Title: Water Hardness

Research Question:
Using complexometric titration, how does the calcium and magnesium ion content in a range of
10 different bottled water and water types (Bel-Aqua, Evian, Awake, Voltic, distilled water, tap
water, Highland springs, Special Ice, Ocean Spring, Everpure) used in the school community
vary?

Subject: Chemistry

Topic: Moles and concentration, Bonding

Word count: 3.510

 1

Table of contents Page number

1.0 Introduction……………………………………..2-4
1.1 Focus…………………………………………….2
1.2 Background information………………………...3-4
1.3 Justification……………………….……………..4
2.0 Method…………………………………………..4-11
2.1 List of apparatus………………………………....6
2.2 List of reagents…………………………………..7
2.3 Preparation of solution………………………......7
2.4 Variables ………………………………………...9
2.5 Reactions and equations………………….……...9-10
2.6 Procedure………………………………….…….10-11
2.7 Safety and ethical concerns………………….…..11
3.0 Data collection and processing…………………..11-22
3.1 Qualitative data ……………………………….....11-12
3.2 Quantitative data…………………………………12-18
3.3 Graphs………………………………………….. 19
3.4 Sample calculations……………………………. 19-21
4.0 Analysis………………………………………... 22-23
4.1 Discussion of graphs and data…………………. 22-23
5.0 Conclusion……………………………………….23
6.0 Evaluation ……………………………….............24
7.0 Improvement……………………………………..24-25
8.0 References………………………………………25-26
 2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The calcium and magnesium ion content of a solution contribute to a state of water,

described as “hardness”. This is the result of when water, in combination with carbon dioxide,

moves through rock and soil, dissolving small amounts of minerals and keeping them in this

solution. These water solutions contain cations usually with a charge of 2+ or larger. Ions with a

charge of 2+, which is typical of group 2 metals, include Ca2+ and Mg2+. The two cations in focus

are from the elements calcium and magnesium, two very common metals in nature that react to

form barely soluble products and sometimes complexes with water and other elements. These

products are often present in underground water systems and thus result in water being “hard”.

Some examples of such products are bicarbonate (HCO3) and calcium carbonate (CaCO3).

1.1 FOCUS

“Hardness” is directly proportional to the concentrations of calcium and magnesium ions

dissolved in water and so can be described as the concentration of multivalent cations (cations

with more than one valence electron, in this case the calcium and magnesium ions), dissolved in

the water.

Hard water has no adverse effects on health, and is in fact seen as healthy by individuals in

the school community based on its higher mineral ion concentration. It is, however, seen as a

hindrance to a number of cleaning tasks from laundry, to dishwashing, bathing and personal

grooming. In the school however, the primary use of most of these different water samples is

drinking. These brands of water have varying mineral ion content and are all perceived to be

beneficial due to these mineral ions. Hence, the aim of this experiment was to investigate the

hardness of water in a range of 10 different water samples, used by the many people on the

school campus. This investigation used complexometric titration otherwise known as

 3

chelatometry, which is a form of volumetric analysis where the formation of a coloured complex

is used to determine the end point of a reaction and identification of metal ions in solution, This

method was chosen as opposed to using spectrophotometry, as the spectrophotometer is mostly

used for measuring hardness in extremely soft water ( concentrations less than 4 mg/cm3). (Hach,

2017)

Research question: Using complexometric titration, how does the calcium and magnesium ion

content in a range of 10 different bottled water and water types (Bel-Aqua, Evian, Awake,

Voltic, distilled water, tap water, Highland springs, Special Ice, Ocean Spring, Everpure) used in

the school community vary?

