Discovering the Formula of an Unknown Copper Chloride

Purpose
The purpose of this lab was to determine the ratio of copper to chlorine to water in a copper chloride.
This was to be done by eliminating each component through heat or displacement until the copper
chloride hydrate was separated into water vapor, copper metal, and aqueous chloride ions.

Background

In this lab we will gain a better grasp of the concept of molar ratios. We will be dealing with a sample
of Copper Chloride Hydrate, however, we have no idea what the oxidation state of copper is or how
many water molecules are present. To determine this, we will draw off the water with heat and re-mass
the substance to calculate the amount water present. The new material has the copper separated from it
through a single displacement reaction with aluminium. After this, the substance was re-massed to
determine the chlorine present. Using these gram ratios, we can determine the molar ratios in the
compound. We will essentially be That lab will allow easy observation of the relation between the mass
of the individual elements in a substance to its formula.

Procedure

First, mass a crucible with a small amount of the unknown copper chloride. Then subtract the mass of
the crucible to find the copper chloride hydrate's mass. Heat the copper chloride hydrate in the crucible
until it has changed from greenish blue to brown as this means the water has been driven off. Re-mass
the crystals to determine the mass of water lost and then dissolve the crystals in water. Add aluminium
wire and allow it to react fully. Filter and then mass the dry copper produced. Determine the mass of
the chlorine by subtracting the mass of the copper and water from the original mass of the hydrate.

Observations

1. The color change upon heating was intense. The chemical started a turquoise color but slowly
became more green and then a rich, chocolate brown.

2. The needle like crystals in the crucible did not change shape much upon heating.

3. The color change upon dissolving the dehydrated copper chloride was very sudden. The solution
went from clear to the same color that the original copper chloride was.

4. The reaction of the aluminium wire and the copper chloride solution started very slowly but it
steadily became more vigorous. A lot of bubbles were produced and the wire even moved at points.

5. The color of the copper produced was very unlike copper wire or pennies. It was a brick red color.

6. The only measurement tool used was a digital balance that has no uncertainty and records to the
thousandths place.

Data
 Raw Data
Atomic Mass of Copper: 63.546amu
Atomic Mass of Chlorine: 35.453amu
Atomic Mass of Hydrogen: 1.0079amu
Atomic Mass of Oxygen: 15.999amu
Mass of Crucible: 12.515g
Mass of Crucible and Hydrated Sample: 14.522g
Mass of Crucible and Dehydrated Sample:
14.014g
Mass of Empty Watch Glass: 31.700g
Mass of Filter Paper : 0.910g
Mass of Filter Paper and Copper: 1.496g
Calculated Data
Mass of Hydrated Sample: 2.007g
Mass of Dehydrated Sample: 1.499g
Mass of Copper: 0.586g
No. of Moles of Copper: 0.00922mol
Mass of Water Evolved: 0.508g
No. of Moles of Water: 0.282mol
Mass of Chlorine in Sample: 0.913g
No. of Moles of Chlorine: 0.0258mol
Mole Ratio, Chlorine: Copper in Sample: 2.80:1
Mole Ratio, Water: Copper in Hydrated Sample:
3.06:1
Formula of Dehydrated Sample (Rounded): CuCl3
Formula of Hydrated Sample:CuCl3 X 3H2O
Percent Chlorine in Sample: 41.6%
Actual Mass of Chlorine in Sample: 0.835g
Percent Error: 9.34%

Calculations

Mass of Hydrated Sample

Mass of Hydrated Sample=Mass of Crucible Plus Sample – Mass of Crucible
MoHS=14.522g-12.515g
2.007g=Mass of Hydrated Sample

Mass of Dehydrated Sample

Mass of Dehydrated Sample=Mass of Crucible Plus Dehydrated Sample- Mass of Crucible
MoDS=14.014g-12.515g
1.499g=Mass of Dehydrated Sample

Mass of Copper
Mass of Copper= Mass of Filter Paper Plus Copper- Mass of Filter Paper
MoC=1.496g-0.910g
0.586g=Mass of Copper

No. of Moles of Copper

No. of Moles of Copper=
Mass of Copper in Sample 0.586g Cu
Atomic Mass of Copper 63.546g
=0.00922mol Cu

Mass of Water Evolved

Mass of H2O Evolved= Mass of Hydrated Sample-Mass of Dehydrated Sample
Mass of H2O Evolved= 2.007g-1.499g
Mass of H2O Evolved= 0.508g

No. of Moles of Water

No. of Moles of Water=
Mass of Water Evolved 0.508g H2O
Molecular Mass of Water 18.0148g
=0.282mol H2O

Mass of Chlorine
Mass of Chlorine= Mass of Dehydrated Sample- Mass of Copper
Mass of Chlorine= 1.499g-0.586g
Mass of Chlorine= 0.913g

No. of Moles of Chlorine

No. of Moles of Chlorine=
Mass of Chlorine 0.913g
Atomic Mass of Chlorine 35.453g
No. of Moles of Chlorine= 0.0258mol Chlorine

Mole Ratio, Chlorine: Copper in Sample

Mole Ratio, Chlorine: Copper in Sample=
No. of Moles of Chlorine 0.0258mol Cl
No. of Moles of Copper 0.00922mol Cu
Ratio= 2.80 moles Cl:1mole Cu

Mole Ratio, Water: Copper in Hydrated Sample

Mole Ratio, Water: Copper in Hydrated Sample:
No. of Moles of Water 0.282mol Water
No. of Moles of Copper 0.00922mol Cu
Ratio= 3.06 moles Water: 1mol Cu

Percent Chlorine Present in Actual Compound

Percent Chlorine Present in Actual Compound=
2 Cl (2 X 35.453) 70.906g
2 Cl + 1 Cu + 2H2O (2 X 35.453) + (1 X 63.546) + (2 X 18.0148) 170.482g
= 0.416 or 41.6%

Actual Mass of Chlorine In My Sample

Actual Mass of Chlorine In My Sample=Mass of Hydrated Sample X Percent Chlorine
AmoC= 2.007g X 0.416g
Actual Mass of Chlorine in My Sample= 0.835g Cl

Percent Error
Percent Error=
(Actual Mass of Cl – Theoretical Mass of Cl) (0.913g-0.835g) (0.078)g
Theoretical Mass of Cl 0.835g 0.835g
=0.0934 or 9.34% Error

Error Analysis

This lab was hurried, and I believe that was the largest source of error in this lab. We had an
over abundance of chlorine in our sample. However, the mass of chlorine was determined by the
difference of the mass of the dehydrated sample and the copper produced. If we had “too much
chlorine”, that was likely because there was not enough copper precipitated out of solution. This, in
turn, was likely because we didn't give the aluminium wire enough time to fully displace the copper in
the solution. If we had left it for longer, there is a much better chance that almost all of the copper
would have come out of solution. If some copper was left in solution, it was unaccounted for and made
our value of chlorine a bit inflated. Our filtration system was also crude and some copper may have
been easily lost back into the solution. I am quite proud of our 9.34% error. However, that was enough
to make Copper(II) Chloride Dihydrate look like an unheard of Copper(III) Chloride Trihydrate.