Miguel Gonzalez

Chem 401L

GC/MS Lab Report

Data Analysis:

1-2.

Compound MS   FID  
Alkane: tr (min) k’ tr (min) k’
Decane 2.919 1.162 2.309 0.261
Undecane 3.695 1.729 2.653 0.449
Dodecane 4.461 2.304 3.147 0.719
Tridecane 5.161 2.823 3.756 1.051
Tetradecane 5.786 3.285 4.405 1.406
Alkene      
1-Decene 2.856 1.116 2.453 0.34
Undecane 3.694 1.736 2.655 0.45
1-Dodecene 4.401 2.26 3.423 0.869
1-Tridecene 5.107 2.783 4.061 1.218
1-Tetradecene 5.741 3.253 4.71 1.572
Alcohol    
1-Pentanol 1.696 0.256 3.412 0.859
1-Pentanol, 2-methyl- 1.914 0.418 3.728 1.032
1-Hexanol 2.067 0.531 4.074 1.22
1-Heptanol 2.678 0.984 4.737 1.581
1-Octanol 3.451 1.556 5.36 1.921
Aromatic      
Toluene 1.754 0.3 2.521 0.386
p-xylene 2.156 0.597 2.935 0.614
o-xylene 2.293 0.699 3.216 0.768
4-ethyltoluene 2.727 1.02 3.424 0.882
Benzene, 1,4-diethyl- 3.422 1.535 3.969 1.182
Unknown      
3-methyl, 1-butanol 1.638 0.213 4.246 0.73
Benzene, bromo- 2.554 0.892 3.147 1.334
Undecane 3.693 1.736 2.643 0.453
Tridecane 5.16 2.822 3.747 1.06
  t0 (min)
 MS 1.35
FID
Alkane 1.831
Alkene 1.831
Alcohol 1.801
Aromatic 1.819

Capacity Factor Plot

2.5

2 Alkane
f(x) = 0.8 x + 0.72
R² = 0.98 Linear (Alkane)
Alkene
1.5
f(x) = 0.6 x − 0.45 Linear (Alkene)
FID k'

R² = 0.96
f(x) = 0.54 x − 0.44 Alcohol
f(x) = 0.62 x + 0.25R² = 0.97 Linear (Alcohol)
1 R² = 0.97
Aromatic
Linear (Aromatic)
0.5 Unknown

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
MS k'

HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE FOR HEPTADECANE TO ELUTE: maybe 2.2 min based on

what gina said

3. unknowns:

Unknown Type Carbon Number Molecular Weight (g/mol)

1 (3-methyl, 1-butanol) Alcohol 5 88.148
2 (bromobenzene) Aromatic 6 157.01
3 (undecane) Alkane 11 156.31
4 (tridecane) Alkane 13 184.37

4. The library search result for p and o-xylene did not make it a clear way to make an

unambiguous distinction. Based on the cluster plot, capacity factor plot, and the library search

result, the best method to make this distinction is with the capacity factor plot. P-xylene elutes
first appears on the capacity plot in the aromatic group before o-xylene. One reason could be that

there is symmetry in the p-xylene so there is less polarizability and less interaction in general

than the o-xylene. Having those two clear points on the capacity factor plot makes it the best way

to distinguish between the two isomers.

5. Molar response factor FID:

Molecular
Carbon
Alkane Peak Area Weight RCn
Number
(g/mol)
Decane 10 222052365  142.29  0.919
Undecane 11 215875909  156.31  1
Dodecane 12 216169783  170.34  1.084
Tridecane 13 233875800  184.37  1.162
Tetradecan
14 227859919  198.39  1.25
e

Molecular
Carbon
Alkene Peak Area Weight RCn
Number
(g/mol)
Decene 10 222052365  140.27  0.935
Undecane 11 215875909  156.31  1
Dodecene 12 216169783  168.32  1.039
Tridecene 13 233875800  182.35  1.096
Tetradecene 14 227859919  196.38  1.156

6.
 Alkane: Relative Response Factor vs. Carbon #
1.4

1.2 f(x) = 0.08 x + 0.09

R² = 1
1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5

Alkene: Relative Response Factor vs. Carbon #

1.4
1.2
f(x) = 0.05 x + 0.4
1 R² = 1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5

7.

