DETERMINATION OF HARDNESS OF WATER AND WASTEWATER

NAME: UYAPO R.S BATISANI

STUDENT ID: 19000149
MODULE CODE: CHEM 205
PROGRAM: PURE AND APPLIED CHEMISTRY
GROUP B
DETERMINATION OF HARDNESS OF WATER AND WASTEWATER

AIM
To determine the concentration of magnesium and calcium in unknown
samples by titration.

INTRODUCTION
One of the factors that establishes the quality of water supply is its degree of
hardness. According to (Camp, Ulrich De La, and Oliver Seely.
“Complexometric Ca Determination.” N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2013) the
hardness of water is due to the presence of soluble bicarbonates, chlorides and
sulphides of multivalent that are positively charged more than 1+, the most
important are calcium and magnesium. Hard water is one which does not
lather with soap whilst soft water lathers. Water hardness has been shown to
be important for biological function of aquatic life. For instance, fish are
dependent on calcium water hardness for normal heart, however, some
countries spend a lot of money each year to soften their water, which reduces
mineral content of tap water, to enhance potability and surfactant lathering. In
this experiment, hardness is determined by titrating Ca2+ and Mg2+ with
chelating agent, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) at a buffered pH of 10.
Eriochrome Black T is used as a visual indicator. Hardness is reported in parts
per million of calcium carbonate (CaCO3).
The titration reaction is:
Ca2+ (or Mg2+) H2Y2- CaY2- (or MgY2-) + 2H+

Where Y represents the formula for EDTA

APPARATUS
2 beakers(100ml)
Volumetric flasks(250ml)
Measuring cylinder
Funnel
200ml beaker
Burette
Pipette
Labman Digital Analytical balance
Retort stand
Spatula
Hot plate
Stirring rod
3 Erlenmeyer flasks(250ml)
Weighing boat
CHEMICALS
Phenolphthalein
0.1M NaOH solution
pH 10 buffer
2M Hydrochloric acid
NaCl
Black T
EDTA
NaOH pellets
Distilled water
Wastewater and drinking water
PROCEDURE
PART A. PREPARATION OF A STANDARD 0.01M EDTA
Disodium EDTA dehydrate was accurately weighted about 0.923 g to the
nearest 0.1mg and placed the weighted EDTA in a 100 mL beaker. The EDTA
was dissolved in 50 mL of distilled water. Since the dissolution was slow, 2
small pellets of NaOH was added and stirred using stirring rod. The solution
was quantitatively transferred to a 250.0 mL volumetric flask and rinsed the
beaker with distilled water and poured the solution in the volumetric flask.
Flask was then filled to the mark with distilled water and inserted the stopper
to shake thoroughly mix the solution.
PART B. ANALYSIS OF THE UNKNOWN SAMPLE
Using a pipette, 25.00 mL of wastewater was hosed into a 250 mL Erlenmeyer
flask and diluted it to 100 mL with 75 mL of distilled water measured by a
measuring cylinder. The solution was then aliquoted for four separate 25 mL
using a pipette into four different flasks. To each flask 4 drops of 2M of
hydrochloric acid was added and gently boiled the solutions for 5 mins at once.
The solutions were cooled near to room temperature by using tap water then
added 2 drops of phenolphthalein then added 2 drops of 0.1M of NaOH
solution to the flask and the solution turned from colourless to pink. To the
solution 2 mL of a pH 10 buffer was added then weighed 0.010g of Black T and
1.000g of NaCl using Labman Digital Analytical balance and added to the
solution. The prepared EDTA solution was poured into a burette and titrated
till the solution turned blue. The whole procedure for the other three divisions.
The analysis time under 5 minutes.
DETERMINATION OF THE INDICATOR ERROR USING BLACK SOLUTION
A volume of 50.00 mL of distilled water, 2 mL of pH 10 buffer, 0.01g Black T
and 1.000g NaCl was placed in a flask. It was then titrated with EDTA till it
turned blue.
RESULTS

DISCUSSION
The results from this experiment are not reasonable. In the first part of the
experiment the average molarity was 2.12M. The molarity was supposed to be
0.01M so the EDTA molarity was not accurate. In the second part of the
experiment the hardness of water was found. This was done through finding
the calcium content in the wastewater. The average calcium content ppm was
found to be 10 176 mgL-1. This indicates that the actual hardness of water was
closer to 10000 mgL-1. According to (National Research Council (1977) Drinking
water and health. Washington, DC, National Academy of Sciences) soft water
has a ppm between 0 and 30. When carrying out this experiment, parallax
error might have been encountered when taking the reading from the burette.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the results from this experiment were not accurate. However,
the hardness of wastewater was discovered by finding calcium content in
wastewater. The calcium content from the three trials performed were 8480
mgL-1, 11024 mgL-1 and 10176 mgL-1.The average of this with standard
deviation was 9893.33 ± 1295.32. Titration values might have been lower.

REFERENCES
Camp, Ulrich De La, and Oliver Seely. “Complexometric Ca
Determination.” N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2013 .
National Research Council (1977) Drinking water and health. Washington, DC,
National Academy of Sciences