Analyzing Metals with Titrations: Fe, Al, Ni, Co, and Cu in Unknown Alloy

  • Thread starter Thread starter zeshkani
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the analysis of an unknown alloy containing Fe, Al, Ni, Co, and Cu through a series of titrations with a 0.0230M EDTA solution. Four titrations are conducted at different pH levels, with specific volumes recorded at the first equivalence points: 17.0 mL for Titration A, 38.2 mL for Titration B, 11.11 mL for Titration C, and 13.85 mL for Titration D. Each titration step aims to determine the concentration of specific metals in the alloy, with the relevance of EDTA and murexide being debated. The discussion highlights the complexity of interpreting titration results and the need for clarity in understanding what each step reveals about the alloy's composition. Ultimately, the goal is to ascertain the experimentally determined composition of the unknown alloy.
zeshkani
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
1.0000 grams of an unknown alloy is dissolved and diluted to 1 liter. Oxygen is bubbled through the solution
to oxidize each of the metals to their highest oxidation state. The sample is known to contain only Fe, Al, Ni,
Co, and Cu. 100.00 mL aliquots are taken for each of the following titrations. The concentration of the EDTA
solution is 0.0230M.

Titration A: The pH is adjusted to 0.0, and the titration is followed with an appropriate ISE. The volume at the
rst equivalence point is 17.0 mL.

Titration B: The pH is adjusted to 1.8 and the solution is ltered. The remaining solution is titrated and
monitored with an appropriate ISE. The volume at the rst equivalence point is 38.2 mL.

Titration C: The pH is adjusted to 5.7 and the solution is ltered. To the remaining solution, 0.01 moles of
2,3-dimercaptopropanol and murexide are added. The solution is titrated to red violet. The titration requires
11.11 mL.

Titration D: The pH is adjusted to 5.7 and the solution is ltered. To the remaining solution, murexide is added.
The solution is titrated to red violet with 13.85 mL.

(a) What is determined in each titration step?
(b) What is the experimentally determined composition and brand name of the alloy?

like fpr question A, what is it even asking, it seems to complicated

and also A: The EDTA and murexide are not relevant to this problem. Let the concentration of the titrant be 0.0230 M in each part. Let the titrant in titrations A and B be Ti(II). Let the titrant be In(I) in titrations C and D. In titration C, the 2,3-dimercaptopropanol complexes Cu(II) and shifts its potential negative of nickel.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well do you know what you use titration for? Like what do you find when you use titration on an uknown substance?
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

Similar threads

Back
Top