Amira Aquarian

October 15, 2019

Chemistry
Lab Write-Up
Flame Spectroscopy Investigation Lab Write-Up
Part 1:
Results:

Table 1: Observations of know variables and unknown variables

Solution: Flame Color: Picture:

Barium Yellow and purple

(Ba)

Lithium A combination of red, pink,

(Li) and orange
Potassium A combination of white and
(K) purple

Calcium Orange with a slight tint of

(Ca) yellow

Sodium A combination of white,

(Na) orange, and yellow
Unknown #1 A combination of red, pink,
and orange

Unknown #2 Orange with a slight tint of

yellow

Pictures are taken from: ​http://www.mrpalermo.com/virtual-lab-spectroscopy.html

Discussion:

1. How is the color observed in the flame test related to the emission line
spectrum?
When the thermal energy from the fire excites the specific atoms, the
electrons on said specific atom first increases then decreases energy levels,
therefore the distance from the nucleus changes. (The further away it is, the
higher the energy is). When the electron decreases energy, they release that
energy as light and that light comes out in different wavelengths and/or
intensities, which then translates to the visible spectrum when the light reaches
your eyes.
2. Which elements are your unknowns?
a. I have determined that unknown #1 is Lithium (Li). When comparing the
flame of unknown #1 to the five known solutions, I saw that Lithium had
the same red/pink/orange colored flame as the unknown. To make sure
there wasn’t another substance that looked similar in flame color, I
compared the picture of unknown #1 to all the others and found that there
were no others that looked similar enough to be considered the same
substance. Because of this, I am quite confident that my answer is correct.
b. I believe that unknown #2 can be classified as Calcium (Ca). I determined
this by examining the flame color of this unknown substance and then
comparing it to each known substance aside from Lithium because I
identified that as unknown #1. I saw that the orange flame with a slight tint
of yellow resembled the Calcium flame. I am confident in my answer
because no other substance flame was similar enough to be classified as
unknown #2.

3. Classify the flame test data and the emission line spectrum data separately
as qualitative or quantitative.
The flame test data would be classified as qualitative. This is because the
data is descriptions of what I saw from the experiment, which would be
considered qualitative. The emission line spectrum would be the opposite of the
flame test data, it would be considered quantitative. It would fit into this category
because the emission line has specific numbers representing the data instead of
just a description like the flame test data. I think that the quantitative data would
be easier to use because it gives you specific numbers, meaning you can more
accurately analyze the data. On the contrary, I think that data represented in a
qualitative form would be easier to use. It gives you a general view of what the
data is representing, for example, the final color of the flame instead of the colors
that make up the wavelengths.
Part 2:
Results:

Table 2: Spectrophotometer Graphs of Substances’ Peak Wavelengths and Intensities

Name of Peak Wavelength Intensity Photo
Substances (nm) (ref)

NaCI 588 0.047

Figure 1

SrCl​2 606 0.025

670 0.032
681 0.039

Figure 2

LiCI 670 0.042

Figure 3

KCI 787 0.033

Figure 4
Unknown #3 607 0.021
(KCI and ​SrCl​2 )​ 674 0.03
683 0.032
789 0.36

Figure 5

Discussion:

1. How is it possible to detect one metal in the presence of another using

spectroscopy?
Each singular metal is different from every other metal. This means that
they have unique and different wavelengths from each other, making the process
of identifying which metal is which when using spectroscopy clear and quite
easy. When using spectroscopy to determine which metals are combined, the
wavelengths from those singular metals will be combined into the same graph,
but will still show the separate waves. For example, if a spectrophotometer graph
has wavelengths that peak at, 607 nm, 674 nm, 683 nm, and 789 nm, it is most
likely a mixture of KCI and ​SrCl​2​. I can make this educated guess because, on
the ​SrCl​2​ graph (figure 2) the wavelengths were at 606 nm, 670 nm, and 681 nm
and the spectrophotometer graph for KCI (figure 4) has a wavelength of 787 nm.

2. Which two metals were presented in your unknown?

The two metals that were presented in unknown #3 are, KCI and ​SrCl​2 .​ I
determined this by comparing both the wavelengths as well as the graphs of the
unknown to pairs of the knowns. I finally found that the graphs of KCI and ​SrCl​2
corresponded best with the graph of the unknown. Along with the common
graphs, I compared and calculated the difference between the wavelengths of
each substance to find that the differences were very small (shown in table 3
below). When using a spectrophotometer graph, you can determine if there is
more than one element represented in the graph quite easily. In the graph of
SrCl​2 SrCl2
​ (figure 2), it shows that it has three major wavelengths, 606 nm, 670
nm, and 681nm with intensities of 0.025 ref, 0.032, and 0.039 ref. In the graph of
KCI (figure 4) it has one major wavelength at 787 nm with an intensity of 0.033
ref. In the graph of unknown #3, it has four wavelengths, 607 nm, 674 nm, 683
nm, and 789 nm. These wavelengths have the intensities of 0.021 ref, 0.03 ref,
0.032, and 0.36 ref. When compared, the biggest difference between the
 wavelengths is 4 nm. Unlike small differences in the wavelength numbers, the
intensities of these waves from the two separate substances have a wide range
of changes when combined into the new substance (unknown #3). Because this
new substance qualifies as a unique substance, it will share common factors like
the wavelengths but will have its unique intensities for those waves. I am very
confident in my answer because of the evidence I have behind my belief.

