Determining an Unknown Substance through Qualitative and

Quantitative Analysis
CHM 2045L Section 003
T.A. Timothy Vasquez
3/30/15

Introduction
The objective of this project was to attempt to determine an unknown inorganic material
that is usually present in water samples from different sources. During the first week of the
experiment, qualitative analysis was used to determine the unknown inorganic compound.
Qualitative analysis can be defined as the determination of the nature of the chemical species in a
sample (Helmenstine). At the end of the first week, the results from the qualitative testing should
have been conclusive enough so that that identity of the unknown could be clarified from the list
of known chemicals. For the second week of the experiment, there was at least one quantitative
test performed for confirmation of the unknown. Quantitative analysis is defined as the
determination of how much of a given component is present in a sample (Helmenstine).
Volumetric analysis is an example of a quantitative test used in this project for the determination
of the unknown. Volumetric analysis is suitable for unknowns that have acidic or basic
properties. A clear understanding of stoichiometry and chemical equations will be necessary
(Sandi-Urena et al.). Acid-base titration was the main quantitative test used in the experiment.
Acid-Base titrations are usually used to find the the amount of a known acidic or basic substance
through acid base reactions. The analyte is the solution with an unknown molarity. The reagent is
the solution with a known molarity that will react with the analyte (Chemwiki). In the qualitative
tests, the determination of the chemical was based on examples such as observing that a reaction
is creating gas or observing that a reaction results in a color change. Qualitative analysis is not as
reliable as quantitative analysis but is often far easier (Chemwiki). By using both qualitative and
quantitative analysis, the results were able to determine the unknown sample which had been
labeled F. This project focused mainly on establishing the identity of different chemicals
through running series of chemical tests on a variety of known chemicals. There were 12

chemicals available during the lab in which to compare the unknown F: CaCl2, NaNo3,
(NH4)2SO4, NH4Cl, MgSO4, Ca(NO2)2, NaC2H3O2, NaOH, Na2CO3, Na2C2O4, and NaCl. By
testing the given chemicals and comparing it to the results of the unknown substance, it can be
determined what the unknown may be. It was theorized that by using both qualitative and
quantitative analysis on the unknown substance, the identity will successfully be confirmed from
the given known chemicals.
Methods
Qualitative analysis
Solubility Test- Each piece of glassware was properly cleaned with distilled water. First a
50 mL beaker was weighed and then 0.2 g of the unknown substance F was transferred into the
beaker and reweighed. 20 mL of distilled water was measured into a graduated cylinder then
transferred into the beaker with the unknown substance. After stirring the mixture, it was noted
whether or not the unknown substance dissolved. Repeating the above steps, the solubility of all
the known substances were determined. Afterwards, the known chemicals that had adverse
reactions to the unknown substance F were eliminated.
pH Test- Similarly to the solubility test, a solution of 0.2 g of the unknown solution F
was created within 20 mL of distilled water in a 50 mL beaker. Using litmus paper, the pH of the
unknown was determined and the color was recorded to use for comparison later. After
eliminating the adverse substances from the solubility test, solutions were similarly recreated of
the remaining known chemicals with 20 mL of distilled water and 0.2 g of the known substance
into a 50 mL beaker and then the pH was calculated. Taking a litmus paper strip, it was dipped
halfway into the solution. The observations were recorded then the litmus paper was removed.

After the color change of the litmus paper and pH level of each known substance were recorded,
any substance that was contrary in pH reaction was eliminated.
Flame Test- First 5 mL of Hydrochloric acid (HCl) was poured into a 50 mL beaker.
Make sure to clean the nickel-chromium wire loop by dipping it in hydrochloric acid. Then, rinse
the nickel-chromium wire with distilled or deionized water. Test the cleanliness of the loop by
inserting it into a gas flame. If a color is produced, the loop was not sufficiently cleaned. Prepare
the solutions of the unknown substance F and the remaining known chemicals. After preparing
the solutions, set up the Bunsen burner and switch the gas on. The flame can be controlled by
adjusting the air ports. Dip the clean loop into the unknown substance then place the loop with
the unknown substance into the base of the flame. Record your observations noting the flames
color. Recreate the experiment with the remaining known chemical solutions. Make sure to
properly clean the wire loop in the HCl solution first. Compare the results to that of the known
flame colors to identify which metal cation is present in the substance. Eliminate all of the
compounds whose properties are not similar to that of the unknown.
Conductivity test- A solution of each known and unknown substance was obtained by
preparing 20 mL of distilled water in a 50 mL beaker. The glassware must be cleaned sufficiently
with distilled water incase residue remained from previous experiments. This would corrupt the
conductivity levels. Add 0.2 g of the unknown substance to the distilled water to create the
solution to be used for the conductivity test. Place the conductivity meter in the solution and
record the results. For the remaining known solutions, recreate the test with the approximate
amount of distilled water and 0.2 g of whichever known substance being tested. Record the
results and compare to the unknown substance.

