Experiment Eight: Spectrophotometric Analysis Of A Comple

Name: Mark Aw NOTE: This experimental report, including an abstract and the answ
gtID: 902510497 must be submitted via the T-Square report submission link within 72
Section: a1
Email: markaw91@gatech.edu m/l
Unknown No: 47 co 0.188
cr 0.05

wavelength 1= 399.3
wavelength 2= 503.9
A1 A2 A1-A2 A1/A2
Blank 0 0 0 0 concentration
Co g/L
1) 0.047 0.184 -0.137 0.255 2.216
2) 0.008 0.366 -0.358 0.022 4.432
3) 0.052 0.567 -0.515 0.092 6.647
4) 0.115 0.750 -0.635 0.153 8.863
11.079
Cr g/L
1) 0.170 0.076 0.094 2.237 0.520
2) 0.310 0.127 0.183 2.441 1.040
3) 0.430 0.183 0.247 2.350 1.560
4) 0.665 0.254 0.411 2.618 2.080
2.600

unknown mixture: %Co

1) 0.3620 0.2720 0.090 1.3309 43.65
2) 0.3700 0.2810 0.089 1.3167 45.56
3) 0.3660 0.2710 0.095 1.3506 42.87

1) 0.3750 0.2800 0.095 1.3393 44.66

2) 0.3770 0.2820 0.095 1.3369 45.06
3) 0.3620 0.2750 0.087 1.3164 44.59

Mean 0.3687 0.2768 0.0918 1.3318 44.40

Standard Dev. 0.0064 0.0048 0.0036 0.0134 0.98

Points
Final Grade
 A λ −aCo λ 1
1
aCr λ 1 b
Plot Absorbance vs Concentration graphs for both Co and Cr on ONE graph!

Absorbance vs. Concentration 0=aCr λ 2 b

(
Absorbance

1
0.9
f(x) = 0.016638462131623 x + 0.007508776260441
0.8
f(x) = 0.040536206014955 x − 0.010735707879919
0.7
0.6 Co
0.5 @399.3
nm
0.4
Linear (Co
0.3 @399.3
f(x) = 0.01486574944113 x + 0.011244133188174
0.2 nm)
0.1
f(x) = 0.001896896262235 x + 0.001789558418357
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Concentration (M)
alysis Of A Complex Mixture
uding an abstract and the answers to questions
eport submission link within 72 hours of completion.

g/mol
58.93
51.9961

5ml
10ml
15ml
20ml

5ml
10ml
15ml
20ml

% not Co or
%Cr Cr mass (g) Co concentCr concent
42.64 13.71 0.5005 g 8.73026 8.528704
43.54 10.90 0.5014 g 9.111166 8.708365
43.17 13.95 0.5004 g 8.574823 8.634761

44.20 11.14 0.5005 g 8.932592 8.840199

44.43 10.51 0.5014 g 9.012096 8.885852
42.60 12.81 0.5004 g 8.918927 8.519853

43.43 12.17 0.5008

0.77 1.51 0.0005

absorptivity in units of L/g-cm <-- the slope of the regression lines

A1 Co 0.0019
A2 Co 0.0166
A1 Cr 0.0405
A2 Cr 0.0149
A λ =aCr λ 1 bc Cr + aCo λ 1 bcCo
1
A λ =aCr λ 2 bc Cr + aCo λ 2 bcCo
2
A λ −aCo λ 1 bc Co
1
=c Cr
aCr λ 1 b
A λ − aCo λ 1 bc Co
0=aCr λ 2 b
( 1
aCr λ 1 b )+ aCo λ 2 bcCo − A λ
2

TABLE OF RESULTS:
Co= 8.87997743 g/L
Cr= 8.68628912 g/L
44.40 % Co in sample
43.43 % Cr in sample
12.17 % of sample that was neither Co or Cr

Note: This spreadsheet is only meant to be a guide to the

calculations required for the experiment. If you notice
that the experimental procedure calls for other
calculations, you are still required to perform those.