Compound Peak Area RCn Molecular Moles Grams

Weight
Tridecane 189198134 1.162 184.37 5.749 x 10-4 0.1060
Undecane 188257288 1 156.31 6.647 x 10-4 0.1039

Presentation of Results:
1. a. 3-methyl, 1-butanol

i. From the library search result in the MS run, it showed that 2 out of the 3

searches aligned with 3-methyl, 1-butanol.

ii. In the cluster analysis with Factor 2 vs Factor 1, it showed that this

unknown grouped with the alcohols.

iii. In the capacity factor plot, it aligns with the alcohols and additionally is

the first one to elute in the group. This makes sense given the compound

because it has a lower boiling point, branching, and the fewest number of

carbons, thus further confirming the presence of the compound. If it was

the other compound, 1-pentanol, that the library search resulted in, then

it would have fallen on the 1-pentanol point in the graph.

b. Benzene, bromo-

i. From the library search result in the MS run, all three searches resulted in

bromobenzene as the compound.

ii. In the cluster analysis graph with Factor 2 vs. Factor 1, this unknown is

grouped with the aromatics, which further confirms the aromatic group

associated with bromobenzene.

iii. In the capacity factor plot, bromobenzene follows the linear trend of the

aromatic group, but it does not align, in respect to the y-axis, with the

other standards. This could be explained by the fact that the unknown

has a bromo group. The bromo group causes polarizability that the other

aromatics do not have, in addition to having a larger size than the methyl
 groups. By taking that into consideration, bromobenzene follows the

trend line of the aromatic group in the capacity factor plot.

c. Undecane

i. In the library search result, all three searches resulted in undecane. This

provides the first line of evidence for the unknown

ii. In addition, the capacity factors from the FID and MS data align with the

standard in the alkane and alkene mixes.

Standards Compound MS k’ FID k’

Alkane Undecane 1.729 0.449
Alkene Undecane 1.736 0.45
Unknown Undecane 1.736 0.453
iii. In the capacity factor plot, undecane falls directly on the points of the

standards, further leading me that the unknown was undecane.

iv. In the cluster plot of Factor 2 vs. Factor 1, the undecane grouped with the

alkane compounds.

d. Tridecane

i. All of the 3 library search results in the MS data showed that the

compound was tridecane.

ii. Additionally, the capacity factors from the alkane standards in FID and

MS align with the compound in the unknown solution.

Standards Compound MS k’ FID k’

Alkane Tridecane 2.823 1.051
Unknown Tridecane 2.822 1.060
iii. In the capacity factor plot, tridecane falls right on the tridecane from the

alkane standard. This further points in the direction that tridecane is one
 of the unknowns. Also, it makes sense that tridecane is after undecane to

elute because it has more carbons attached to it than undecane.

iv. From the cluster plot with Factor 2 vs Factor 1, this unknown also

grouped with the alkane groups. Given all the evidence, it ultimately

confirms that tridecane was the compound.

2. See Question 4 in Data Analysis

3. See Question 7 in Data Analysis

Additional Questions:

1. From the cluster analysis, there are clearly four different clusters. These clusters

correspond to the alkane, alkene, aromatic, and alcohol groups. The alkanes, alkenes,

and aromatics were the only ones that were group closed together. The alcohol cluster

was loosely together, which may be due to polarizability of the compounds and their

ability to hydrogen bond. Some other factors that affect the cluster analysis are the

carbon number, injection technique used, and the size of the compound. All of these

could play a role in how the clustering results.

2. You could run known samples of the compound of interest in the GC and then compare

the retention times to the unknown sample. If they are the same, then it should be the

same compound. The mass spec adds certainty by allowing the data to be compared to

a library with a vast amount of compounds in order to give more certainty in your

results.