George McQuinn

Chemistry
Spectroscopy Lab

Spectroscopic Analysis of Unknown Elements, Known

Elements, and Animas River Water Samples.
Introduction
This lab was done by Animas High School Students in order to determine the quantities
of metals detectable in samples taken from the Animas River and its tributaries. To understand
how spectroscopy works, we must first understand the Bohr model of the atom. The Bohr model
shows the atom with the nucleus as a circle at the center surrounded by rings and an electron
on the rings shown in figure 1.

Figure 1

As energy is added to the electron, the electron jumps to a different ring. This movement
is affected by the amount of energy added. Now on an outer ring, the electron will lose energy in
the form of light and jump back to a smaller ring as shown in figure 2.

Figure 2

The light emitted when the electron loses energy is the light that is seen with the
spectrometer and the color of it tells us what element the atom is. Although the Bohr model is
easy to interpret, the most accurate model of the atom today is the quantum mechanical model.
The two models resemble each other but differ in the fact that the quantum mechanical shows
clouds of energy where the electron could be as opposed to rings with a specific point
representing the electrons location as shown in figure 3.
Figure 3

For elements to be found using spectrocity, the substance must first be changed into a
plasma. Plasma is the fourth state of matter in which the molecules are moving so fast that the
electrons are freed the atom, allowing ions and electrons to coexist. When plasma is looked at
with a spectrophotometer, the light is defracted and split into its different colors. The colors will
show up in bars known as atomic emission spectrum lines. These lines are produced by the
electron releasing energy and moving closer to the nucleus as shown in figure 2.

Results Part 1
Table 1: Substance and flame color
Solution

Flame Color

Control

Orange

NaCl

Orange/Yellow

CuCl2

Green/Teal

LiCl

Orange/Red

KCl

Pink/Coral

CaCl2

Orange/Yellow

SrCl2

Pink/Red

Water Sample #13

Blue/Orange

Water Sample #5

Blue/Orange

Unknown 1

Orange

Unknown 2

Pink/Purple

Discussion Part 1
Through spectroscopic analysis, I determined that the chemical in unknown 1 is
sodium chloride. Because the unknown flame burned orange with no other colors
present, the same as the sodium chloride flame, I believe that the sample was sodium
chloride with no other contaminants.
The metal does determine the color of the flame. Depending on the type of atom
being burned, it releases different types of photons, resulting in a different color light. An
example of this is when KCl was burned, the flame was pink and coral colored. When
SrCl2 was burned, it produced a pink and red flame. These two metal samples burned
different colors, showing that the metal does determine the flame color.
The control in this experiment is the melamine foam used to absorb the test
substance and be put into the flame. When the foam with no test solution was inserted
into the flame, we saw that the flame burned orange. Knowing that the foam itself burns
orange allows us to assume that all test solutions will also burn with a slightly orange
hue.

Results Part 2
Table 1:
Table 1 represents the dilutions of the substance as we looked for the detection limit of
the spectrophotometer for copper.
Molarity

Parts Per Billion

Wavelength and Intensity

0.25 Molarity

33,600,000

W: ~590 I: .02
W: ~545 I: .023
W: ~756 I: .025

0.150

20,200,000

W: ~540 I: .015
W: ~754 I: .021

0.125 Molarity

16,800,000

W: ~530 I: 0.013

Figure 1
Figure 4 shows the spectrophotometer data as the solution was diluted.
Red and Green - Test #1 (0.25 Molarity)
Blue and Orange - Test #2 (0.150 Molarity)
Purple - Test #3 (0.125 Molarity)

Example Problem: How to find Molarity in parts per billion (PPB)

.5 Mole
1000 g

.5 Molar Solution =

134.45 CuCl2
1 Mole

67.2 g
1,000,000
1000 g
1,000,000

67,200,000
1,000,000,000
.5 Molar Solution = 67,200,000 PPB

Table 2:
Upper and lower detection limits for metals present.
Metal
LiCl

Characteristic
MDL Molarity
Wavelength (nm) Upper Bound
670.8

MDL Molarity MDL ppb Upper

Lower Bound Bound
0.5

0.1

0.5

0.1

3,500,000

690,000

0.5

0.1

20,000,000

4,000,000

588.9

0.0008

0.00016

18,400

3,680

CuCl2

~520, ~545, ~735

0.25

0.125

33,600,000

16,800,000

KCl

773.5, 770.3,
777.6

0.02

0.004

780,000

156,000

SrCl2
CaCl2
NaCl

MDL ppb Lower

Bound

590 and 773.9

Discussion part 2
The method detection limit is the point at which the substance can no longer be
detected by the measurement tool. It is important to know the detection limit because
when test results are negative, it does not mean that it is truly negative. A negative test
just means that the concentration of the substance was below the method detection
limit. To determine the limit of the spectrophotometer, a molar solution was diluted and
tested until the chemical could no longer be found. As the concentration is measured
and diluted, eventually, one of the tests will not show any amount of the chemical. The
point at which the chemical is not detectable is the lower bound limit and the lowest
point at which the chemical could be detected is the upper bound limit.
Detection limits can be applied to the results of our peers when looking at both
positive and negative tests. If a water sample test for copper comes back negative, we
know that the amount of copper is below 0.25 molarity. If a test comes back positive for
potassium, we know that it has a molarity of at least 0.02.
Table 3
Table 4 shows the spectrophotometric results for the water sample tests.

Based on the CDPHE data and the detection limits found by honors students, we
shouldve found sodium. Jonathan and Luke were the only pair who successfully
detected a wavelength. They tested sample A72 #1 and discovered a yellow plasma. It
is likely that this yellow flame was calcium, confirming our expected results. An
improvement that could be made to finding our detection limits is diluting the solution
less as we do more tests. By diluting the samples less, a more accurate limit is
attainable.
Part 3

Results
Figure One - Emission Spectrum of A
Figure 1 shows recorded wavelengths of unknown A.

Figure Two - Emission Spectrum of B

Figure 1 shows recorded wavelengths of unknown B.

Figure Three - Emission Spectrum of C

Figure 1 shows recorded wavelengths of unknown C

Discussion Part 3

Unknown A is hydrogen. With wavelengths at about 656.2nm, 486.1nm, 434.0nm, and

410.1nm, they line up almost perfectly with our recorded wavelengths at 660nm, 430nm, and
490nm. Unknown B is mercury. With wavelengths at approximately 404.656nm, 407.781nm,
435.835nm, 491.604nm, 546.074nm, 576.959nm, and 579.065nm, we can observe that our
measurements, at 420.nm, 560.nm, 590.nm, and 700.nm, match closely enough to decide that
we are looking at mercury. It is possible that our measurement at 700 is contamination of the
sample. Unknown C is lithium. With wavelengths at about 430nm, 490nm, and 585nm, our
measurements at 440nm, 500nm, 560nm, 585nm, and 670nm, can be well matched. It is
possible that our measurement at 670 is sample contamination.
When using a spectroscope to observe emission lines, we do not see the entire
spectrum for the given element. We do not see the entire spectrum because there is not an
equal quantity of every photon emitted by the element. The quantity of photons determines the
brightness of the light emitted. Although an element may emit lines spanning across the entire
spectrum, many of the photons are too dim to be visible. For the same reason of different
quantities of photons, not all spectral lines will be of equal brightness. Depending on the amount
of energy added to the electron, the photons released from the electron will be different colors
and brightnesses.