Free worked solutions · 2026 Edition

IB Chemistry Chemical inquiry worked solutions

Worked solutions to every practice question in Chemical inquiry of Photon Chemistry: Study Guide for the IB Diploma (SL & HL). Try each question, then compare your working with the full solution.

  • SL & HL
  • 15 questions
  • Full worked solutions
  • Free, no sign-up

Basic practice

Question Q01

[1 mark]
A student compares endpoint times at different initial concentrations. Which change best isolates the effect of concentration? A. change the temperature with each concentration
B. keep total volume and the small detected product concentration fixed
C. choose a different endpoint colour for each run
D. use the shortest result only
Show solutionHide solution
B. Keep the measured intervals comparable by fixing total volume and the small detected product concentration. A introduces a temperature confounder, C changes the endpoint, and D selects evidence without justification.

Final answer

B

Question Q02

[1 mark]
A reported molar concentration has unit \mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}}. What does \mathrm{dm^{-3}} contribute to the meaning? A. per cubic decimetre
B. a negative concentration
C. a cubed negative length
D. a negative ion charge
Show solutionHide solution
A. The factor \mathrm{dm^{-3}} means per cubic decimetre. A negative exponent denotes a reciprocal, not a negative concentration, length or ion charge.

Final answer

A

Question Q03

[1 mark]
A spreadsheet gives R^{2}=0.997 for a straight-line fit of two measured variables. Which conclusion is justified?
A. The gradient must be positive.
B. The line accounts for most of the variation in the dependent variable.
C. The independent variable has been proved to cause the change.
D. Every measurement has an uncertainty of 0.3\%.
Show solutionHide solution
B. R^2=0.997 says the line accounts for most observed dependent-variable variation. It supplies neither a gradient sign nor causal proof; the unexplained fraction is not a measurement uncertainty of 0.3\%.

Final answer

B

Question Q04

[1 mark]
A calibration line for a laboratory gauge is supported by measurements between 4.0 and 14.0\,\text{mm}. An unknown reading corresponds to 21.0\,\text{mm} on that line. Which is the strongest next step before reporting the result?
A. Report it because a straight line remains valid for every value.
B. Add repeated measurements at 9.0\,\text{mm} only.
C. Extend the calibration with known standards near 21.0\,\text{mm}.
D. Delete the largest existing calibration point.
Show solutionHide solution
C. Standards near 21.0\,\mathrm{mm} test the relation outside its validated 4.0–14.0\,\mathrm{mm} range. Repeats only near 9.0\,\mathrm{mm} cannot validate extrapolation. Keep existing valid standards.

Final answer

C

Question Q05

[1 mark]
During repeated drop-time measurements, one value is much larger than the rest. The record states that the timer failed to stop and continued running after that drop had landed. Which treatment is justified?
A. Exclude the value and document the recorded timing failure.
B. Keep it because every reading is automatically valid.
C. Exclude the value only because it is furthest from the mean.
D. Replace it with the mean and present it as a measured value.
Show solutionHide solution
A. The recorded timer failure is independent evidence that the interval was not measured as intended. Retain the record and document exclusion. Disagreement alone is insufficient; substituting the mean fabricates a reading.

Final answer

A

Question Q06

[1 mark]
Two fuel tests report energy releases per gram: U, (21.6\pm0.8)\,\text{kJ g}^{-1}; V, (22.4\pm1.0)\,\text{kJ g}^{-1}. Which conclusion is best supported?
A. V is conclusively better because its central value is larger.
B. The reported intervals overlap, so the tests do not establish a clear ranking.
C. U releases more energy per gram because its uncertainty is smaller.
D. V releases more energy because its upper limit is higher.
Show solutionHide solution
B. U spans 20.8–22.4\,\mathrm{kJ\,g^{-1}}; V spans 21.4–23.4\,\mathrm{kJ\,g^{-1}}. The overlap means these bounds do not support a clear ranking. Central values, precision alone or upper limits do not resolve the comparison. These are not supplied confidence intervals.

