Complexometric Titration and Atomic Emission Spectroscopy) That Allow Us to Quantify the Amount of Each Metal Present Individually
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Title Quantitative Analysis of a Solution Containing Cobalt and Copper Name Manraj Gill (Lab partner: Tanner Adams) Abstract In this series of experiments, we determine the concentrations of two metal species, copper and cobalt, in a mixture of the two by initially using an ion exchange column to separate them from the mixture. We consequently use two different techniques (complexometric titration and atomic emission spectroscopy) that allow us to quantify the amount of each metal present individually. This step-by-step analysis not only goes through the basis for the experimental approach but also is a breakdown of the measurements that leads us to the final results: the Co:Cu ratio in the unknown mixture. Purpose In this series of three experiments (Parts I – III), we aim to initially separate a solution containing a mixture of Cobalt, Co (II), and Copper, Cu (II), ions in an unknown ratio and in unknown concentrations. The end goal of the entire experiment is to determine how much Co and Cu were originally present in the sample we obtained in Part I. But to do so, as explained in further detail in the ‘Theory and Methods’ section below, we initially separate the two ions (Part I) based on their unique chemical properties and then we attempt to quantify the separated ions through two different methods (Parts II, III). The overall purpose is an analysis of the efficiency of the separation and quantification approaches used to measure the constituent compounds in a mixture. This “efficiency” can be determined by comparing the obtained measurements to the known amounts that were used to make the solution. Theory and Methods (Part I) In order to initially separate the two ions from each other and obtain a purified amount of each of Cu and Co, we pass the unknown solution through an Ion Exchange Chromatograph. The principle of Ion Exchange Chromatography is based on utilizing an ion exchange resin. In this case, we use an anion exchange resin, namely, AG 1-X8. AG (analytical grade) 1-X8 is a strongly basic anion exchange resin with quaternary ammonium function groups attached to the styrene divinylbenzene copolymer lattice. (1) 1-X8 specifically has a high amount of resin cross-linkage making it suitable for exchange with and separation of low molecular weight inorganic anions! (1) The basis for using an anion exchange is to exploit the different number of chlorine ions (Cl-) that can be bound to the two different metal atoms. And then, the consequently different affinities to the Cl- bound metals to the resin serve to provide enough of a separation between the two if the resin vessel is tall enough. The strength with which an ion is held in the resin increases with increasing charge on the ion. Therefore, the more Cl- bound, the longer it stays in the resin. Now, to understand the theory of different amounts of chlorine ions being bound to the two metals, we look at the stability constants for metal-chloro complexes and find that, at specific concentrations of chrloide ion, there are different fractional distribution curves for the copper-chloride complexes and cobalt-chloride complexes. Therefore, we use the specific chloride concentration that yields in the metals being bound to significantly different number of chloride ions. This is characterized by looking at the stepwise stability constants. That is, the stability of the complex upon addition of another chloride. The equation can be written as follows: n+ - m+ M + bCl ⇌ MClb In the equation, the b value is the number of Cl- ions and the M is representative of either Cu or Co. The corresponding equilibrium constants as b varies from 0 (no chloride ions bound) to 4 (4 chloride ions bound) allows us to extrapolate the likelihood of the complex being present at specific concentrations of chloride. The graphs on the left plot out the distribution of a complex (based on the b values) at a range of chloride concentrations. And as stated previously, the property we want to exploit is the different number of chlorides that can be bound to the two metals at the same concentration of chloride ions. As marked on the plots, at pCl- = 0.5 (yellow line), [Cl-] = 3.0M, the copper complexes are present in highly chloride bound states (b = 2, 3, 4) whereas the cobalt complexes are less likely to be bound to chloride ions (b = 0, 1). Therefore, at this concentration of chloride ions, the copper will be retained more strongly in the resin while the cobalt will “run through” faster. Application of Theory (Part I) Based on the approach described above, we were able to use 3M HCl in the resin and separate the mixture