The data gathered and calculated in the experiment accurately portrayed the way the reactions would have taken place. The chloride analysis was a little bit off from other groups due to the fact that our AgCl was in clumps, creating less surface area, thus our product took longer to burn and may not have burned correctly compared to other groups; yet there are several experimental factors that could have caused us to have different results than other groups, i.e. different measurements for samples. Our sources of error could have included eye measurement error, timing of set solutions error, measurement errors, and small calculation errors. Among other variables, the calibration of the analytical balance and spectrophotometer could have been off slightly, yet our results, like most other groups, still followed the general trend line generated by the graph using Beer’s Law. The measurement errors could have occurred due to the fact that one partner’s perspective of a measurement could be different than the others, but the lab cannot be preformed solo. When it comes to improving the lab, there aren’t to many ways to ensure accurate measurements due to the fact that in any experiment there are human and environment variables that cannot be accounted for, or even prepared for. In any experiment there will always be human error.
Group Lab Report
The purpose of this lab is to use a variety of analytical skills and methods to determine the empirical formula of an unknown compound.
There is certain background knowledge needed to understand this lab: What Beer’s Law is and how to generate a Beer’s Law plot, how to use elemental analysis, and how to form an empirical formula from the percentage of each element in the compound.
Beer’s Law helps explain the relationship between absorbance and thickness off a sample, and accordingly, the relationship between absorbance and the amount of solute in a solution. Forming a Beer’s Law plot is useful when having a...