Final answer

B

Tutorial practice

Question Q07

[6 marks]
A laboratory needs the dissolution enthalpy of dry sodium ethanoate. Its molar mass is supplied. An insulated cup, lid, balance and temperature probe are available. The salt must dissolve completely.
(a) Outline a calorimetry method, including the mass and temperature measurements needed.   [4]
(b) Explain how the measurements give the molar enthalpy, assuming a known solution specific heat capacity and negligible cup heat capacity.   [2]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) Weigh the salt and water separately to establish the salt amount and final solution mass [1]. Measure stable initial water temperature [1]. Add salt, replace the lid and mix until dissolution is complete, with the probe in the bulk liquid [1]. Log temperature and justify the final reading or time extrapolation [1].
(b) Calculate q_{\mathrm{solution}}=m_{\mathrm{solution}}c_p\Delta T using the known solution heat capacity and negligible cup capacity [1]. Obtain n=m_{\mathrm{salt}}/M and \Delta H=-q_{\mathrm{solution}}/n [1]. When heat is in J, divide by 1000 to report \mathrm{kJ\,mol^{-1}}. An exothermic dissolution warms the solution and has negative reaction enthalpy. No numerical enthalpy can be invented without the measurements.

Final answer

Weigh salt/water; measure initial and representative final temperatures. Use q=m_{\mathrm{solution}}c_p\Delta T, n=m_{\mathrm{salt}}/M, and \Delta H=-q/n.

Question Q08

[4 marks]
In an exothermic dissolution, a probe is held beside the freshly added crystals without stirring. It briefly reports a higher temperature than a second probe in the bulk liquid. A student uses this brief local reading to calculate the reaction enthalpy.
(a) Explain the error in this choice and its likely effect on the calculated enthalpy.   [2]
(b) Suggest two changes that would give a representative solution temperature.   [2]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) An unstirred local hot region does not represent the bulk temperature [1]. The exaggerated rise gives too large a positive solution heat and an exothermic reaction enthalpy that is too negative [1].
(b) Mix gently to obtain a representative bulk temperature [1]. Immerse the probe suitably, away from fresh crystals and the cup wall [1]. Repeats alone do not correct a spatial bias.

Final answer

The local hot spot overstates the bulk rise and makes the exothermic enthalpy too negative. Mix gently and immerse the probe away from crystals/wall.

Question Q09

[5 marks]
An analyser reports [\mathrm Q]=(0.0468\pm0.0004)\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}} and then (0.0312\pm0.0004)\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}} after (52.0\pm0.5)\,\mathrm{s}. Use maximum absolute uncertainty addition for subtraction and percentage uncertainty addition for division.
(a) Calculate the mean disappearance rate.   [2]
(b) Determine the percentage uncertainty in this rate.   [2]
(c) Express the rate with an appropriate absolute uncertainty.   [1]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) Subtract concentrations: \Delta c=0.0468-0.0312=0.0156\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}} [1]. Calculate r=0.0156/52.0=3.00\times10^{-4}\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}} [1].
(b) Add the absolute input bounds: \Delta(\Delta c)=0.0004+0.0004=0.0008\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}} [1]. Add relative bounds for division: 100(0.0008/0.0156+0.5/52.0)=6.09\% [1].
(c) The unrounded absolute rate bound is 1.83\times10^{-5}\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}}. Match decimal places to report (3.00\pm0.18)\times10^{-4}\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}} [1]. This is the specified maximum-bound estimate, not a standard deviation.

Final answer

(3.00\pm0.18)\times10^{-4}\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}}; maximum percentage bound 6.09\%.

Question Q10

[5 marks]
A sensor detects a fixed, small product concentration in each trial. Reaction conditions other than initial reagent concentration are held fixed, and the concentration change before detection is negligible relative to each initial reagent concentration. Times to detection are:\begin{array}{cc}c_0/\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}} & t/\mathrm s\\\hline 0.0400 & 120\\0.0800 & 60\\0.120 & 40\end{array}
(a) Calculate reciprocal times and state the concentration dependence supported by these data.   [2]
(b) Explain why reciprocal time is a comparable rate proxy here.   [2]
(c) Suggest how to test the trend more convincingly.   [1]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) Compute reciprocal times 0.00833,\ 0.0167,\ 0.0250\,\mathrm{s^{-1}} [1]. Doubling/tripling initial concentration doubles/triples this proxy, so it is proportional across the supplied range [1].
(b) Every endpoint has the same small product increment [1]. Rate is that increment divided by time; negligible depletion makes the comparison an initial-rate proxy [1]. It is not itself a rate constant.
(c) Repeat measurements and investigate additional concentrations, comparing the trend with repeat uncertainties [1]. The limited relationship does not prove a universal kinetic model.

