By Logan Olsen, Chase Huntley, Chuck Corbett
HCl (aq) + NaHCO3(aq) → NaCl (aq) + H2O(l) + CO2(g)
We tried HCl and baking soda at first, but after many inconsistent trials we switched to Vinegar
and baking soda.
Pv=nRT
R=0.08205 L*atm/mol*K
T=293 K (room temp.)
V=0.7 L (volume of propel bottle)

_____(2.5 atm)(0.7 L)______ = 0.073 mol CO2(g)
(0.08205 L*atm/mol*K )(293 K)
0.073 mol CO2(g)
L
12.1 mol
1 mol NaHCO3
84 g NaHCO3
1 mol CO2
1 mol NaHCO3
0.073 mol HCl
= 6.1152 g of baking soda
= .00603 L HCl
All of the mole ratios are one to one. To find the amount of liters needed of
HCl we used the molarity of HCl and canceled the moles out. In our
experiment we multiplied all of the values by two because we increased our
pressure to 5.0 atm.
CH3COOH (aq) + H2O(l) + NaHCO3(aq) → H2O(l) + CO2(g) + NaCH3COO(aq)
The vinegar had five percent acidic acid- 5% (AA)
Pv=nRT
R=0.08205 L*atm/mol*K
T=293 K (room temp.)
V=0.7 L (volume of propel bottle)
0.146 mol CO2(g) ______(5.0
1 mol NaHCO
84 g= NaHCO
atm)(0.73L)______
0.146 mol3CO2(g)
(0.08205 L*atm/mol*K )(293 K)
1 mol CO2
0.146 mol
AA
1 mol NaHCO3
60 g AA
1 Cm3 AA
100 mL Vin
1 mol AA
1.05 g AA
5 mL AA
= 12.264 g
baking soda
= 166.85 mL
Vinegar
We made other calculations for various pressure values (4, 4.25, 4.5, and
4.75 atm). But after some trials we determined that having 5 atm was the
correct amount to have for the car to travel a distance of 25 ft.
Car Design
Design #1: Our first design was poorly designed. Although it was rather simple,
it didn’t uphold the ability to sustain the thrust of the pressure released
Design #2: Our second design was also unsuccessful. It also dealt
with the same problems.
Design #3: Our final design is shown in the pictures posted above. It
worked well for the amounts of vinegar and baking soda. Although we
didn’t win the finals, the size of our car would result in the destruction of
any other car to itty bitty pieces!!! Our car also is known to attack
professors who wear shorts everyday.
Semi Final Graph Results
Reaction
Vinegar / BS
∆ Run ∆ Run ∆ Run ∆ Run ∆ Run ∆ Run
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
25 out -185 s
-80 s
-185 s
180 s
-30 s
Distance Cum
Place
Total
5
110
CumPla Comme
ce
nts
4
Distance for each Run
300
250
200
150
Distance (inches)
100
50
0
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Run 5 Run 6
Spew
Mr. Smooth!

If you click on the link below you will see a
brief video clip of how nonchalant Dr. Skip
moves out of the way to dodge this speeding
car of fury.
Conclusions




Overall our car was consistent. In the semifinals we took advantage of the fact that we
had unlimited runs in a two hour time period.
We ran at least ten trials in the semis and had
two strong enough scores to propel us into the
finals. Our car ranged from about 10 to 20
feet.
In the finals we didn’t do as well we wanted
but we finished in the middle of the pack.
We tried to nail Dr. Skip but he was far to
elusive for our car.
Opening the valve was the biggest source of
error in our experiment.
Final Thoughts
We could have changed our design to be
smaller and easier to get started by the
force created by the chemical reaction.
 We only tried two chemical reactions.
There are many more safe chemical
reactions that we didn’t try that could have
been more effective and create less spew.
 We created the most spew out of anyone
so we should most definitely get extra
credit.
