CHAPTER III – PRESENTATION OF DATA AND RESULTS

Introduction

The researchers conducted an experiment in order to determine the efficiency of powdered

citric acid and baking soda a substitute for the production of carbon dioxide in soda drinks.

There were three set-ups, one controlled group (Group 0) containing a fixed amount of

powdered citric acid and baking soda and two experimental groups. Group 1 having an

increased amount of powdered citric acid and baking soda ang Group 2 having a decreased

amount of the same ingredients where the volume of carbon dioxide produced would be

obtained through the use of a balloon.

The raw data that was gathered in the experiment was gathered in Table A (carbon production

matrix) where the circumference of the balloon, volume of carbon dioxide produced, time taken

to reach maximum inflation, temperature of solution were measured. Afterwards, the data

gathered in the three set-ups were analyzed using Independent Samples T-test as the analysis

tool. Additionally, a two-tailed t test method will be used.

A. PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

 Circumference of the Balloon (in cm)
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Trial 1 Trial 2

Group 0 Group 1 Group 2

Figure 4. Circumference of the Balloon (in cm)

Data found in Table A shows that the amount of powdered citric acid and baking soda

used is directly proportional to the circumference of the balloon and therefore the volume

of the carbon dioxide contained inside it. The Control Group produced an average of

45.8 cm circumference of the balloon, while the Experimental Group 1 (which had an

increased amount of powdered citric acid and baking soda) had an average of 60.6 cm,

a relatively larger increase with a standard deviation of 8.55. On the other hand,

Experimental Group 2, having a decreased amount of powdered citric acid and baking

soda, produced an average of 40.6 cm, which is closer to the Control Group with a

standard deviation of 3.22. Conclusively, the amount of powdered citric acid and baking

soda used is equal to the amount of carbon dioxide produced which, in this case, was

measured and determine through the size of inflation of the balloons

 Volume of Carbon Dioxide Produced (in cm3)
70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Trial 1 Trial 2

Group 0 Group 1 Group 2

Figure 5. Volume of Carbon Dioxide Produced (in cm3)

As previously stated, the circumference of the balloon is a measure of the volume

of carbon dioxide that was produced by the powdered citric acid and baking soda.

Likewise, the two variables show a directly proportional relationship. For instance, the

reaction caused by Group 1, having the largest amount of powdered citric acid and

baking soda, produced the largest amount of carbon dioxide among the three; with an

average of 3750.70 cm3 (as shown by Table B). Inversely, the reaction caused by Group

2 had the smallest (1132.60 cm3).

According to Altott, A. (n.d.), when citric acid is mixed in water, a reaction occurs in

which hydrogen ions from the citric acid are released. These hydrogen ions then react

with the baking soda or sodium bicarbonate after having been mixed to produce carbon

dioxide gas. However, in addition to CO2, the reaction also produced water and sodium

ion, as shown was once again by Fig. 3.

 Therefore, naturally, the larger the amount of each reactant one would use, the

quicker and more potent the reaction time would be, the larger the quantity of the

product it would produce.

Figure 2. Chemical Equation Describing the Reaction Between Citric Acid and Baking Soda:

3NaHCO3 + C6H8O7 → 3Na+ + C6H8O7-3 + 3H2O + 3CO2

Sodium Bicarbonate Citric Acid Sodium Ion Citric Acid Ion Water Carbon Dioxide

Time taken to reach maximum inflation of balloon

(in seconds)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Trial 1 Trial 2

Group 0 Group 1 Group 2

Figure 5. Time taken to reach maximum inflation (in seconds)

The relationship between the amount of powdered citric acid and citric acid and time

taken to reach maximum inflation of balloon based on its reaction is directly proportional

as well. However, several more inferences could be made from the graph. Firstly, it is

evident that the larger the amount of ingredients used, the faster the time of
inflation/reaction as shown in Group 1. However, not much difference was observed in

Group 0 and Group 2 in terms of time of inflation (SD = 0.514 seconds) despite its

difference in amount of powdered citric acid and baking soda.

