium crystal is high. All three look very different in physical

appearance.
 Alford – Haque
10A

Data and Observations:

Table 1
Factors Tested in Experiment
Factors + Values Standards - Values
Particle Size Medium Crystal Fine Crystal Powder
Temperature (ºC) 55-60 22-28 0-3
Mixing Method 1 per second 5 per 10 seconds 1 per 10 seconds

Table 2
Results of Each Randomized Run
Randomized Factor: Particle Factor: Factor: Mixing Results in Time
Runs Size Temp Method of Dissolution
(ºC) (s)
1 standard 0.1888 23.9 5 per 10 sec 150

3 + 0.2090 + 55 + 1 per sec 338

5 + 0.2210 + 55.3 - 1 per 10 sec 350
2 + 0.1850 - 2.2 + 1 per sec 311
7 + 0.1898 - 2.5 - 1 per 10 sec 600
6 standard 0.2021 22.8 5 per 10 sec 60
10 - 0.1980 + 55.1 + 1 per sec 54
4 - 0.2012 + 58 - 1 per 10 sec 145
8 - 0.2007 - 2.8 + 1 per sec 162
9 - 0.2194 - 2.3 - 1 per 10 sec 300
11 standard 0.2060 26.9 5 per 10 sec 158

Table 1 above shows factors tested during this experiment including the factors’ low,

standard, and high values. Table 2 shows the order in which the trials were run along. The

results of each run were measured in seconds(s).

 Alford – Haque
10A

Table 3
Data and Observations
Trial
1 In the beginning of aggravation the fine particle began to ionize slowly but as the
trial continued the rate of ionization increased.
2 Observations made was when the medium was ionizing it made the water turn a light
blue and wasn’t as intense of a blue compared to the other trials.
3 One of the slowest ones to ionize. Had a light blue hue.
4 Solution was a light blue color, after ionization little particles were floating around.
5 The crystal was a darker hue and you could physically see the crystal shrink.
6 After complete ionization, the solution became a light blue color.
7 Slowly could observe the particles breaking off the medium crystal.
8 The rate of ionization was much quicker compared to other trials.
9 At the beginning of the trial, not as many particles were floating around.
10 During this trial, it ionized the quickest compared to other trials.
11 At the end of this trial, the solution appears to be “oily”.

Table 3 above shows the observations made during this DOE experiment. Many were

similar in being a light blue solution. Trial 10 ionized the quickest at 54 seconds. Trial was

ionized the slowest at 350 seconds.

Data Analysis and Interpretation:

In this experiment we collected quantitative data that was continuous. We know the data was

quantitative since it had to do with numbers. In this case it was the amount of time it took for the

CuSO4 to dissolve. The data collected should be valid because the trials were randomized using

the Ti-Nspire randomizing function. This reduced bias in the experiment. The standards gave

fairly consistent results except for Trial 6. The reason for this outlier may be due to human error.
 Alford – Haque
10A

Table 5
Effect of Particle Size
(-) Values (+) Values
54 338
EFFECT OF PARTICLE SIZE
500
145 350

RESULTS IN TIME OF
400 399.75

DISSOLUTION (S)
162 311 165.25 300
200
300 600 100
0
Average: 165.25 Average: 399.75 -1 1
PARTICLE SIZE

Figure 3. Effect of Particle Size

Both Table 5 and figure 3 shows the effects particle size had on the experiment. Its effect

was 234.5. This number means the difference between the average (-) treatment and the average

(+) treatment. This means that the medium crystal on average ionized 234.5 seconds slower than

the powder. Due to there being a high slope the effect will most likely be significant.