Final answer

0.00833,\ 0.0167,\ 0.0250\,\mathrm{s^{-1}}; proportional to concentration in this range. Fixed small endpoint; negligible depletion; repeat and extend conditions.

Question Q11

[4 marks]
Endpoint times at one concentration are 54.1, 54.3, 79.8 and 54.2 s. All runs were completed. The notebook identifies no timing fault, but records incomplete mixing during the 79.8 s run. (a) Explain why replacing 79.8 s with 54.2 s and presenting four measured readings would be unacceptable.   [1] (b) State two actions needed before deciding whether the unusual run is valid for the intended method.   [2] (c) State one likely improvement to the collection procedure.   [1]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) The substitute was never measured and would conceal the original evidence [1].
(b) Preserve the original reading and note, and investigate whether incomplete mixing changed the measured endpoint [1]. Repeat the condition using the documented intended mixing procedure [1]. Another specifically justified investigation can supply the second action.
(c) Use a consistent, feasible mixing protocol without changing other conditions [1]. The note prompts investigation; it neither requires automatic deletion nor establishes the direction of every mixing effect. Compare sensitivity to inclusion if validity remains unresolved.

Final answer

Do not invent a replacement. Keep the reading/note, investigate mixing and repeat the condition using a consistent protocol.

Question Q12

[4 marks]
A database study compares published solubilities. Source A states grams of anhydrous solute per 100 g water at 298 K; source B states grams of hydrated solid per 100 g solution at 308 K. A simulation gives a smooth curve generated from a fitted equation using source A. (a) Identify two reasons the published numbers cannot be pooled unchanged.   [2] (b) Explain whether the simulated curve independently confirms source A.   [1] (c) State one record needed to make the secondary-data selection traceable.   [1]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) The temperatures differ [1]. The mass/denominator definitions are incompatible: anhydrous solute versus hydrated solid, and water versus solution [1]. Both of the latter differences together earn one mark here.
(b) No. The equation was fitted using A, so agreement is a consequence of that input rather than independent validation [1].
(c) Record the exact source/version and stated selection criterion, or the included/excluded record identifiers linked to the data [1]. A complete provenance trail also preserves conditions and quantity definitions.

Final answer

Temperature and quantity definitions differ. The fitted simulation is not independent confirmation. Preserve a precise source/version and selection record.

Advanced practice

Question Q13

HL[6 marks]
Initial-rate measurements for a single-reactant model give:\begin{array}{cc}[\mathrm Q]_0/\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}} & r_0/\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}}\\\hline .040 & 1.6\times10^{-3}\\.080 & 3.2\times10^{-3}\\.120 & 4.8\times10^{-3}\end{array}
(a) Plot the three points with labelled axes and draw the expected best-fit line.   [2]
(b) Deduce the order and rate law from the graph.   [1]
(c) Calculate k, with units.   [2]
(d) Predict the initial rate for [\mathrm Q]_0=0.100\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}}.   [1]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) Put initial Q concentration on the horizontal axis in \mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}}, and initial rate vertically in \mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}} [1]. Plot (0.040,0.0016), (0.080,0.0032) and (0.120,0.0048) and draw the straight line through the origin [1]. A newly drawn local answer plot is supplied separately.
(b) Direct proportionality supports first order in Q, r=k[\mathrm Q] [1].
(c) Calculate k=0.0016/0.040=0.040 [1], with unit \mathrm{s^{-1}} [1].
(d) Predict r_0=0.040(0.100)=4.0\times10^{-3}\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}} [1]. The measured range supports the stated model, not an elementary mechanism.