Temperature of Solution (in °C)

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20
Trial 1 Trial 2

Group 0 Group 1 Group 2

Figure 6. Temperature of Solution (in °C)

This time, the relationship between amount of powdered citric acid and baking soda

and temperature is inversely proportional. Basically, an increased amount of powdered

citric acid and baking soda used would result to a colder (decreased) temperature of its

solution. For example, the solution of powdered citric acid and baking soda in Group 1

was the coldest among the three (22.5°C) because of the measurements’ increased

state. This is due to the fact that the reaction between citric acid and baking soda is

referred to as an endothermic reaction, or the process of chemical reaction which

absorbs heat from its environment, such as the container they are in or one’s fingertips.
 Since the reactants absorb all the heat, and the product of the reaction expends none of

it, theoluteion would cool the container or one’s own fingertips will feel cold. Therefore,

this results to a lower temperature. The larger the chemical reaction produced, more

heat is absorbed, the lower the temperature.

B. ANALYSIS OF DATA

Table C. Group Statistics

Group Statistics (Volume of CO2 Produced)

Group N Mean Std. Deviation
Group 0 2 1622 28.28427
Group 1 2 3751 49.49747
Group 2 2 1132.5 163.3417

Table D. Control Group versus Experimental Group 1

Control Group (Group 0) versus Experimental Group 1 (Group 1)

Group 0 Group 1
Mean 1622 3751
Variance 800 2450
Observations 2 2
Hypothesized Mean 0
Difference
df 2
t Stat -52.81398999
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.000179159
t Critical one-tail 2.91998558
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.000358318
t Critical two-tail 4.30265273

Figure 7. T-Distribution Graph of Group 0 and Group 1

 A two-sample t-test was performed to compare the average volume of carbon dioxide

produced between in the Controlled Group (Group 0) and Experimental Group 1 (Group 1). As

could be observed, there was a significant difference in average volume of carbon dioxide

produced between Group 0 (M = 1622, SD = 28.28) and Group 1 (M = 3751, SD = 49.50); t(2) =

-52.814, p = 4.302.

Based on the data from Table D, the t Statistic is -52.81398999. On the other hand, the

p value is 4.302, obtained through the use of a t-table by correlating the data’s degree of

freedom (2) and its alpha (0.5, having 95% as its level of confidence). In order to determine

whether or not to reject the null hypothesis (Group 1 is efficient compared to Group 0), the t

Statistic should be less than the critical value (t < ±4.302). Since t = -52.814 > -4.302, the t Stat

falls under the rejection region and therefore the null hypothesis shall be rejected, as shown by

the T-Distribution graph the researchers had plotted. Furthermore, the p-value is less than the

alpha (0.0003583 < 0.05), further justifying the result. Conclusively, Group 1 is not efficient in

the production of carbon dioxide compared to Group 0 as the test has shown a significant

difference between the two groups.

Table E. Control Group versus Experimental Group 2

 Control Group (Group 0) versus Experimental Group 2 (Group 2)
Group 0 Group 2 CONCLUSION
Mean 1622 1132.5
Variance 800 26680.5
Observations 2 2
Hypothesized Mean 0
Difference
df 2
t Stat 4.175951
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.02642

t Critical one-tail 2.919986

P(T<=t) two-tail 0.05284017
t Critical two-tail 4.30265273

Figure 8. T-Distribution Graph of Group 0 and Group 2

A two sample t-test was performed to compare the average volume of carbon dioxide

produced between in the Controlled Group (Group 0) and Experimental Group 2 (Group 2). It

was found that there was no significant difference in average volume of carbon dioxide

produced between Group 0 (M = 1622, SD = 28.28) and Group 2 (M = 1132.5, SD = 163.34);

t(2) = 4.176, p = 4.302.

Group 0 and Group 2’s t Statistic is 4.17951, as shown in Table E. Similar to the data shown

in Table D, the two groups’ critical value is 4.302 as well. This signifies that t < ±4.302 and since

4.17951 is less than 4.302 and does not fall within the rejection region, the researchers did not
reject the null hypothesis (Group 2 is efficient compared to Group 0) and concluded that Group

2’s mean volume of carbon dioxide produced bares no significant difference with Group 0’s

mean volume of carbon dioxide.