1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

It is common knowledge to many people that metal ions such as calcium can be found in many

different sources of water, including drinking water, but as to the concentrations of mineral ions

present, many are unaware. Although still safe to drink (in high demand in fact), high

concentrations of multivalent metal ions (i.e. metal ions with a valence of more than one) can

result in water being “hard”, which can negatively impact some of the day to day tasks we

perform, from showering to washing other things. Well water can be hard because the high

calcium concentration in well water is a result of ground water passing through or over

limestone deposits or other calcium ore. Concentrations range from zero to several hundred

mg/dm. Like calcium, magnesium concentration is raised as a result of water passing over

magnesium ore formations. Calcium carbonate (CaCO3), magnesium hydroxide (Mg(OH)2), and

calcium sulphate (CaSO4) are a few of the deposits formed by the passage of water over ore
 4

formations of magnesium and calcium. Another example is the reaction of calcium with

bicarbonate;

Ca2+ (aq) + 2 HCO-3(aq) → CaCO3(s) + H2O(l) + CO2(g)

And the formation of calcium carbonate

CaCO3 (s) + CO2 (aq) + H2O (l) ⇋ Ca2+ (aq) + 2HCO3− (aq)

The sum of magnesium and calcium iron concentrations both expressed as calcium carbonate in

milligrams per litre is known as the total hardness. General guidelines for classification of water

in the United States are: 0 to 60 mg /dm3 (milligrams per litre) as calcium carbonate is classified

as soft; 61 to 120 mg/dm3 as moderately hard; 121 to 180 mg/dm3 as hard; and more than 180

mg/dm3 as very hard. (Heidekamp, Annelies J). Hardness was initially thought to be the

capacity of water needed to precipitate soap as water which is hard in nature would not allow

soap to form as much suds. Water with high concentrations of magnesium and calcium ions is

detrimental to plumbing and heaters, because at increased temperatures, scale of calcium and

magnesium ions is formed, which could possibly clog pipes or damage heaters.

1.3 JUSTIFICATION

Within the school community, the widespread usage of bottled water is as a result of the

preference of bottled water, thought to be high in metal ion concentration (especially calcium),

and therefore „purer‟ as compared to tap water. This investigation will aid in an informed

comparison and evaluation of this conception, as well as establishing the true calcium and

magnesium ion values in the samples of bottled water and tap water to be analysed.

2.0 METHOD

The method to be used was obtained from an online source (Canterbury). Some changes made to

the original method include metric systems (mL to cm3) and some volumes of reactants, such as
 5

halving the mass of ErioT indicator and the volume of ammonia and absolute ethanol needed to

turn it into a solution, in order to maintain the concentration specified in the referred literature

(Canterbury). This was done to avoid error and wastage, as advised not to store more than one or

two days before use, by the source the investigation was based on (Canterbury).

The method to be used is known as complexometric titration, used for finding the total calcium

and magnesium content of a given sample or also to find the total hardness of water, as the total

concentration of magnesium and calcium ions in a sample are considered to be the hardness. This

method utilized EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) or Edetic Acid, which is the acid form

of edetate, a chelating agent with anti-hypercalcemic and anticoagulant properties. Edetic acid

bonds with calcium and heavy metal ions, forming soluble stable complexes with calcium and

magnesium ions. It made use of the azo dye, Eriochrome Black T or ErioT as an indicator, (due

to its chemical association with azo pigments which are insoluble in water and other solvents),

which is blue in colour. The indicator also formed a complex with the calcium, magnesium and

other metal ions, changing from blue to red (red being an indication of a higher concentration of

these metal ions and pink indicating a lower concentration) in the process. Ammonium chloride,

(NH4Cl), was used as a buffer for this titration because EDTA is insoluble in water at low pH.

This is because H4Y (The various EDTA species are often abbreviated H4Y, H3Y-, H2Y2-, HY3-

and Y4-), is predominant in environments of low pH (less than 2). By increasing the pH, each

hydrogen ion in the carboxyl groups of EDTA will start to dissociate, making it easier for metal

ions to bond to as they do not need to remove hydrogen ions first. Above pH 10, Y4- is

predominant. As Y4- is needed to react with the metal ions present in the titration solution, a

buffer with a pH of 10 or higher, such as ammonium chloride is used. The branded water

samples were obtained from a local shop, unrefrigerated (room temperature), and distilled and
 6

tap water samples were obtained within the school. Hydrated magnesium chloride (MgCl2⋅6H2O)

was used in back titration to complex the excess EDTA in solution until the endpoint, after

which the remaining calcium and magnesium ions complex with the Eriochrome black T

indicator. Hydrated magnesium chloride was also used due to its ability to produce a sharp

endpoint, seen in the complex it forms with the EDTA (wine-red).

