Seperating Metal Cations Using Paper Chromatography

Lab 3 Separating Metal Cations by wall news make-up Chromatography Introduction/Purpose In druggistry, it is important to effectively meditate the components in a given mixture. In order to do so, chemists will analyze a mixture either qualitatively or quantitatively victimization different methods and equipment. Qualitative analyses be subjective, and only hoard up non-numerical data such(prenominal) as the color, appearance, and smell of the components. This data is intended to obtain physical schooling on the components puzzle.While quantitative analyses are objective, and use numerical data to gather the quantity of the components present. Quantitative data can be given in terms of height, area, volume, weight, speed, time, temperature, etc. Each method of data analyses provides chemists with specific types of info that can be apply to draw conclusions about the experiments they have transacted. This research laboratory utilized both quantitative and qualitative data by use the paper Chromatography method for determining the alloylic element cations present in an unheard-of pattern.This was performed by utilise reagents that reacted with the admixture cations deposited on the paper. The retention factor of distributively cognize cation was calculated in order to determine which coat cations were present in two vague samples. Objective Effectively use Paper Chromatography to analyze quantitative and qualitative data of different metal cations, in an effort to evenly identify two unappreciated samples of metal cations, by comparing them against a chromatogram with known component reactions.This lab also assist in better understanding the importance of developing a chemists observation and data recording methods, as some of the reactions are faint, or may degrade over a short period. secular & Equipment 1) Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 2) 600 ml beaker 3) Plastic wrap 4) Rubber dance band 5) (3) Paper l distributively(prenomin al)s 6) (2) 11 x 14 cm pieces of chromatographic paper 7) Pencil 8) Metric ruler 9) Capillary tube 10) Paper towels 11) 10 ml of 6M HCL 12) 35 ml of Acetone ((CH3)2CO) 13) Metal cations- Iron(III), Cobalt(II), Nickel(II), and papal bull(II) 14) Two unknown sample cations 5) Reagents Potassium ferrocyanide, Potassium thiocynate in acetone, Dimethyl glyoxime in ethanol 16) 50 ml beaker with 25 ml of ammonium hydroxide 17) Fume roof Procedure/Methods 1) *See the attached pre-lab outline for the mental process/order of trading operations used in completing this lab experiment* 2) *The procedure was altered at step 9 with direction from the lab instructor. Chromatogram 2 was not key outted with the four known metal cations. * Three pieces of filter paper were used to practice spotting with the four known metal cations.The filter paper was folded into four separate sections and a small sample of the known metal cation was spotted onto a mark point. This process was repeated for ea ch piece of filter paper. Filter sample 1 was spotted utilize potassium ferrocyanide filter sample 2 was spotted employ potassium thiocynate in acetone and filter sample 3 was spotted using dimethyl glyoxime in ethanol. Using three separate samples allowed the group to analyze the qualitative results (color change) of the interactions with each of the four metal cations.This provided preliminary data that was used to imagine which compound would be best to spot the known metal cations on chromatogram 1. After reviewing both the interaction results, and the retention values (RF), we consequently set which reagent provided the most identifi qualified interaction with each of the metal cations. Equation 1. pic data *See attached info sails* Results The lab instructor reported the results of the correct unknown metal cations as follows 1) undiagnosed 1 = Copper ) unacknowledged 2 = Iron and Nickel As shown on selective information Sheet 2, our lab group concluded that the unkn own metal cations were as follows 1) Unknown 1 = Cobalt 2) Unknown 2 = Iron Qualitative entropy (Chromatogram 1) The first observations made of chromatogram 1 were those of the physical changes in the color of the metal cations after they were exposed to the developing solvent. The colors observed for the metal cations were as shown by the corresponding bar graph in enrol 1 below.Copper = Light Brown, Nickel = Pink, Iron = Blue, and Cobalt = Green Quantitative data (Chromatogram 1) After the qualitative observations were analyzed and recorded, the spotted sections of each metal cation were marked with a pencil at the highest migration distance of the substance. This measurement was then used in calculating the Rf value of each metal cation, using Equation 1 above, and represented in Figure 1 below. Copper = . 7, Nickel = . 1, Iron = 1, and Cobalt = . 5 Figure 1. pic Qualitative Data (Chromatogram 2)The first observations made of chromatogram 2 were those of the physical changes i n the color of the metal cations after they were exposed to the developing solvent. The colors observed for the metal cations were as shown by the corresponding bar graph in Figure 2 below. Unknown 1 = Green, and Unknown 2 = Blue Quantitative Data (Chromatogram 1) After the qualitative observations were analyzed and recorded, the spotted sections of each metal cation were marked with a pencil at the highest migration distance of the unknown substance.This measurement was then used in calculating the Rf value of the unknown metal cations, using Equation 1 above, and represented in Figure 2 below. Unknown 1 = . 41 and Unknown 2 = . 91 Figure 2. pic Conclusion The qualitative and quantitative data of the known metal cations from chromatogram 1 were used to determine the metal cations that composed Unknown sample 1 and 2, in chromatogram 2. Unknown 1 was developed using KSCN/acetone, and Unknown 2 was developed using K4Fe(CN)6. However, it is unknown why we chose to use that reagent as contrary to the other two available.It is also clear that a deviation from the procedure caused us to erroneously streak our chromatogram unknowns with only one reagent. Failing to spot and streak chromatogram 2 with all reagents prohibited our ability to analyze the sample after exposure to all reactions. As shown from the results of the filter paper samples, we were able to see qualitative changes on Fe, Cu, and Co with the use of potassium ferrocyanide, Fe, Cu, and Co with the use of potassium thiocynate in acetone, and Fe, Co, and Ni with the use of dimethyl glyoxime in ethanol.Although the colors in each reaction were different with each of the reagents used on the filter paper samples, the use of each reagent would have provided us with a number of optic changes to identify. Those observations would have been marked, and prompted more calculations of the Rf values associated with each reaction, allowing for a more thorough evaluation and determination of the unknown metal ca tions present.Although we were able to immaculately detect the presence of Fe in unknown sample 2, it is evident that if the chromatogram had been exposed to the dimethyl glyoxime in ethanol, we would have detected the Ni as well. The exposure of the filter sample containing the Ni, to dimethyl glyoxime in ethanol, yielded the only visual reaction, out of all three reagents tested. This labs results further solidify the need to digest the procedure as thoroughly as possible, and if there are feelings of inadequacy, we perform the procedures that we feel will enable us to procure the most accurate results.