Table 3: The calculated difference between the wavelengths of the two separated
substances (KCI and ​SrCl​2 )​ and the wavelengths of unknown substance #3
Wavelength(s) of known Wavelength(s) of Difference between the
substances unknown substance #3 two wavelengths
(nm) (nm) (nm)

606 (​SrCl​2​) 607 1

670 (​SrCl​2​) 674 4

681 (​SrCl​2​) 683 2

787 (KCI) 789 2

3. How do the peaks on an Intensity vs. Wavelength graph relate to emission

lines like those seen in a spectroscope (Part3)? Discuss both the location
and the height of the peak and their corollaries in Part 3 of the experiment.
When comparing the wavelengths and intensities of emission lines to a
spectroscope graph, the peaks/lines should appear around or on the same nm
mark. For example, if there is a peak of a wave for a certain substance on a
spectroscope graph at 450nm, a line would appear on an emissions line at
450nm as well. The intensity would also appear on both. On a graph, the more
intense the wavelength is, the higher the peak is. The lower it is, the lower the
peak is. Corresponding with the graph, when there is a high intensity the line(s)
on an emission line would appear bright and bolder. The lower the intensity, the
less bright the line would be. The horizontal location of the peak/line whether on
an emission line or a spectroscope graph represents the color of the flame for
that certain substance.
Part 3:
Results:

Table 4: Emission Spectrum of Unknown B and Unknown C

Unknown B

Estimations of Unknown B (nm) Purple: 420

Blue/Purple: 450
Light Blue: 470
Dark Green: 520
Lighter Green: 550
Yellow: 560
Orange: 580-590
Red: 650

Prediction of the identification of Unknown

B (Hydrogen)

Photo from:
https://ch301.cm.utexas.edu/section2.php?t
arget=atomic/H-atom/line-spectra.html

Estimations of Hydrogen (nm) Purple: 410

Blue: 434
Green: 486
Red: 656

Unknown C

Estimations of Unknown C (nm) Purple: 400

Dark Blue: 450
Blue/Green: 470
Dark Green: 490
Lighter Green: 500
Orange/Yellow: 600
Red: 680-710
Prediction of the identification of Unknown
B (Helium)

Estimations of Helium (nm) Dark Purple: 402

Light Purple: 447
Darker Blue: 471
Lighter Blue: 492
Yellow: 587
Red: 667

Discussion:

1. Using specific evidence, justify your identification of the two unknowns

you observed. Your justification should be detailed as possible and
reference distinct wavelengths.
a. The identification of unknown B is Hydrogen. I came to this conclusion by
comparing the wavelengths of the unknown to the wavelengths of sodium,
mercury, lithium, helium, and hydrogen. After close examination, I found
that when comparing unknown B to Hydrogen, they were quite close with
their wavelength measurements. The wavelengths that I found for
unknown B are, 420 nm, 450 nm, 470 nm, 520 nm, 550 nm, 560 nm,
580-590 nm, and 650 nm. The data points that I collected for Hydrogen
was, 410 nm, 434 nm, 486 nm, and 656 nm. Since the average difference
between the two sets of data is about 12 nm, I determined that aside from
human error during the lab, the wavelengths were close enough to be
considered the same metal.
b. The identification of unknown C is Helium. This was determined by once
again comparing the collected wavelengths of unknown C to the
wavelengths of sodium, mercury, helium, and lithium. When I calculated
that the average difference between the unknown's wavelengths and
helium's wavelengths was about 8 nm, I made a final decision that it could
be identified as the same metal.
2. When you use your spectroscope to observe the emission lines, are you
seeing the entire emission spectrum for the given element? Why or why
not?
When using a spectroscope to observe the emission line, you are not
always able to see the entire emission spectrum for any certain element. If the
intensity of a wavelength is to low, the line will either appear blurry or out of reach
for the human eye. What I found when using a spectroscope for my lab was, that
once I tried to look below 400 nm or above 700 nm, it became either blurry or I
wasn't able to see any colors.

3. When you use your spectroscope to observe the emission lines, do all
emission lines seem equally bright? Propose an explanation for why or
why not based on your understanding of the Bohr Model of the Atom.
When using a spectroscope to observe an emission line, the emission
lines do not appear equally bright. Based on the Bohr Model of the Atom, an
emissions line is made when an atom is in its “excited” mode. When it is in this
state, it releases photon energy. This causes the atom to produce certain
wavelengths of light. High or low intensity will be shown depending on the
number of atoms going through this stage. If more atoms are going through this
transition, the more intense the wavelength will be. And vice-versa, the fewer
amount of atoms, the lower the intensity.