The set-up involved a titration setup, for the indicator reaction with the water samples. The

reagent preparations took place in a fume cupboard (as was the case with the preparation of the

ammonium chloride buffer due to the presence of concentrated ammonia) and away from naked

flame in the case of dissolving the Eriochrome Black T indicator in ethanol. The water samples

were covered during the time they were not in use to avoid contamination by any of the reagents.

The burette was filled to the (0.00 ±0.05) cm3 mark with the hydrated magnesium chloride

solution prepared, before being used to titrate each water sample, which had the specified

volumes of indicator, ammonium chloride and hydrated magnesium chloride in mixture, until the

colour change from blue to red occurred, at which point the burette tap was closed and the titre

value recorded. Prior to the actual experimentation, trial titrations were carried out, using

samples of tap water, to confirm that the experiment indeed was viable.

2.1 LIST OF APPARATUS:

1. (50.00 ± 0.05 cm3) Burette (1)

2. (100.00 ± 0.05 cm3) conical flasks (2)

3. (50.00 ± 0.05 cm3) pipette (1),

4. (250.0 ± 0.1 cm3) volumetric flasks (2),

5. (100.00 ± 0.05 cm3) measuring cylinder (1)

6. (50.00 ± 0.05 cm3) beakers (2)

 7

7. Kettle (1)*

8. Temperature sensor (1)*

*This equipment was used to remove reduce carbon dioxide levels in the distilled water samples via boiling, a

more easily controllable alternative to using a Bunsen burner.

2.2 LIST OF REAGENTS

1. EDTA

2. Ammonium chloride

3. Eriochrome black T indicator

4. Hydrated magnesium chloride

5. Water samples

2.3 PREPARATIONS OF SOLUTION

1. EDTA (C10H16N2O8) was prepared by adding (9.310 ± 0.001) g of EDTA salt to (500.0 ±

17.5) cm3 of distilled water in a volumetric flask (250.0 ± 0.1 cm3).

2. A buffer solution of Ammonium chloride (NH4Cl) was made by adding (7.000 ±

0.001)g of ammonium chloride to (57.00 ± 0.05) cm3 concentrated ammonia and then

diluted to (100.00 ± 0.05) cm3 with distilled water in a volumetric flask (pH 10.5)

3. The indicator, Eriochrome black T (C20H12N3NaO7S) was made by dissolving (0.200 ±

0.005) g of Eriochrome black T in (15.00 ± 0.05) cm3 of concentrated ammonia solution

and (5.00 ± 0.05) cm3 absolute ethanol.

4. Hydrated magnesium chloride (MgCl2 .6H2 O(s) in a 0.025 moldm-3 solution was made

by weighing (2.540 ± 0.005) g of magnesium chloride hexahydrate and diluting to

(500.00 ± 0.01) cm3 with distilled water in a volumetric flask (175.0 ± 0.1 cm3).
 8

For sample preparation, samples already in solution required no further preparation.

Figure 3: Pink colour observed before addition of EDTA

In Fig. 3, the pink colour seen is as a result of the product formed by the indicator and the calcium ions in
the solution. At this point all reagents excluding EDTA have been added.
In Fig. 4, the blue colour change is seen after the endpoint of the titration has been reached- a sign of total
reaction of all Ca2+ and Mg2+ ions in solution.

Figure 4: Blue colour observed after titration

Figure 5: Setup for the titration experiment ( Stubbings, 2018)

 9

2.4 VARIABLES:

Independent variables: Water samples used (Bel-Aqua, Evian, Awake, Voltic, distilled

water, tap water, Highland springs, Special Ice, Ocean Spring, Everpure).

Dependent variables: End point colour of each sample, varying from red (high concentration

of calcium and magnesium ions) to pink (lower concentration of calcium and magnesium ions),

volume of EDTA needed to titrate samples.

Controlled variables: Volume of water (100.00 ± 0.05 cm3), EDTA and Ammonium chloride

buffer used (500 ± 17.5 cm3 and 157 ± 0.1 cm3 respectively).