Final answer

First order: r=k[\mathrm Q], k=0.040\,\mathrm{s^{-1}}; predicted r_0=4.0\times10^{-3}\,\mathrm{mol\,dm^{-3}\,s^{-1}}.

Question Q14

[7 marks]
An approved gas-density method weighs the same dry vessel before and after filling at fixed temperature and pressure. Empty mass =(65.214\pm0.002)\,\mathrm g; filled mass =(65.286\pm0.002)\,\mathrm g; gas volume =(40.0\pm0.4)\,\mathrm{cm^3}. Assume no leakage or retained liquid. Use maximum absolute bounds for subtraction and add relative bounds for division. (a) Calculate gas mass and its absolute uncertainty.   [2] (b) Calculate density in \mathrm{g\,dm^{-3}} and its percentage uncertainty.   [2] (c) Give density with an absolute uncertainty and judge compatibility with a supplied reference value of 1.90\,\mathrm{g\,dm^{-3}}, whose uncertainty is negligible here and whose conditions match.   [2] (d) Suggest one feasible measurement change that reduces the largest relative contribution without assuming that repeats remove bias.   [1]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) Gas mass is 65.286-65.214=0.072\,\mathrm g [1]; its maximum bound is 0.002+0.002=0.004\,\mathrm g [1].
(b) Convert volume to 0.0400\,\mathrm{dm^3}; density is 0.072/0.0400=1.80\,\mathrm{g\,dm^{-3}} [1]. The percentage bound is 100(0.004/0.072+0.4/40.0)=6.56\% [1].
(c) The unrounded absolute bound is 0.118\,\mathrm{g\,dm^{-3}}, giving (1.80\pm0.12)\,\mathrm{g\,dm^{-3}} [1]. Its rounded interval 1.68–1.92\,\mathrm{g\,dm^{-3}} contains 1.90, so the bound does not resolve a discrepancy [1]. This does not exclude systematic bias.
(d) Use a suitable balance with smaller uncertainty, or a validated larger gas mass and measured volume in approved apparatus [1]. Mass is the largest relative contribution. Repeats cannot be assumed to remove bias; do not prescribe an unapproved pressure increase.

Final answer

m=(0.072\pm0.004)\,\mathrm g; \rho=(1.80\pm0.12)\,\mathrm{g\,dm^{-3}}, 6.56\%. Compatible within these bounds; reduce the balance contribution.

Question Q15

[6 marks]
A blank-correctable assay gives A=0.750c+0.020 for c in \mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}}, validated from 0 to 0.600\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}}. A 10.00\,\mathrm{cm^3} sample is diluted to 50.00\,\mathrm{cm^3}. Its diluted absorbance is 0.320\pm0.015; take line coefficients and volume uncertainties as negligible for this exercise. (a) Calculate the original concentration.   [2] (b) Obtain its absolute uncertainty from the stated absorbance bound.   [2] (c) A high-concentration standard at 1.00\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}} gives A=0.610\pm0.015. Explain what this suggests about extrapolating the line.   [2]
Show solutionHide solution
(a) The measured diluted concentration is (0.320-0.020)/0.750=0.400\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}} [1]. Multiply by 50.00/10.00=5.000 for original concentration 2.00\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}} [1]. The diluted sample is the one within the calibration range.
(b) The diluted bound is 0.015/0.750=0.020\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}} [1]. Scaling by five gives original (2.00\pm0.10)\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}} [1]. Coefficient/volume uncertainties are negligible only by the question's assumptions.
(c) Extrapolation predicts A=0.750(1.00)+0.020=0.770. The 0.160 difference exceeds the 0.015 absorbance bound [1]. Repeat high standards and test the model range; the dilute line is not validated at 1.00\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}} [1]. Retain the point; its cause is not uniquely identified.

Final answer

Original c=(2.00\pm0.10)\,\mathrm{mmol\,dm^{-3}}. The 0.160 high-standard residual exceeds 0.015; extrapolation is unvalidated.

Connected questions

From the book

Photon Chemistry: Study Guide for the IB Diploma (SL & HL)

Chemical inquiry from the core ideas to full exam questions, with question types, worked examples and graded practice.

About the book