IR Spectroscopy: Examining Absorption of Water, CO2 & Methane

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This discussion focuses on the examination of absorption spectra obtained through IR spectroscopy, specifically analyzing the absorption characteristics of water, carbon dioxide, and methane. Participants explore the implications of these spectra, the visibility of rotational line structures, and the factors contributing to observed absorption features.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide around 4000nm is not apparent when methane is present, prompting questions about other contributors to absorption in IR spectroscopy.
  • Another participant questions the expectation of seeing carbon dioxide absorption bands when methane is introduced, seeking clarification on the initial query.
  • Concerns are raised about the visibility of the rotational line structure of carbon dioxide, with suggestions that the moment of inertia may play a role in its absence.
  • It is mentioned that the rotational structure could be visible if the resolution of the instrument is sufficiently low, with specific values provided for the rotational constant of CO2.
  • One participant argues that since carbon dioxide has no Q band, the absence of a spike at the expected wavelength raises questions about other absorption sources.
  • Clarification is provided that the first spectrum was taken of air and the second included a methane gas cell, which may affect the visibility of CO2 absorption.
  • Potential mundane explanations for the observed absorption patterns are discussed, including background subtraction in the spectrometer and the pathlength through air affecting intensity.
  • There is speculation that improving resolution might reveal the absence of a Q-branch, but uncertainty remains regarding the source of any observed peaks at the vibrational origin.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the visibility of carbon dioxide absorption in the presence of methane, and there is no consensus on the reasons for the observed spectral features or the implications of the Q band absence.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention limitations related to spectrometer settings, such as background subtraction and pathlength considerations, which may influence the observed spectra. There is also uncertainty regarding the conditions under which certain absorption features may appear.

Scott Gray
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I've been doing IR spectroscopy to examine to the absorption spectrum of water and carbon dioxide, after which I took another absorption spectrum with a methane gas cell. The absorption spectrum without the methane shows absorption from carbon dioxide around 4000nm, however, this is not apparent on the spectrum with the methane which appears at a around . What else is it that contributes to the absorption in IR Spectroscopy?

Also why is it that the rotational line structure of Carbon Dioxide cannot be seen, does this have something to do with the moment of inertia of the carbon dioxide molecules?

Since carbon dioxide has no Q band (i.e. no transitions where the vibrational energy changes but the rotational energy doesn't) wouldn't it be expected that the wavelength at which it would occur if it happened to have one spike back up to match the observed intensity of the general curve? Since this doesn't happen there is some absorption resulting in a small spike but what else is absorbing this energy?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Scott Gray said:
I've been doing IR spectroscopy to examine to the absorption spectrum of water and carbon dioxide, after which I took another absorption spectrum with a methane gas cell. The absorption spectrum without the methane shows absorption from carbon dioxide around 4000nm, however, this is not apparent on the spectrum with the methane which appears at a around . What else is it that contributes to the absorption in IR Spectroscopy?

Not sure what you are asking here ... if you have replaced the CO2 with methane, why would you expect to still see bands from CO2? Perhaps I didn't understand what you were trying to say.

Also why is it that the rotational line structure of Carbon Dioxide cannot be seen, does this have something to do with the moment of inertia of the carbon dioxide molecules?

That rotational structure will be visible if you set the resolution of your instrument lower than about 1 cm-1 (I am assuming you are using an FTIR). If you can go down to 0.5 cm-1 (or lower), you should be able to resolve the peaks to the baseline. You are right to suspect the explanation has to do with the inertial moment of the molecules ... the rotational constant (B) of CO2 ( the inverse of the moment of inertia combined with some constants) is ~0.4 cm-1. Normally ro-vibrational peaks are separated by 2B, but in CO2, half of the peaks are missing due to nuclear spin statistics, so the peaks are separated by 4B, or ~1.6 cm-1.

Since carbon dioxide has no Q band (i.e. no transitions where the vibrational energy changes but the rotational energy doesn't) wouldn't it be expected that the wavelength at which it would occur if it happened to have one spike back up to match the observed intensity of the general curve? Since this doesn't happen there is some absorption resulting in a small spike but what else is absorbing this energy?

Thanks.

I am sorry but I really don't understand what you are trying to ask at all.
 
Last edited:
In the first paragraph I mean that the first spectrum was taken of just air and the second contained a methane gas cell which the photons passed through as well as air. But the absorption for the CO2 in air can't be seen in the spectrum with the presence of the methane gas. What else here is contributing to this absorption?

Similarly for the spectrum of air the CO2 should have no Q band, however, there is still some absorption since the position where the Q band should occur provided it did have one does not spike but it appears as just a small hump (these plots are of the observed intensity against the wavelength not wavenumber).
 
Scott Gray said:
In the first paragraph I mean that the first spectrum was taken of just air and the second contained a methane gas cell which the photons passed through as well as air. But the absorption for the CO2 in air can't be seen in the spectrum with the presence of the methane gas. What else here is contributing to this absorption?

Similarly for the spectrum of air the CO2 should have no Q band, however, there is still some absorption since the position where the Q band should occur provided it did have one does not spike but it appears as just a small hump (these plots are of the observed intensity against the wavelength not wavenumber).

There are a couple of possibilities to explain what you see, but both of them are pretty mundane:

First, are you sure the spectrometer isn't set up to do some sort of background subtraction? FTIR's are oftern single beam spectrometers, so the protocol is to first take a background spectrum, and then subtract it from the sample spectrum, so that only the peaks unique to the sample spectrum appear.

The second possibility is that if the spectrometer is set up so that the pathlength through air is fairly short (i.e. the housing is purged with dry nitrogen, or evacuated), and most of that distance is taken up by the sample cell, then the intensity of the air-related bands would be strongly attenuated in the methane spectrum. You can appreciate the reason for this from Beer's law.

For you second question, my guess is that if you improved your resolution, you would see that there really is no Q-branch. However, if you resolve all the rotational lines to the baseline, and you are still seeing a peak at the vibrational origin, then I am not sure where that would be coming from. I seem to recall that a weak Q-branch may become allowed at high-pressure, due to collisions ... however that should not be appearing at atmospheric pressure.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
15K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K