2800Excel_Word

2800Excel_Word - .009 Percent Error 1.35 1.35 0.29...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Brittney Brown September 1, 2010 Chem2800/L Formula A Formula B Formula C Formula D Equation E: 2NaHCO 3 (s) → Na 2 CO 3 (s) + CO 2 (g) + H 2 O(g) Equation F: 6NO 3 - + 6H + + 5(NH 2 ) 2 CO → 8N 2 (g) + 5CO 2 (g) + 13H 2 O Table G x i y i mg SO 4 2- /L, c x Turbidimeter Reading, R 0.00 0.06 5.00 1.48 10.00 2.28 15.0 3.98 20.0 4.61
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Table H SUMMARY OUTPUT Regression Statistics R Square 0.983389947 Observations 5 Coefficients Standard Error Intercept 0.162 0.213204128 X Variable 1 0.232 0.017408044 Equation 1 Table 1. Results of Iron analysis (mg/tab) of a Food Supplement by a Gravimetric Method A B C 16.2 16.9 16.8 17.8 17.2 16.9 17.1 17.2 16.9 16.3 18.0 16.8 17.7 17.5 17.2 18.2 16.6 17.1
Background image of page 2
M(true value)= 17.0 mg/tab A B C Average (mg/tab) 17.23 17.23 16.95 Standard Deviation 0.83 0.48 0.16 Percent Relative Standard Deviation 4.82% 2.79% 0.94% 95% Confidence level 0.87 0.51 0.17 % RSD 0.048 0.027
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: .009 Percent Error 1.35% 1.35% 0.29% Precision/ Accuracy Not Precise & Not Accurate Precise but Not Accurate Precise & Accurate Grubbs Test No outliers No outliers No outliers The design sample A is the most suitable for analyzing the solution of unknown concentration, because it had the highest R 2 value (0.9964). As R 2 approaches unity, the model fits the data points well. The worse calibration curve was sample B, which had a R 2 value of 0.9278. R 2 values less than 0.9600 have errors associated with the calibration. Table 3. Predicted concentrations of Ca 2+ in Milk Sample A A Predicted [Ca 2+ ] mM Absorbance 0.178 0.0353 0.175 0.0347 0.182 0.0360 0.178 0.0352...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 4

2800Excel_Word - .009 Percent Error 1.35 1.35 0.29...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online