Note: All calculations not inherent to this spreadsheet

must have their formula and calculations shown.
Abstract
NOTE: Your abstract should be clear, concise and well thought out.
It should never contain first person, and should always be in a past,
passive voice. An abstract should briefly describe what the goal(s) of
the experiment were, how you attained those goals, numerical
result(s) of the experiment, and concluding statement.
The objective of the lab is to obtain a representative sample of a dispersible solid and determine the composition of the sample
of two metals were obtained and pipetted into 25 ml volumetric flasks with varying molarities and diluted with DI water. Logg
to begin finding the absorbance of the different concentrations for each of the two metals to create an absorbance vs concentrat
absorbance was greatest. The absorbtivity was then found from the slope, giving a value for each metal at each absorbance wav
into a formula to solve for the percent composition. The percent composition of unknown 47 was determined to be 44.4% +/- 0
43.43% +/- 0.77%. The experiment was successful and fairly accurate due to a homogenous mixture and low standard deviatio

TA Comments:

Points:
d determine the composition of the sample by visible spectrophotometry. Stock solutions
molarities and diluted with DI water. Logger Pro was then used along with a spectrometer
tals to create an absorbance vs concentration graph using the two wavelengths where the
lue for each metal at each absorbance wavelength. The observed data can then be plugged
own 47 was determined to be 44.4% +/- 0.8% Co and the %Cr was determined to be
genous mixture and low standard deviation.
Questions: (Include these in the spreadsheet in the spa
1
The instrument was double beam because the solution contains more than one chromophore that ends up
being the sum of the absorbances of each component. The two beams are used to calibrate the blank and to
measure the absorbancies of the metal complexes

TA Comments:

Points:

2
The precision of the result was precise, with a 0.98% standard deviation for %Co and a 0.77% standard
devaition for %Cr. Sources of inaccuracies include not making the mixture homogenous enough to ensure equal
metal ratios throughout and losing some mass while quantitatively transfering and making the homogenous
mixture. A machine can be used to make the homogenization process efficient and perfect. The transfer of
samples using DI can then be used to quantitatively transfer the crystals.

TA Comments:

Points:

3
The weight percent of each three samples vary a bit due to the fact that the homogenous mixture was not
perfectly homogenous and the fact that samples were lost while quantitatively transfering the crystals.Another
problem was the fact that the wavelengths seemed to vary when trying to see if the absorbance measurement
was repeatable. It was repeatable, but the wavelengths would vary by 50-60 nm.

TA Comments:

Points:

4
Different cuvettes would bring in more room for systematic and random errors. Each cuvette may result in a
different blank calibration and each cuvette may not be perfectly the same length b. Each cuvette may then
skew their respective data in a certain way and to minimize the error one cuvette should be used. The cuvettes
were washed with DI then prewashed a few times with the sample before measuring the absorbancy.
TA Comments:

Points:
hore that ends up
ate the blank and to

.77% standard
enough to ensure equal
g the homogenous
ct. The transfer of

mixture was not

the crystals.Another
rbance measurement

tte may result in a

cuvette may then
be used. The cuvettes
absorbancy.
 Concentration Absorbance at 399.3 nm Absorbance at 503.9 nm
Conc Abs-399.3 Abs-503.9
mol/L

10.943 0.0472160236436 0.183612531974

21.885 0.00842883562167 0.36561887604
32.828 0.0519113748027 0.567388127455
43.771 0.115067822007 0.750398197393
54.714 0.0976821853963 0.901579961187

Concentration Absorbance at 399.3 nm Absorbance at 503.9 nm

Conc Abs-399.3 Abs-503.9
mol/L

4.001 0.170176197557 0.0751436260849

8.003 0.310087752658 0.127204406739
12.004 0.430397754595 0.183188159735
16.006 0.664873221308 0.253538786211
20.007 0.803810155706 0.309402834377

Absorbance vs. Concentration

Absorbance

1
0.9
f(x) = 0.016638462131623 x + 0.007508776260441
0.8
f(x) = 0.040536206014955 x − 0.010735707879919
0.7
0.6 Co
0.5 @399.3
nm
0.4
Linear (Co
0.3 @399.3
f(x) = 0.01486574944113 x + 0.011244133188174
0.2 nm)
0.1
f(x) = 0.001896896262235 x + 0.001789558418357
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Concentration (M)
 comcem

10.943
21.885
32.828
43.771
54.714

4.001
8.003
12.004
16.006
20.007

Co
@399.3
nm
Linear (Co
@399.3
nm)