2.5 REACTIONS AND EQUATIONS

Fig1: EDTA 2-D structure (Pubchem) Fig. 2: Eriochrome black T 2-D structure (Pubchem)

The main reaction is:

Ca2+ (aq) + EDTA4− (aq)→ [Ca-EDTA]2−(aq)

Fig. 3: Structural equation of reaction between EDTA and calcium ion (Penn State/ Behrend)
 10

Ca2+ + In2- → CaIn Eqn. 2

Consider the indicator ion, In 2-, to be blue and the product, CaIn to be wine red

CaIn + EDTA4- → CaEDTA2- + In2- Eqn. 3

In this experiment, the end point will be indicated when the original red solution turns to blue, as

a result of all Ca2+ or Mg2+ ions forming complexes with EDTA ions.

Indicator reaction:

ErioT + Mg2+ → ErioT-Mg

2.6 PROCEDURE

To standardize the EDTA solution

1. A (10.00 ± 0.01) cm3 sample of the EDTA solution was pipetted into a (100.00 ± 0.05
cm3) conical flask.
2. (10 ± 0.01) cm3 of ammonia buffer solution and 1.00 ± 0.01 cm3 of Eriochrome Black T
indicator solution were added to the EDTA solution.
3. Using a (50.00 ± 0.05 cm3) burette, the EDTA was titrated with the magnesium chloride
solution until the endpoint was reached; a permanent colour change from blue to pink.
Titration method for water samples

1. (100.00 ± 0.01) cm3 of the water sample was poured into a (250.00 ± 0.01) cm3 conical
flask.
2. A 0.005 moldm-3 EDTA solution was made by adding (100.00 ± 0.01) cm3 of water to
the 0.05 moldm-3 solution of EDTA.
3. (20.00 ± 0.01) cm3 of the 0.005 moldm3 EDTA solution was added to the water sample.
4. (10.00 ± 0.01) cm3 of the ammonia buffer and (1.00 ± 0.01) cm3 of Eriochrome Black T
indicator solution were added to the water sample.
5. A 0.0025 moldm-3 magnesium chloride solution was prepared by adding (100.00 ± 0.01)
cm3 of water to the 0.025 moldm-3 magnesium chloride solution.
6. The water samples were titrated with this 0.0025 moldm-3 magnesium chloride solution
until the solution changed from blue to a permanent pink colour.
 11

7. The prior steps were followed with other samples, keeping the volume and concentration
of reactants the same until concordant results (titres agreeing within 0.10 ± 0.01 cm3)
were obtained.
2.7 SAFETY AND ETHICAL CONCERNS:

This experiment utilizes chemicals such as:

1. Ammonia, a highly corrosive substance with a pungent smell. As such parts of the

experiment involving ammonia were performed in a fume cupboard, safety goggles,

gloves and an apron were used to protect my skin and eyes. In the event of contact with

my skin, the affected area was thoroughly washed and neutralized with water. Disposal of

chemicals were carried out by pouring the ammonia down a designated drain and pouring

large amounts of water to neutralise it.

2. Ethanol, a highly flammable liquid with a sharp smell. Parts of my experiment involving

ethanol were carried out away from naked flame and heat to avoid combustion. Safety

goggles were worn to protect against damage to my eyes in case of splashing.

3.0 DATA COLLECTION AND PROCESSING

3.1 QUALITATIVE DATA

The water samples were colourless. They remained colourless upon the addition of the EDTA

and buffer (both also colourless), but changed upon the addition of the indicator, from colourless

to blue (a sign of succesful reaction and complexing with calcium and magnesium ions in

solution.

Samples such as Evian, Ocean Spring, Highland Spring and Awake resulted in light red (pink)

solutions when EDTA, ammonium chloride and eriot T were added to the water samples, and a

blue solution after the titration was completed. The Bel-Aqua and Voltic samples however
 12

resulted in a dark red solution, much like a red wine, though very clear, and a dark blue, at the

end point. This difference is likely due to the highly basic nature of the water samples (both

companies boast of pH values above 7 (citifmonline.com). With this in mind high metal ion

content was predicted in these two samples.

