ANALYSIS OF IRON ( FE )

A Comparison of Methods for Analysis of Iron ( Fe )



Table of Content

Introduction3

Methods of Iron Analysis4

Experimental Preparation of the Original Fe Solution16

Measurement of the Absorbance Spectrum17

Determination of the Absorbance of the Standard Fe Solution18

Analysis of City Tap Water19

Procedure20

Calculations21

Comparitive Analysis22

Conclusion24

References26

Methods of Iron Analysis

Introduction

Although iron was first used by humans thousands of years ago, iron and steel (with the major constituent being iron) remain an integral part of modern society. Without iron, most engineered structures and technologies such as ships, automobiles, bridges, and skyscrapers could not exist in their modern forms and quantities, if at all. Iron and its alloys offer many advantages for engineering applications, with the key ones being its strength, formability and low production costs (Acharyya, 2010, 1128). However, it does have one major drawback: it corrodes relatively easily. Corrosion is estimated to cost the U.S. $276 billion per year. While material selection and corrosion prevention methods (i.e. coatings, sealants and corrosion inhibitors) make up the bulk of the up-front costs, inspection and corrosion maintenance are on-going costs and can contribute substantially to the overall cost. Inspection and maintenance can be time-consuming, labor-intensive, and not always 100% accurate.

Therefore, developing a means by which corrosion damage can be monitored or even predicted, with minimal human input, could have a tremendous impact on the life-cycle costs of structures, vessels, and transportation vehicles. An example demonstrating the impact that a reliable corrosion monitoring technique can have is very evident in applications dealing with the storage of hazardous liquid waste in metal containers. For instance the waste might need to be stored for extended periods of time until it can be treated or it degrades on its own (Kohl, 1995,, 164).

Methods of Iron Analysis

A particular case is that dealing with the temporary storage of high level nuclear waste in tanks at the Savannah River and Hanford waste sites. These tanks will contain the liquid waste until it is approved to be vitrified and stored at the Yucca Mountain Repository. It has been estimated that the process of vitrifying and transferring the waste from the tanks to the repository should take 30-40 years, but could take as long as 100 years.

Due to the harmful constituents in the waste, it is not always feasible to visually inspect corrosion damage in the tanks. If proper inspections were to be performed, the tanks would have to be emptied and cleaned in order to inspect and repair any damage, while the waste is held temporarily in another container. This type of venture is both costly and dangerous to humans and the environment. In-situ monitoring methods, based on electrochemical techniques, can be used to constantly monitor corrosion and could possibly be used to predict when an inspection is necessary or to schedule maintenance. This could avoid unnecessary inspections and maintenance, which would be beneficial in terms of cost and safety. Currently, there are 177 tanks containing 253 million liters of High Level Nuclear Waste (HLW) from fifty years of weapons ...