Results Table 2 Metal Actual reduction Percent error between your Reduction potential in descending order from most (+) to most (-) reordered from the last column in Results Table 1. (Don't potential of each metal from the measured reduction voltage (column #1) and the actual reduction textbook (Zumdahl, 6th ed. voltage (column # 3). (Cu p 833)* forget to insert Cu at the +0.34 V position in this table) will, of course, have a 0% error)** * Be careful to chose the proper half reactions. These involve the metal and the ions listed in the materials section on page L-1. **Students in the past have found that iron gives the largest percent error. It turns out that the "iron" we are using is really mild steel and is alloyed with other metals, so a large error is to be expected. We have not found a source of pure iron at this time. Is the order of the metals in Results Table 2 the same as that in the table of Standard Reduction Potentials on p 833 in Zumdahl's text? Yes No (circle one) If you circled No, check all your calculations. The order should come out the same as in the standard table.
Results Table 2 Metal Actual reduction Percent error between your Reduction potential in descending order from most (+) to most (-) reordered from the last column in Results Table 1. (Don't potential of each metal from the measured reduction voltage (column #1) and the actual reduction textbook (Zumdahl, 6th ed. voltage (column # 3). (Cu p 833)* forget to insert Cu at the +0.34 V position in this table) will, of course, have a 0% error)** * Be careful to chose the proper half reactions. These involve the metal and the ions listed in the materials section on page L-1. **Students in the past have found that iron gives the largest percent error. It turns out that the "iron" we are using is really mild steel and is alloyed with other metals, so a large error is to be expected. We have not found a source of pure iron at this time. Is the order of the metals in Results Table 2 the same as that in the table of Standard Reduction Potentials on p 833 in Zumdahl's text? Yes No (circle one) If you circled No, check all your calculations. The order should come out the same as in the standard table.
Chapter20: Applications Of Oxidation/reduction Titrations
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 20.28QAP
Related questions
Question
100%

Transcribed Image Text:Metal Metal Half reaction that goes Half reaction that goes as
at the at the as a reduction (this is
(+)
Voltaie
Measured Volt age (V)
an oxidation (this is for the
Cell
(metals
used)
() for the metal at the (+) metal at the (-) terminal)
Termi Termi terminal)
nal
nal
#1
#2
# 3
Cu^2+(aq) + 2e. - Zn(s) - Zn^2+(aq) + 2e-
Cu(s)
Cu - Zn 0.881 0.864 0.850
Cu
Zn
Cu^2+(aq) + 2e- Pb(s) - Pb^2+(aq) + 20-
Cu(s)
Cu - Pb 0.486 0.489 0.495 Cu Pb
Cu - Ag -0.420 -0.415 -0.407
2Ag^+(aq)+ 2e-
2Ag(s)
Cu(s) – Cu^2+(aq) +
Ag
Cu
2e-
Cu^2+(aq) + 2e- - Fe(s) -
Cu(s)
Cu - Fe 0.544 0.555 0.571 Cu
Fe
Fe^2+(aq) +
2e-
Metal at the Metal at
(+)
Terminal
Voltaic Cell
Reduction
Adjusted reduction
potential of metal
reacting with Cu
(assumes that Cu
has a reduction
voltage of 0.34 Vy
Average
the (-)
Terminal
(metals used)
Меаsured
potential of metal
reacting with Cu
Voltage from the
Data Table
(assumes that Cu
has a reduction
voltage of 0.00 V)
(V)
Cu - Zn
0.865
Cu
Zn
-0.865
-0.525
Cu - Pb
0.49
Cu
Pb
-0.49
-0.150
Cu - Ag
-0.414
Ag
Cu
0.414
0.754
Cu - Fe
0.556
Cu
Fe
-0.556
-0.216
Footnote #1: If Cu is the (+) terminal and the other metal (M) is the (-) terminal, the
Cu is going as a reduction and M is going as an oxidation. By definition, the reduction
potential of M is (-). If Cu is (-) and M is (+), then Cu is going as an oxidation and
other metal is going as a reduction. By definition, the reduction potential of M is (+).
Essentially, this means that the sign of each voltage in the first column is to be
reversed when entered in this column.
Footnote #2: In the previous column, Cu was arbitrarily assigned a voltage of 0.00 V.
However, the actual standard reduction potential of Cu is 0.34 V. Thus, to convert the
reduction potential in the previous column to actual reduction potentials, add 0.34 V to
each entry.
Results Table 2
Metal Actual reduction Percent error between your
Reduction potential in
descending order from most
(+) to most (-) reordered
from the last column in
potential of each
metal from the
textbook
(Zumdahl, 6th ed. voltage (column # 3). (Cu
p 833)*
measured reduction
voltage (column #1) and
the actual reduction
Results Table 1. (Don't
forget to insert Cu at the
+0.34 V position in this
will, of course, have a 0%
error)**
table)
* Be careful to chose the proper half reactions. These involve the metal and the
ions listed in the materials section on page L-1.
**Students in the past have found that iron gives the largest percent error. It
turns out that the "iron" we are using is really mild steel and is alloyed with other
metals, so a large error is to be expected. We have not found a source of pure iron
at this time.
Is the order of the metals in Results Table 2 the same as that in the table of Standard
Reduction Potentials on p 833 in Zumdahl's text?
Yes
No
(circle one)
If you circled No, check all your calculations. The order should come out the same as
in the standard table.
| |き