3.2 QUANTITATIVE DATA

Raw data collected:

Table 1: Titration results for Standard:

Titre Values for Standard ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

0.00 31.30 31.3

0.00 29.60 29.6

0.00 30.60 30.6

0.00 29.60 29.6

0.00 30.70 30.7

0.00 29.50 29.5

0.00 17.70 17.7

 13

Table 2: Titration results for Evian mineral water

Titre Values for Evian mineral water ( ±0.05 cm3)

Initial volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

6.90 14.50 7.6

0.00 8.80 8.8

0.00 9.60 9.6

9.90 19.10 9.2

1.20 8.80 7.6

19.10 27.00 9.5

8.80 16.20 7.4

Table 3: Titration results for tap water

Titre Values for Tap Water ( ±0.05 cm3)

Initial volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

2.20 4.20 2.0

4.20 6.20 2.0

6.20 7.90 1.7

7.90 9.50 1.6

9.50 11.40 1.9

20.80 22.70 1.9

22.70 24.70 2.0

 14

Table 4: Titration results for Everpure mineral water

Titre Values for Everpure mineral water ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

19.20 22.30 3.1

22.30 23.70 1.4

23.70 24.90 1.2

24.90 26.20 1.3

26.20 27.30 1.1

15.40 16.80 1.4

16.80 18.70 1.9

Table 5: Titration values for Highland Springs mineral water

Titre Values for Highland Springs ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final volume ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

27.40 32.20 4.8

32.40 37.80 5.4

37.80 41.30 3.5

41.30 46.00 4.7

1.30 6.20 4.9

6.20 10.60 4.4

10.60 15.40 4.8

 15

Table 6: Titration results for Bel-Aqua mineral water

Titre Values for Bel-Aqua mineral water ( ±0.05 cm3)

Initial ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

3.40 23.70 20.3

23.70 43.20 19.5

12.20 29.60 17.4

29.60 48.60 19.0

0.10 19.40 19.3

19.40 40.30 20.9

0.00 19.40 19.4

Table 7: Titration results for Special Ice mineral water

Titre Values for Special Ice mineral water ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

11.40 12.90 1.5

13.20 14.80 1.6

14.80 16.30 1.5

16.30 17.90 1.6

17.90 19.20 1.3

18.40 19.50 1.1

19.50 20.80 1.3

 16

Table 8: Titration results for Awake mineral water

Titre Values for Awake mineral water ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

0.00 17.10 17.1

17.20 31.70 14.5

0.00 15.70 15.7

15.70 30.60 14.9

0.10 17.40 17.3

17.50 34.90 17.4

10.00 27.20 17.2

Table 9: Titration results for Voltic mineral water

Titre Values for Voltic mineral water ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

14.10 34.80 20.7

5.60 25.70 20.1

25.70 46.20 20.5

14.20 34.70 20.5

10.50 31.40 20.9

11.90 32.20 20.3

13.60 34.70 21.1

 17

Table 10: Titration results for Ocean Spring mineral water

Titre Values for Ocean Springs mineral water ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

27.00 28.70 1.7

28.70 29.80 1.1

29.80 30.80 1.0

0.00 1.10 1.1

1.10 2.20 1.1

16.20 17.30 1.1

17.30 18.60 1.3

Table 11: Titration results for distilled water

Titre Values for Distilled water ( ± 0.05 cm3)

Initial ( ± 0.05 cm3) Final ( ± 0.05 cm3) Volume used ( ± 0.1 cm3)

23.10 39.50 16.4

0.20 16.10 15.9

16.10 32.10 16.0

0.00 19.00 19.0

0.00 18.10 18.1

18.10 38.10 20.0

1.40 26.80 25.4

 18

Table 12: Average volume of EDTA used in each sample

Average volume used ( ± 0.1

Water samples cm3)

Evian mineral water 8.3

Tap water 1.9

Ocean Spring mineral water 1.2

Special Ice mineral water 1.4

Everpure mineral water 1.6

Highland Springs mineral water 4.6

Awake mineral water 16.3

Distilled water 18.7

Bel-Aqua mineral water 19.4

Voltic mineral water 20.6

Table 12: Average volume of EDTA used in titration of each sample

 19

3.3 GRAPHS

Average volume used for each sample

(100.0 ± 0.1 cm3)
Volume of EDTA used in cm3

25
20
15
10
5
0

Chart 1: Representation of average volume of EDTA used in titration of each sample

