4-Methylcyclohexanol

Objective: The purpose of this experiment was to synthesize adipic acid from cyclohexanol via an oxidation reaction that was catalyzed by sulfuric acid. Purity of the product was assessed by measuring the melting point.

Another source of error was that the size of the filter paper was awfully small. This made it so the chances of spilling the precipitate and not getting it in the funnel was much greater than it should have been. Some of the product was lost during the transfer from the beaker to the funnel due to this factor, in the end reducing the total yield recovered. Lastly the substances used may not be 100% pure, this means that the mass of the reactants could have been less than the actual measured amount. This means the mathematically calculated theoretical yield was larger than it should have been.

The highest percent yield is seen in trial 3 whereas the lowest percent yield is seen in trial 4. Sample calculations:- Trial 1:- Moles of Na2CO3 = Molarity × Volume = (1.00 moles ×25.10 mL×1 liter)/(Litres×1000mL) = 0.00251 moles Moles of CaCl2 =

The most prominent error for this lab is the actual mass of the product. The actual mass of the copper we obtained is greater than the theoretical yield. The actual mass of the copper is 2.436 grams and the theoretical mass is 2.343 grams. The percent yield exceeds 100% and there is a great percent error of 3.969%. The cause of this error could possibly be the result of the impurity of the product. The solid copper product was left in the oven to dry overnight. It is possible that not all of the water has evaporated from the solid copper which would greatly influence the mass of the product. Another possibility is the accumulation of particles from the atmosphere into the solid copper and onto the filter paper. While the product was wet, dust particles from the air could have been pulled into the moisture.

The purpose of this experiment is to produce cyclohexene through the acid catalyzed elimination of water from cyclohexanol. Secondary alcohols like as cyclohexanol, undergo dehydration by E1 mechanism. In this experiment the important intermediate in the mechanism is the cyclohexyl cation. This intermediate can undergo both substitution and elimination reactions. In order to prepare the cyclohexene in a desired yield, it is imperative to the substitution reaction. In this experiment, the substitution reaction is suppressed by firstly, the use of strong acids with anions that are relatively poor nucleophiles ; secondly, a high reaction temperature that favours the elimination reaction as opposed to the substitution reaction; and lastly, the distillation of cyclohexene from the reaction mixture as it is formed. The dehydration of cyclohexanol is strategically done so as to have the product, cyclohexene, distilling from the reaction mixture as it is being formed; the distillation technique serves to remove the cyclohexene from contact with the sulphuric acid before polymerization occurs. In order to obtain pure cyclohexene from the crude distillate, one has to treat with the addition of calcium chloride that helps to get rid of the water and part of the cyclohexanol, thereafter, distillation aids in separating the rest of the cyclohexanol.

The graph produced from the Gas Chromatography showed that a reaction occurred because there are peaks on the graph. Each peak represents a major product formed. Since there are two peaks on the graph 2 major products formed. The theoretical yield of the alkene mixture was 3.914 g; however, the actual yield of the mixture was 0.73 g. The percent yield for the reaction was 18.65%. Considering the percent yield, the reaction was not efficient. The difference in the theoretical yield and the percent yield is most likely due to the reaction incomplete reaction. Instead of distilling the reaction to completion, it was stopped after 3 mL of product was obtained. To improve the percent yield the reaction could be taken to closer to completion by continuing distillation past 3 mL of product formed. The low percent yield could also be a result of the extraction. When removing the liquid from the crystals product could have remained behind.

This gave me a percent recovery of 48%. Some sources of error for this lab could have occurred during the liquid-liquid extractions. I could have taken part of the wrong layer in my extraction, which would affect the results of the experiment. The major functional group in acetic acid is carboxylic acid.

The results suggest that the Theoretical Yield was 4.2246 grams and the Actual Yield was 4.24 grams, which gave a Percent Yield of 100.473% and a Percent Error of 0.473%. The actual yield was greater than the theoretical yield. It is suggested that it was greater than because I used two different filter papers and I only measured one. If I had measured the two different papers, I would probably obtain a different mass for each of them. Because I am only off by 0.02 grams, that could have been the reason why I didn’t get the mass I should have obtained.

If 48g of Mg produces 80g of MgO, than 1g of Mg produces: (80.6 g)/(48.6 g) = 1.66g of MgO. So if started with 0.66g of Mg, this means 0.66g x 1.66g = 1.0956g of MgO should have been received. (Theoretical yield) Percentage yield of MgO = (1.01 g)/(1.0956 g) x 100% = 92.18 % The percentage yield of the product is quite high, this shows that experiment was 92.18% accurate.

Since the temperature of the aluminum block did not exceed 100 ℃, the temperature of the reaction was 100 ℃ as well. The reflux that was caused by the magnetic stirrer allowed the reaction to have the necessary thermal energy to perform the reaction. The crystals that formed at the end was the acetaminophen.

After steam distillation occurred, the solvent was exposed to the open air for seven days. The Cinnamaldehyde built up in the bottom of the test tube, baring the color brown. The calculated actual percent yield of my experiment was 1.55%. This calculation fell in the range of the literature percent yield of Cinnamaldehyde which is between 1.00-3.00%.

Purpose: In this experiment, there are five known compounds given and one unknown compound. The known compounds are: aldehydes, ketones, primary and secondary alcohol, and ester. The Dumas method is used to determine what the unknown substance is. Both Aldehydes and Ketones are similar in a way that they both have carbonyl groups in their Lewis structure; the only difference between the two are that aldehydes are quickly oxidized into carboxylic acids whereas it more difficult to achieve.1 There are three different types of alcohols; there are primary, secondary and tertiary alcohols.

The results are consistent with what I expected, although there were major sources of error in all trials. The percentage errors for all 3 trials were relatively low. Percentage error is used to compare actual mass to theoretical mass, and is expressed as a percentage. The lower the percentage error, the closer your predicted measurements (theoretical yield) are to the definite measurements (actual yield). We were asked to choose the trial with the least percentage error as our final trial.

The percent error was found by subtracting the lowest HCl/NaOH ratio from the highest ratio. The answer was then divided

ex. Test tube 1, 0 mol/L solute concentration: 1.6 – 1.3 ÷ 1.3 × 100 = 23.08%