1.

0 Abstract:
This experiment emphasizes on atomic absorption spectroscopy by flame from a burner system
using standard solution. The target of the experiment is also to study the methodology of
preparing the standard calibrating solution. The instrument utilized is this experiment is atomic
absorption spectrometer and the experiment demonstrates how the apparatus function. Moreover,
the compound used in this experiment is Iron (II) nitrate and copper (II) Sulfate. In the
experiment sample solutions of different concentrations were made and ran through the AAS.
From the data of analysis obtained from the spectrometer, calibration curves were constructed by
plotting the average absorbance vs. the concentration. The experiment enabled us to determine
the amount of metal in the sample.

2.0 Introduction
Atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) is a spectroanalytical strategy for the quantitative
determination of chemical elements utilizing the absorption of optical radiation (light) by free
atoms in the vaporous state. They relate to the energy required to advance electrons starting with
one energy level then onto the next higher energy level. The procedure of nuclear absorption
spectroscopy included two stages which is the atomization of the specimen and the absorption of
radiation from a light source by the free atoms.

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy

Atoms of various elements assimilate certain wavelengths of light. Light from a specific element
is utilized to break down a specimen and to figure out if it contains a specific element. For
instance, a light that contains lead discharges light from energized lead atoms that can deliver the
right blend of wavelengths that will be consumed by any lead atoms from the example. In this
examination the specimen is tried utilizing linear concentration of 4,8,10 ppm.
The relation to find the volume can be calculated using this formula:
M1V1 = M2V2

Where:
M1 = initial concentration in ppm
2

V1 = initial volume in mL (volume of solution required)

M2 = final concentration in ppm
V2 = final volume in mL (volume of volumetric flask)

In this investigation, a calibration curve is built by running a few specimens of known

concentration of iron nitrate under the same conditions and record the comparing level of
absorbance, that is, a converse rate of the light transmitted. A straight line can be drawn between
the different points.

Figure 2: Theoretical Calibration Curve

3.0 Apparatus:

Figure 3: Atomic absorption spectroscopy operating machine

3.1 Materials:

100 ml and 50 mL volumetric flask

10 mL and 50 mL beaker
10 mL,5 mL pipette
Pipette filler

Chemicals:

Copper (II) Sulfate

Iron (II) Nitrate

4.0 Procedure:
5

Five standard calibration solution were prepared for each iron and copper covering the

range of 4,6,8,10 ppm

Distilled water was prepared as blank solution
Analysis of AAS was conducted
Firstly all the standard calibrated solutions were ran through the AAS and then an

unknown solution was ran through the AAS

The analysis for the experiment were repeated
The steps of the whole analysis experiment were recorded
From the analysis data obtained, standard calibration curves were plotted.
From the standard calibration curve the percentage of heavy metal ion present in the
unknown sample was calculated

5.0 Results:

Diluted solution
6

M1V1= M2V2
Where;
M1= Initial concentration in ppm
V1= Initial volume in ml (volume of solution required)
M2= Final concentration in ppm
V2= Final volume in ml
Copper:
Table 5.1: Concentration and volume of the stock and diluted solution
Concentration of

Volume of

Concentration of

Volumetric flask

Copper (ppm)

Copper (ml) V1

Copper (ppm)

(ml) V2

M2
4

50

M1
200

4 x 50
=1
200

200

6 x 50
=1.5
200

50

200

8 x 50
=2
200

50

200

10 x 50
=2.5
200

10

50

Iron:

Table 5.2 Concentration and volume of the stock and diluted solution
Concentration of

Volume of

Concentration of

Volumetric flask

iron (ppm)

iron (ml)

iron (ppm)

(ml) V2

M1
200

V1
4 x 50
=1
200

M2
4

50

200

6 x 50
=1.5
200

50

200

8 x 50
=2
200

50

200

10 x 50
=2.5
200

10

50

AAS results
Copper:
Table 5.3 Absorbance data for the calibration standards
Concen Absor
tration

banc

s
0

e
0.011

2
0.006

8
0.007

10

0
0.007

Unkno

7
0.001

wn

copper
0.01
0.01

f(x) = 0x + 0.01
R = 0.99

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
3

10

11

Figure 4: Standard calibration curve for Copper

Concentration of Unknown:
y=mx+c
0.0010 = 0.0002(x) + 0.0061
x= -25.5 ppm
Iron:

Table 5.4 Absorbance data for the calibration standards

Concentrati

Absorban

ons
0
4
6
10
Unknown

ce
-0.0003
0.0019
-0.0015
0.0097
0.0080
9

Iron
0.01
0.01
f(x) = 0x - 0
R = 0.96

0.01
0.01
0
0
0
0

10

12

Figure 5: Standard calibration curve for Copper

Concentration of Unknown:
y=mx+c
0.0080 = 0.001(x) - 0.001
x= 9 ppm

10

6.0 Discussion:
The experiment started with preparing the stock and diluted solution. There were four different
concentrations of the solution 4,6,8,10 ppm, which were prepared for each iron and copper
respectively. Different formulas were used in order to determine the mass and volume to be used
for the different concentrations.
The small tube of the operating machine was inserted into the test tube containing the sample
solution in order to get the absorption of the sample. The absorbance for calibration zero was
determined which was 0.0112. After getting the results for the absorbance of elements at
different concentration, a standard calibration curve was made.
The standard calibration curve consisted of absorbance against concentration. The graph
consisted of the regression line from which the slope and intercept were determined. For copper
the slope and intercept determined were 0.0002 and 0.0061, while for iron 0.001 and - 0.001.The
unknown concentration for iron was determined to be 9 ppm while for copper was -25.5
ppm.The unknown concentration for copper is illogical which was down to the errors made
during the experiment moreover In theory the line obtained should be linear and the correlation
0.999 as these compliment the concentration of each solution. From the calibration graph for
copper the correlation turned out to be 0.9856 while for iron 0.9614. Although they do not
deviate strongly from the theory but its still shows there were errors made during the experiment.
The errors made could be human, firstly in preparing the solutions. There could be parallax error
while getting the perfect volume for the solution or errors made while putting the perfect amount
of element mass needed for the solution. Apart from that the machine was not operating at
optimum level. There was a problem with the compressor and the device stopped midway of the
experiment a couple of times.

11

7.0 Conclusion:
The experiment was not successful as the results deviated from theoretical
results. In order to improve the experiment the operating machine should be made sure to be
working at optimum condition and the different concentration solutions should be prepared with
extreme cautious as slight deviation effect the overall result of the experiment.

8.0 References:

Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy | Atomic Absorption Spectrometer Aurora Biomed.

2016 [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.aurorabiomed.com/atomic-absorption-

spectroscopy/. [Accessed 8 March 2016].

A. Walsh (1955), the application of atomic absorption spectra to chemical analysis,
Spectrochim. Acta 7: 108117.
H. Becker-Ross, S. Florek, U. Heitmann, R. Weisse (1996), Influence of the spectral
bandwidth of the spectrometer on the sensitivity using continuum source AAS, Fresenius
J. Anal. Chem. 355: 300303.

12