3.4 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

The data above was calculated to 2 decimal places (initial and final volumes) while volume

differences were calculated to 1 decimal place. The measurement was carried out with a 50 ±

0.05 cm3 burette, which is accurate to up to ± 0.05 cm3 meaning the titre differences for each

water sample are accurate to ± 0.1 cm3:

X ± 0.05 cm3 - X ± 0.05 cm3= 2X ± 0.1 cm3

14.50 ± 0.05 cm3 – 6.90 ± 0.05 cm3 = 7.6 ± 0.1 cm3

The first two titrations for each water samples was to gain a general idea of how much of the

EDTA would be required and so were performed much slower than the rest in order to do so,

explaining some of the anomalous data points.

In order to calculate the total moles of EDTA added to the sample solution:
 20

The moles of the magnesium chloride solution used in the back titration from concordant

results were calculated. From the equation of the titration below, the moles of Mg2+ are

equivalent to the moles of excess EDTA.

EDTA4− + Mg2+ → [Mg-EDTA]2−

Given that the ratio of Ca2+ + Mg2+ : EDTA = 1 : 1, the moles of Ca2+ and Mg2+ that must have

been complexed with EDTA were calculated by subtracting the moles of excess EDTA from the

total moles of EDTA added to the sample, using titre values. This result is the moles of Ca2+ and

Mg2+ in the sample solution. (Canterbury)

Ppm(CaCO3) = × 1000ppm

Concentration (ppm) Hardness Rating

<61 Soft

61-120 Moderately hard

121-180 Hard

>180 Very hard

Table 13: Water hardness scale

Average titre difference for Evian water sample =

= = 8.3 cm3

Uncertainty calculation for Evian water samples

= = cm3

% Uncertainty = = 1.204%
 21

Mr(EDTA): 336.208 g/mol

m(EDTA): 9.31 g

n(EDTA): = = 0.027 mol

EDTA4− + Mg2+ → [Mg-EDTA]2−

For Evian mineral water:

Volume of EDTA used = 8.3 10-3 dm3

Concentration of EDTA used = 0.05 mol

Number of moles of EDTA used = c × v 0.05 × 0.0083 = 4.15 10-4 mol

1:1 so n(Mg)= 0.000415 mol

0.027- 0.000415 = 0.026585 mol of Ca2+ and Mg2+ in water sample

Ppm CaCO3= × 1000ppm

= ×

= 0.006% × 0.0005% = 3.01 × 10-6 %

= 83 × ± 3.01 × 10-6 % = ± 2.5 × 10-4

 22

Table 14: Water hardness, ppm value and number of calcium and magnesium ions present in
each sample
Water sample Parts per million (ppm) and Number of Ca2+ and Mg2+

hardness level moles present

Evian mineral water 83.0 ( Moderately Hard) 0.026585

Tap water 18.6 (Soft) 0.026907

Ocean Spring mineral water 12.0 (Soft) 0.026940

Special Ice mineral water 14.1 (Soft) 0.026923

Everpure mineral water 16.2 (Soft) 0.026992

Highland Springs mineral 46.4 (Soft) 0.026977

water

Awake mineral water 163.0 (Hard) 0.026919

Distilled water 186.9 (Very Hard) 0.026907

Bel-Aqua mineral water 194.0 (Very Hard) 0.026903

Voltic mineral water 205.9 (Very Hard) 0.026897

4.0 ANALYSIS

4.1 DISCUSSION OF GRAPHS AND DATA

These results show an interesting pattern: as expected, the most basic water samples had the

highest values per parts per million (ppm) and hardness levels at 186.9 ppm, 194 ppm and 205.9

ppm (Voltic, Bel-Aqua, distilled water respectively), however the number of moles of calcium

and magnesium ions for these water samples are not the highest and in fact low compared to the

other water samples (0.026897 mol, 0.026903 mol, 0.026907 as compared to the 0.026992 mol
 23

content of the Everpure water sample or the 0.026977mol content of the Highland Springs water

sample). This could be as a result of the presence of other metal ions being present in the water

samples which provided, for example copper, nickel, zinc, manganese, explaining how this

might have affected the calculation for the moles of the metal ions in the water samples. These

results reflect in the graph, showing the uncertainty for the average volume of EDTA used in

titrating each water sample in the error bars of accuracy (from the calculation) ± 0.1 cm3. The

graph illustrates the Ocean Spring sample, the tap water sample, the Special Ice sample and the