Quantitative analysis
Titration- Obtain 0.2 g of Sodium Carbonate along with 0.2 g of the unknown substance
F. Properly clean all glassware with distilled water. This experiment will be performed
multiple times in order to assure accurate results. Dissolve 0.2 g of the unknown substance in to
100 mL of distilled water in a 250 mL beaker. Add 3 drops each of methyl orange and
phenolphthalein to the solution in the beaker in order to determine the endpoint later in the
experiment. Prepare 250 mL of a diluted Hydrochloric acid solution in a volumetric flask to be
used as the titrant. 3M was available of HCl except only 0.1M of HCl was needed for the
titration. By calculating the molarity with the equation M1/V1=M2/V2 it was calculated 8.3 mL of
HCL was to be added to the 250 mL of distilled water. Clean the burette with distilled water and
clamp it vertically. Rinse the burette with <5 mL of the HCl solution. Place the funnel into the
top of the burette and fill up to 0.00 mL with the 0.1M HCl titrant solution. Place the beaker with
the unknown F solution over a white piece of paper under the burette. Add HCl 1 mL at a time
into the analyte solution until the indicator begins to change color and then decrease increments
to 0.5 mL or smaller at a time. With each drop added of the titrant solution, make sure to take the
pH of the solution. Take several measurements to record an accurate endpoint. Once past the first
endpoint, continue to add the titrant solution slowly until the analyte solution changes color
again at a second endpoint. Take the final volume reading and record results. Repeat the titration
procedure three more times to test the accuracy. The same experiment will be recreated again
except with 0.2 g of Sodium carbonate instead of 0.2 g of the unknown substance F.

Results
Table 1: Solubility Test

Table 2: pH Test

Table 3: Flame Test

Table 4: Conductivity Test

Table 5: Titration of Unknown F

Table 6: Titration of Sodium Carbonate

Discussion
The qualitative and quantitative analysis seemed to prove effective in determining the
unknown substance F. All of the known chemicals were successfully eliminated that our
unknown substance F could not have been. When looking at the results from all the qualitative
and quantitative tests, it is obvious to see that the hypothesis was effective.
The results from the solubility test shows that while all of the chemicals were soluble,
they had different reactions in the solution. The known chemicals that were the most similar to
Unknown F were Magnesium sulfate, Sodium carbonate, Sodium Oxalate, Sodium acetate,
and Ammonium sulfate. The other known substances were eliminated from the remaining
experiments.

The pH test proved to show the pH of the different known chemicals. The chemicals
Sodium carbonate and Sodium acetate along with the unknown F turned the litmus paper a
dark blue. This indicated that these chemicals had a higher pH and were basic. The remaining
chemicals Magnesium sulfate, Sodium oxalate, and ammonium sulfate were eliminated from the
comparison of the unknown F because these chemicals had a higher pH and were considered
acidic.
The remaining chemicals that were tested against the unknown F were Sodium
carbonate and Sodium acetate. Flame tests are used to identify the presence of a relatively small
number of metal ions in a compound (Clark 2005). All three chemicals used in the flame test
gave off an orange color. While it was certain that the unknown F might be one of the
chemicals tested, the results were unable to conclude which one. The flames burned an orange
color because of the presence of sodium ions in the solutions created of each chemical.
In the conductivity test, it was established whether or not the substances had the ability to
conduct electricity. The conductivity test is used to measure the concentration of dissolved solids
which have been ionized in a polar solution such as water (Heyda). The results were measured in
milli-Siemens. The higher the number obtained, the greater conductivity the substance had.
Although our unknown F and Sodium carbonate were not exact in numbers, it can be said that
the results were much closer in conductivity as to the unknown F and Sodium acetate. Because
of this factor, along with the other qualitative tests, Sodium acetate was ruled out as a contender
from the unknown F. With the final qualitative test, Sodium carbonate was determined to be
the unknown substance F.
Although it had been determined that the unknown was Sodium carbonate through the
qualitative analysis, it was needed to determine the amount of the unknown through quantitative

analysis. Titration was the quantitative analysis chosen to be used in this experiment.
Hydrochloric acid was titrated into the unknown F which was believed to be Sodium
carbonate. The titration of the unknown F resulted in two endpoints at 20.5 mL turning from a
bright pink to a dull yellow and again at 39.5 mL from the dull yellow to an orange. The solution
became increasingly acidic as the titration occurred, reaching a pH of 2.3 at 45 mL.
Conclusion
From experimentation using qualitative and quantitative analysis, it was found that the
unknown substance F turned out to in fact be sodium carbonate. The hypothesis turned out to
be correct. The more experiments that were performed using quantitative and qualitative
analysis, the closer and more precise the results became. Both qualitative and quantitative
analysis are crucial types of experiments to be performed in the lab.
Research Connection
In a laboratory setting to the similar to how we performed our research, experimentation
in the same field was performed by Dr. Bill Baker at the University of South Florida.
Researchers in chemistry typically study new materials from a variety of sources. By taking
samples from the environment, Dr. Baker is able to study them and understand their chemistry
and potential uses (Sandi-Urena et al.). In his research, he uses very similar techniques to the
ones used in determining our unknown inorganic compound. Our focus in the project was to
determine an unknown contaminate present in water samples from different sources. Dr. Baker
was able to perform similar research by running several chemical tests in which he discovered a
chemical, meridianin A, in the Antarctic tunicate Synoicum sp. Where this chemical possesses
remarkable biological activity and toxicity toward murine tumor cell lines (Sandi-Urena et al.).

10

References
"Acid-Base Titrations." Chemwiki. UC Davis, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.
Clark, Jim. "Flame Tests." Flame Tests. N.p., 2005. Web. 05 Mar. 2015.
Helmenstine, Anne Marie, Ph. D. "Quantitative Analysis Definition." About Education.
About.com, 30 Apr. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.
Helmenstine, Anne Marie, Ph. D. "Qualitative Analysis Definition." About Education.
About.com, 12 Jun. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.
Heyda, Mark. "Conductivity Measurement and Theory." MBH Engineering Systems. N.p., 2006.
Web. 08 Mar. 2015.
Sandi-Urena, Santiago, Adrian Villalta-Cerdas, Todd Gatlin, and Vasiliki Lykourinou. General
Chemistry I Lab Manual. Tampa: Pro-Copy, 2015. Print.
"Qualitative Analysis." Chemwiki. UC Davis, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.