Table 6

Effect of Temperature ºC
(-) Values (+) Values
311 338 EFFECT OF
600 350
162 54 TEMPERATURE
300 145 400
RESULTS IN TIME OF

Average: 343.25 Average: 221.75 300

DISSOLUTION (S)

343.25 200 221.75

100
0
-1 1
TEMPERATURE ºC

Figure 4. Effect of Temperature

 Alford – Haque
10A

Both Table 6 and figure 4 show the effect that temperature had on the experiment. Its

effect was -121.5. The effect turned out to be negative meaning that when you increase the

temperature the rate of ionization will increase. Effect might be significant.

Effect of Mixing Method

(-) Values (+) Values
350 338 EFFECT OF MIXING
600 311 METHOD
145 54
300 162 RESULTS IN TIME OF 400
Average: 348.75 Average: 216.25 DISSOLUTION(S) 300
348.75 200 216.25
100
0
-1 1
MIXING METHOD

Figure 5. Effect of Mixing Method

Both Table 7 and figure 5 show how the mixing method affected the experiment. Its

effect is -132.5. This means that increasing the speed at which you agitate the solution does

increase the rate of ionization just like increasing temperature. Effect could be significant.

Table 8
Interaction of Particle Size and Temperature
(-) (+)
Temperature ºC Temperature ºC
Line Segment (+) 311 338
(Solid) 600 350
Particle Size Average: 455.5 Average: 344
Line Segment (-) 162 54
(Dotted) 300 145
Particle Size Average: 231 Average: 99.5
 Alford – Haque
10A

Both Table 8 and figure 6 show the effects Particle Size and Temperature and how they

affected the experiment. To find the interaction effect you have to find the difference in the slope

of the lines. The effect was 10. The effect of these two factors are most likely not significant.

Table 9
Interaction of Particle Size and Mixing Method
(-) (+)
Mixing Method Mixing Method
Line Segment (+) 350 338
(Solid) 600 311
Particle Size Average: 475 Average: 324.5
Line Segment (-) 145 54
(Dotted) 300 162
Particle Size Average: 222.5 Average: 108

Both Table 9 and figure 7 show the effects Particle Size and Mixing Method and how

they affected the experiment. The effect of these two factors were -18. The interaction of these

two variables seems to have increased the rate of ionization. However, it doesn’t seem to be very

significant.

Table 10
Interaction of Temperature and Mixing Method
(-) (+)
Mixing Method Mixing Method
Line Segment (+) 350 600
(Solid) 145 300
Temperature ºC Average: 247.5 Average: 450
Line Segment (-) 338 311
(Dotted) 54 162
Temperature ºC Average: 196 Average: 236.5

Both Table 10 and figure 8 show the effects of Mixing Method and Temperature and how

they affected the experiment. The effect of the two factors Mixing Method and Temperature are
 Alford – Haque
10A

81.05. The interaction of these two variables are moderately significant. The effect for these two

factors is the highest one compared to the two previous ones.

Conclusion:

The hypothesis “ The rate of which copper II sulfate will ionize will be more efficient

when mixing method is high, 1 per second, high temperature, 55-60 ºC, and low particle size,

fine powder, are used.” was accepted. If you look back at trial 10, it can be observed that it had

the fastest rate of ionization at 54 seconds. The independent variables in this experiment are

particle size, temperature, and mixing method. For the factor particle size, particle size, the low

value was powder, the standard value was a fine crystal, and for the high value it was the

medium crystal. For the next factor, temperature, the low value was 0-3°C, the standard value

was 22-28°C, and the high value was 55-60°C. For the final factor, mixing method(agitation),

the low value was 1 stir per 10 seconds, the standard value was 5 stirs per 10 seconds, and the

high value was 1 per second. The purpose of this experiment was to find which combination of

CuSO4 , temperature , and mixing method would make it ionize the fastest. For this experiment

varying levels of CuSO4 was mixed with different temperature levels ranging from 0-60°C, with

different rates of mixing going as slow as 1 flick per 10 seconds or as fast as 1 per second. The

solute was the CuSO4 and the solvent was the water or H2O. To test three factors and to find the

effects and interaction effects we used a 3 factor DOE.

Alford – Haque
10A