Everpure sample are the samples that recorded the least amounts of EDTA required for titration

(to form complexes with the calcium and magnesium ions present in the solution). The Evian and

Highland Springs samples reported moderately higher volumes of EDTA needed to complex,

while the Awake, distilled water, Bel-Aqua and Voltic samples required the most volumes of

EDTA to fully complex the calcium and magnesium ions in solution.

5.0 CONCLUSION

Based from calculations and visual representation from the chart, the water samples tested

for hardness can be ranked according to their hardness (calcium and magnesium ion content) in

the following order:

1. Voltic mineral water

2. Bel-Aqua mineral water
3. Distilled water
4. Awake mineral water
5. Evian mineral water
6. Highland Springs mineral water
7. Tap water
8. Everpure mineral water
9. Special Ice mineral water
 24

10. Ocean Spring mineral water

With these results, it is possible to predict the most popular water brands, based on hardness,

the most popular in that regard being Voltic mineral water, and the least predicted to be Ocean

Spring mineral water.

6.0 EVALUATION

Though the experiment went as planned, one limitation was the presence of other ions in varying

concentrations in each of the water samples, which was beyond control, as they were added in

solution in the original packaging of the bottles. This did not nullify the results found in the

experiment, as the values of calcium and magnesium ions in parts per million of each of the

water samples were calculated and directly factored into the comparison and formation of the

conclusion, tackling the requirements of the research question. In terms of methodology, the

procedure used was sourced from a paper published by the University of Canterbury

(Canterbury), and so was considered credible. Titration was opted for as opposed to

spectrophotometry because it offered a broader range of detection for magnesium and calcium

ion concentrations. For data collection, ten readings were taken for each water sample, which

was deemed suitable enough for concrete data. For data processing and conclusion, parts per

million values (ppm) were calculated, as well as using the hardness scale, to determine the

hardest water samples. Controlled variables such as volume of water samples and reagents used

were adhered to strictly, however the distilled water sample required boiling to remove excess

carbon dioxide.
 25

7.0 IMPROVEMENTS

In order to improve upon the experiment, one could delve deeper to investigate the effect of

temperature, if any, on the ion contents of the different water samples, as well as the effect of

mineral ions or metal ions, other than the calcium and magnesium ions, present in the solution,

which was a condition beyond my control. Additional readings could be recorded to further

improve accuracy and draw a stronger conclusion.

8.0 REFERENCES

Websites

“Application - Testing and Monitoring Water Hardness.” Hach, 2017,

www.hach.com/hardnessguide.

Webmaster. “Bel-Aqua Emerges Water Brand of the Year Again.” Citifmonline.com, 17 May

2017, citifmonline.com/2017/05/17/bel-aqua-emerges-water-brand-of-the-year-again/.

Edetic Acid.” National Center for Biotechnology Information. PubChem Compound Database,

U.S. National Library of Medicine, pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/edta.

Journals

“Determination of Total Calcium and Magnesium Ion Concentration.” magnesium_calcium.Pdf,

Canterbury,www.canterbury.ac.nz/media/documents/science-outreach/magnesium_calcium.pdf

“Eriochrome Black T.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 2 Aug. 2018,

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eriochrome_Black_T.

Heidekamp, Annelies J. “Hard Water.” Hard Water, Apr. 2005,

waterquality.cce.cornell.edu/publications/CCEWQ-50-HardWater.pdf

Penn State/ Behrend, chemistry.bd.psu.edu/halmi/chem3waterhardnessS%2705.pdf. Accessed 6

Nov. 2018.
 26

“Water Hardness.” Hard Water, chemistry.bd.psu.edu/halmi/chem3waterhardnessS%2705.pdf.