of Co (II) and Cu (II) in the unknown sample. We had Unknown #2 and from 3 milliliters of the unknown solution, collected 3 samples each of copper and cobalt. Theory and Methods (Part II) In this second part of the series of experiments conducted, we focus only on the cobalt solution that was purified from Part I. The focus is on quantifying the amount of cobalt that was initially present in Unknown #2. To do this, we titrate the 3 separated cobalt solutions to determine with some level of statistical certainty, the amount of cobalt that was initially present. Acid-base titrations are done by neutralizing an acid with a base (or vice-versa). Potentiometric titrations are performed by measuring changes in voltage as compounds precipitate out. However, in the case of titrating out metals such as cobalt, we perform a complexometric titration. In a complexometric titration, the metal ions react with chelating agents to create a complex and an evident color change can be used to determine the end-point of a complexometric titration. (2) In the determination of metal ions, polydentate ligands are used. A polydentate ligand has more than 2 donor atoms that are used to bind to a central metal ion or atom. (3) The process of polydentate ligands binding to the metal ion and forming a complex (chelate) is called chelation. (3) And in such a case, the polydentate ligand is called a chelating agent. In this experiment, we use a chelating agent called ethylenediaminetetraaceic acid (EDTA). It is a polydentate ligand because it can form up to six bonds with the metal ion upon chelation. However, a “regular” titration whereby the metal solution is titrated with the solution of a known concentration of EDTA is difficult to perform. This is because a “regular” or direct titration requires fast course of reaction. That is, the complex formation must be fast enough. (2) Therefore, we perform a “back” titration to measure the amount of cobalt present. In this case, we add a known amount of EDTA of a known concentration to our cobalt solution. The added moles of EDTA are in excess of the predicted moles of metal in the solution. And the solution is mixed very well to ensure that complete chelation is allowed for. We then “back-titrate” by gradually adding cobalt solution of a known concentration until the indicator changes color. At the end-point/equivalence point (when the color changes), the number of moles of EDTA would be equal to the total number of moles of cobalt present. Therefore, the initial number of moles of cobalt is the difference! The chemical basis of the indicator used in this reaction is as follows. The compound, thiocyanate ion, is added that reacts with a free cobalt species and turns blue. Therefore, as long as any cobalt solution (from the standard stock) is still chelating and not free to react with thiocyanate, the solution will not turn blue. Upon turning blue, we will know that the number of moles of cobalt has just gone to a level where it is more than the number of moles of EDTA present. The lighter the hue of the blue, the lower the solution is post the equivalence point. Therefore, we attempt to identify the lightest hue of blue so that we are as close to the equivalence point as possible. Application of Theory (Part II) The concentration of EDTA used is 0.03063M and the concentration of the standard solution of cobalt (used for the titration) is 9.26163mg/mL. However, the stock solution is accurately diluted 10x to obtain a final concentration of ~0.9mg/mL. Since this dilution was performed and involves some degree of error associated with the volumetric transfer and the use of volumetric flasks, an initial standardization is performed which allows us to accurately know this concentration of the 10x diluted cobalt standard solution! The results from the standardization can be analyzed as follows: 10.00mL EDTA x 0.03063moles/L EDTA x 1L/1000mL = 3.063 x 10-4 moles EDTA Since 10.00ml of the diluted Co2+ standard was initially added. And since 7.75ml of this was actually added to reach equivalence, to calculate the concentration of the cobalt standard, we perform the following calculations: (3.063 x 10-4 moles Co2+) / (17.75mL Co2+) = (1.7256 x 10-5 moles/mL Co2+) x (58.93g/mol Co2+) = (1.0169 x 10-3 g/mL Co2+) x 1000mg/g = 1.016916mg/mL This varies from the 0.926163mg/mL expected. A ~10% difference. But this difference largely comes from the major error associated with not having a quantitative measurement of the equivalence point, but a visual one. Rather than relying on potentiometric voltage changes or pH changes as in the previous titration experiments, we use a visual end-point indicator. That leads to us basing the equivalence point on a hue of blue that might actually be very far past the actual equivalence point.