Chemistry Calculating Polystyrene Mv Using GPC

  • Thread starter Thread starter NotJohnson
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the weight-average molecular weight (Mv) of a polystyrene polymer using GPC data. Initial calculations yielded an Mv of 880.62, which raised concerns due to its significant deviation from the number average molecular weight (Mn) of 23097 g/mol. It was clarified that the lab manual's instructions were misleading, and the correct approach involved using the Mark–Houwink-Sakurada equation with the GPC values. After following the proper procedure, a more reasonable Mv of 38419 was obtained. This highlights the importance of accurately interpreting lab instructions and using appropriate equations for molecular weight calculations.
NotJohnson
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am trying to calculate Mv as part of a lab using GPC data for a polystyrene polymer that I produced with a known polystyrene standard. for the produced PS I have a = .678 and K = .00018 and the standard has a = .725 and K = .011. intrinsic viscosity was measured as .2346
Mn for the polymer from GPC is 23097 g/mol (for reference)
The solvent is THF, I'm not sure if the GPC is conventionally or universally calibrated

Homework Equations


IV (eta) = K*Mv^a (Mark–Houwink-Sakurada equation)

ln (Mv) (of PS produced) = 1/(asa + 1) * ln (Kst/Ksa) + (ast + 1) / (asa + 1) * ln (Mvst)
(sa = produced sample, st = standard) (equation correcting for GPC universal calibration)

The Attempt at a Solution


I used the Mark–Houwink-Sakurada equation and got Mv = 68.08 for the standard
I then used the below equation to solve for my sample and got Mv = 880.62

I am confused as to why this number is so much lower than the Mn or Mw. Is this normal or am I using the wrong procedure or equation to calculate this value?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


Never mind, apparently the lab manual worded this question very strangely. We were supposed to compare a and K from the literature to the ones from the GPC but only use the Mark–Houwink-Sakurada equation using the GPC values. Doing this gets an Mv of 38419 which is much more sensible (and ignore the effects of calibration method).
 
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

Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top