User:James C. Schwabacher/Notebook/CHEM-571/2013/09/04: Difference between revisions
(→Data) |
(→Notes) |
||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
[[User:Matt Hartings|Matt Hartings]] Where is the group data (in graph form)? Which data points did you get rid of? What did that do to the group's calibration curve? What is the concentration of the unknown you measured? What is the error on this measurement based on the error inherent in the calibration curve? Is your concentration in agreement with the concentration measured by the group that made it? | |||
<!-- ##### DO NOT edit below this line unless you know what you are doing. ##### --> | <!-- ##### DO NOT edit below this line unless you know what you are doing. ##### --> |
Revision as of 14:38, 12 September 2013
Biomaterials Design Lab | <html><img src="/images/9/94/Report.png" border="0" /></html> Main project page <html><img src="/images/c/c3/Resultset_previous.png" border="0" /></html>Previous entry<html> </html>Next entry<html><img src="/images/5/5c/Resultset_next.png" border="0" /></html> |
Objective
Procedure
DataMatt Hartings Why does some of this data go below zero? You should re-correct this. The baseline should be zero for this one. NotesAll of the data collected yesterday was found to be systematically lower than the rest of the class' data. Thus, the data from the inosine trial was not included in the overall group data. Furthermore, a trial 2 of adenosine dilutions was run, using a new stock solution. This second set of data fit with the overall group data, and our first trial was discarded. It is most probable that there was an error in making the first set of stock solutions yesterday that resulted in the incomplete transfer of the massed solids into the 100 mL volumetric flasks. Having a smaller amount of solute in the solvent than calculated would result in systematically lower absorbance results.
|