Perrin Kileen

10/12/15
Lab Report

Spectroscopy Investigation of Metals in Solution

(All Work Done with Frequency and Intensity)
Introduction
The general goal of this lab was to further investigate what metal ions were present in the
river and determine the specific quantities they existed in. By gaining this information we are
able to find whether the Animas is safe or not. The metal ions we were looking for included
sodium, potassium, copper, calcium, lithium, and strontium. To determine whether these were
present we used three different types of spectroscopy. The first test we conducted included
turning the ions to plasma using a bunsen burner. For the second test we used a spectrometer to
look at various ion types and for the third test was a spectrum tube with a spectroscope.
When using the method of spectroscopy, understanding the different models for the atom
is an important part of the process. The two most commonly used representations are the bohr
and the quantum mechanical model. The bohr model, which can only be used to represent the
hydrogen atom, is easier to understand. It is shown by a nucleus in the middle and rings around it
where the electron orbits. When waves of energy hits the electron it causes it to bounce to
another ring. When it bounces back to its original orbit it releases energy in the form of light.
Different colors are emitted from the process depending on how large the bounce is that the
electron makes. For our lab we used the quantum mechanic model because it is more precise and
the bohr model can only represent hydrogen. Due to the complexity of the model computers are
often used to make equations for it and show how the atoms will react to each other. By using
this model, we were able to determine what ions were present by the colors that were given off.
We then compared this with certain light patterns that result from certain elements.
Quantum Mechanical Model:

Bohr Model:

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report

A large part of this lab was spectrum, this can be recorded by using a number of methods.
The first test we conducted was qualitative and therefore was less accurate than the second test.
For this part of the experiment we took melamine foam on the end of a nichrome wire and
soaked it in various chemical compounds. We then proceeded to use a bunsen burner and hold
the sample in the flame. This produced a different color for each compound. Which allowed for
us to compare known samples to our unknowns and figure out what they consisted of. Our next
test, which was the most accurate, consisted of using a spectrophotometer. This test works in a
similar way to the second test. We took the various samples and turned them to plasma using a
flame, then used the spectrophotometer to measure the result. This piece of equipment is used to
detect atomic emissions. It does this by using a medium which absorbs light from the plasma,
and then measure the light. The information is then transferred to a computer where the atomic
emissions and concentration are graphed. To find our unknown and determine what was in the
river samples we tested sodium chloride, potassium chloride, lithium chloride and strontium
chloride. We then compared these to our unknown and river samples and were able to see what
ions were present. The final test included looking at various samples through a spectrum tube.
This method shows the colors the element(s) give off. By using a spectrum tube we were able to
see what colors showed up on a spectrum scale. By comparing this to known elements we could
determine what elements existed in the water samples and unknowns.
Currently, the most advanced technology available for spectroscopy is called a
microwave plasma- atomic emission spectrometry(MP-AES). This machine works by harnessing
microwaves to create plasma in a form that is easily placed using sample aerosol. The plasma is
created using nitrogen and a torch and the sample aerosol is then atomized in the torch. The light
waves that the sample creates is diffracted using mirrors and scanned through a monochromator
which transfers the data to a ccd detector. The MP-AES is extremely accurate due to the

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report
elimination of human error and contaminates. It runs solely off a computer and uses reference
and control samples to produce accurate data.

Results
Part I Results:
Solution

Flame Color

Control

No reaction

NaCl

Light orange, bright

CuCl2

Mint green, light blue, slightly

orange

LiCl

Orange, pinkish red

KCl

Pink, orange

CaCl2

Mostly orange, small amount of

pink

SrCl2

Reddish pink, orange

Unknown 1

Orange

Unknown 2

Purple, some orange

CC #13

Orange

A72 #1

Blue, orange

To conduct the flame test we used a bunsen burner which heated melamine foam on a nichrome
wire. The foam was soaked in various chemical compounds and reacted by changing the color of
the flame. We repeated this for our unknowns and the river samples to determine what was
present in them.

Part II Results:

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report
Intensity vs. Wavelength for KCl
Peak Wavelengths: 490nm, 765nm

Intensity vs. Wavelength for LiCl

Peak Wavelengths: 672nm

Intensity vs. Wavelengths for NaCl

Peak Wavelengths: 592nm

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report

Intensity vs. Wavelength for SrCl2

Peak Wavelengths: 540nm, 615nm

Intensity and Wavelength for Unknown 3

Peak Wavelengths: 775nm, 605nm, 670nm, 684nm

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report

Intensity and Wavelengths for Water Sample 7:

Peak Wavelengths: N/A

To conduct this test we used a spectrophotometer to measure the wavelengths that colors showed
up in. To use this device we turned our sample to plasma using a bunsen burner. We then used the
optic nerve to measure the colors. This data was transferred to the computer through a USB
connection.
Part III Results:
Figure 1:

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report

Figure 2:

Figure 3:

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report

Sample

Results

Sample A

Violate=440, Turquoise=475, Red=660

Sample B

Violate=425, Light Green=540

Sample C

Violate=430, Dark Green=500, Light

Orange=530

For our final test, we used a spectroscope to identify unknown plasma samples. A spectroscope
works by diffracting light from the plasma samples onto the color spectrum. By doing this we
were able to examine the three samples, compare them to the known elements, and determine
what the elements were.