Transcribed Image Text:F2(g) + 2e- 2F (aq)
+2.87
0,(g) + 2H*(aq) + 2e O2(g) + H,O(1)
Co (aq) + e
H2O2(aq) + 2H*(aq) + 2e 2H,0(1)
PbO2(s) + 4H (aq) + SO (aq) + 2e PBSO (s) + 2H,0(1)
Ce*(aq) + e
+2.07
Co*(aq)
+1.82
+1.77
+1.70
Ce (aq)
+1.61
Mn (aq) + 4H,O(1)
MnO(aq) + 8H*(aq) + 5e
Au (aq) + 3e
+1.51
Au(s)
+1.50
Cl,(g) + 2e - 2CI (ag)
+1.36
2Cr (aq) + 7H2O(1)
Mn (aq) + 2H,O()
Cr.0 (aq) + 14H*(aq) + 6e
+1.33
MnO2(s) + 4H*(aq) + 2e
+1.23
0:(g) + 4H*(aq) + 4e 2H,O()
+1.23
Br(1) + 2e - 2Br (aq)
+1.07
NO (aq) + 4H*(aq) + 3e NO(g) + 2H,0(1)
2Hgt(aq) + 2e
Hg*(aq) + 2e
+0,96
Hg? (aq)
+0.92
2Hg(l)
+0.85
Ag*(aq) +e
Ag(s)
+0.80
Fe (aq) + e
+ Fe*(aq)
+0.77
(bp)*O°H•
MnO,(s) +40H (aq)
0,(g) + 2H*(aq) + 2e
+0.68
MnO (aq) + 2H,O(1) + 3e
+0.59
L(s) + 2e - 21 (aq)
+0,53
0,(g) + 2H,0(1) + 4e
Cu*(aq) + 2e
40H (aq)
+0.40
Cu(s)
+0.34
AgCl(s) +e
Ag(s) + CI (aq)
+0.22
so (aq) + 4H*(aq) + 2e SO,(g) + 2H,0(1)
Cu"(aq) + e
+0.20
Cu*(aq)
Sn*(aq)
+0.15
Sn*(aq) + 2e
+0.13
2H*(aq) + 2e
Pb*(aq) + 2e
Sn*(aq) + 2e
Ni"(ag) + 2e
H(g)
0.00
Pb(s)
-0.13
-Sn(s)
-0.14
Ni(s)
-0.25
Co*(aq) + 2e
Co(s)
-0.28
PbSO,(s) + 2e
Pb(s) + So (aq)
-0.31
Cd**(aq) + 2e
Fe*(aq) + 2e
Cr*(aq) + 3e
Cd(s)
-0.40
Fe(s)
-0.44
Cr(s)
-0.74
Zn* (aq) + 2e
2H O(1) + 2e
Mn (aq) + 2e
Zn(s)
-0.76
H2(g) + 20H (aq)
-0.83
Mn(s)
-1.18
Al*(aq) + 3e
Be (aq) + 2e
Mg (aq) + 2e
Al(s)
-1.66
Be(s)
-1.85
Mg(s)
-2.37
Na*(aq) + e
+ Na(s)
-2.71
Ca*(aq) + 2e
Sr*(aq) + 2e
Ba (aq) + 2e
Ca(s)
olle
-2.87
Sr(s)
-2.89
Ba(s)
-2.90
K*(ag) + e
K(s)
-2.93
Increasing strength as ox idizing agent
Increasing strength as reducing agent
Expert Solution

This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
This is a popular solution!
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps

Knowledge Booster
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, chemistry and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.Recommended textbooks for you

Principles of Instrumental Analysis
Chemistry
ISBN:
9781305577213
Author:
Douglas A. Skoog, F. James Holler, Stanley R. Crouch
Publisher:
Cengage Learning

Chemistry
Chemistry
ISBN:
9781305957404
Author:
Steven S. Zumdahl, Susan A. Zumdahl, Donald J. DeCoste
Publisher:
Cengage Learning

Principles of Instrumental Analysis
Chemistry
ISBN:
9781305577213
Author:
Douglas A. Skoog, F. James Holler, Stanley R. Crouch
Publisher:
Cengage Learning

Chemistry
Chemistry
ISBN:
9781305957404
Author:
Steven S. Zumdahl, Susan A. Zumdahl, Donald J. DeCoste
Publisher:
Cengage Learning

Chemistry: An Atoms First Approach
Chemistry
ISBN:
9781305079243
Author:
Steven S. Zumdahl, Susan A. Zumdahl
Publisher:
Cengage Learning


Chemical Principles in the Laboratory
Chemistry
ISBN:
9781305264434
Author:
Emil Slowinski, Wayne C. Wolsey, Robert Rossi
Publisher:
Brooks Cole