Hydrochloric Acid Lab Report

v. Reliability
The experiment was unreliable. This is because no repeat trials were performed. A number of possible inconsistencies were outlined with regards to accuracy. As no repeat trials were performed, the results obtained may have merely been the outliers in the experiment so therefore be unreliable. This is because repeat trials need to be performed until a constant result is obtained in order for the experiment to be considered reliable. Ideally, a number of repeat trials should have been performed until a consistent result was obtained in order for the results to be considered reliable. Following repeat trials, an average of the results showing time taken, should have been calculated and noted the results table.
The data collected from this experiment was not reliable as no repeat trials were performed. vi. Validity
This experiment was somewhat valid. This is because the experiment satisfies the aim. The experiment allows the relationship between the surface area and rate of reaction to be realised. That is, that the greater the surface
The type of acid was clearly controlled in the method. It clearly states that hydrochloric acid is representing the digestive chemical whilst the antacid tablets represent the food being digested. It is evident that the hydrochloric acid was the acid used in all aspects of this experiment successfully controlling this variable.
It is not certain whether the amount of acid was controlled throughout the experiment. This is because the amount of acid was not clearly outlined neither in the method nor on the materials list. Because the variable of the amount of solvent (hydrochloric acid) was not explicitly stated or controlled, the experiment can be considered invalid. In order for this aspect of the experiment to be considered valid, the variable of the amount of solvent should have been controlled and outlined in the method/ materials