Discussion
1. The first test we performed was the flame test. For this test we heated melamine
foam with a compound soaked into it to create plasma. We then observed this reaction
and wrote down our results. The final goal was to find two unknown substances by
comparing the unknowns to the knowns. We have substantial evidence to believe our first
unknown was sodium chloride due the reaction. The unknown burned orange which was
the same color as sodium chlorides reaction. Orange is also the most prominent on the
spectrum for sodium chloride and therefore is the most feasible compound. After looking
at our second unknown we were able to conclude that it was most likely strontium
chloride because it was pink, purple and orange during the flame test. Pink, purple and
orange are the strongest colors on the spectrum for strontium chloride which made it most
likely to be this compound. Due to the fact that this test was largely based on observation,
I am not as confident in the results. This form of testing was the least complicated of the
three tests we conducted and did not require any instruments except for melamine,
nichrome wire, a bunsen burner and the compounds. We were able to determine that the
metal was what reacted to the flame. This is due to the fact that while our non-metal
chlorine was in all the compounds, but the metals all had different reactions. For our
control substance we used melamine foam soaked in distilled water. The significance of
the control is to ensure that our materials dont cause a reaction with the flame which
could affect results. When the foam was placed in the flame there was no change in color

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report
which ensured that there no contamination. For our river samples we were required to use
another group's data because there was no samples available when we conducted the lab.
The two samples I looked at both reacted to the flame because there were ions present.
The first sample (CC#13) created an orange flame. Therefore it is reasonable to speculate
that most of ions came from calcium and sodium which are both predominantly orange.
The other sample was (A72#1) created a blue and orange flame. The ions in this sample
were most likely copper, calcium and sodium. These three elements had colors that
showed up in the river sample.
2. Our second test was conducted with a device called a spectrophotometer. This
device reads the spectrum of plasma created by a flame and pin points which ions are
present and the concentration of these ions. Unfortunately, I was not able to use the
screenshots I took because of technical difficulties and had to use another groups instead.
This method of measurement was substantially more accurate because it reads the
specific amounts of ions present and graphs them on the emissions spectrum. This test
allows us to see if more than one metal is present in a sample because of the accuracy and
its ability to show multiple multiple atomic emissions. For our lab we tested unknown #3
and found that the highest concentration of ions was potassium which peaked at about
775. We were able to draw this conclusion because it showed up as red, yellow and green
on the emission spectrum which are all part of potassium's spectrum. The other metal that
was present is strontium. Strontium peaked at 605, 670 and 684 which matched its known
atomic emissions on the spectrum scale and accounted for the other unknown metal. I am
confident that both of these metals were in the unknown because they correlated with
their known atomic emissions. They also matched the peaks on the spectrum. On the
graph, we used peaks to find the intensity and emission lines. Due to the fact that a water
sample was not available during our lab I talked to other students about the results for the
water samples. There was no detection of any ions in the samples even though they were
most likely present, this probably because the concentration was too low for the
spectrophotometer to see. The y-axis shows the intensity of the emission while the x-axis
shows where the element falls on the atomic emission spectrum. The metals that we
would have been able to detect if we had used more accurate methodology such as the
MP-AES would have included sodium, potassium, copper, calcium, lead, magnesium,
lithium, and strontium. These are the metals that were the most concentrated from other
data that I looked at. If we had been able to access this method of testing I am confident
that these metals would have shown up, but in a lower concentration.
3. For our final test we used a spectroscope which works by diffracting light and
separating it into its element colors. Our first sample, sample A, was hydrogen. I was
able to find by looking at and comparing different element spectrums. Sample A showed

Perrin Kileen
10/12/15
Lab Report
emission lines at 440, 475 and 660. This was very similar to Hydrogens emission lines
which are at 434, 486 and 656. Sample B closest match was mercury. Sample Bs
emission lines fell at 425 and 540, this is similar to mercurys which is 546 and 435.
Sample C was likely helium. Sample Cs emission lines were at 430, 500 and 580. The
closest element was helium because the emission lines were 445, 585 and 505. The issue
with using a spectroscope is that while most emission lines are bright enough for the
human eye infrared ultraviolet light are not visible. For this reason using equipment like
the MP-AES increases the accuracy of your results. Due to the different energy levels of
energy each element gives off certain lines may appear brighter than others. Each element
has a distinct set of colors that it gives off. The array of colors are the result of electrons
teleporting from one orbital to another. The color of the light depends on the distance
and energy of this jump.