Why in the calculation of related substances we don't consider the moisture content of standard used? In other words, why don't we calculate the related substances on anhydrous basis?
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
By guru on Wednesday, January 5, 2000 - 08:10 am:
Several reasons:
- It's a lot easier to simply use area% at the absorbance maximum of the compound; assuming that all related substances have the same chromophore as the parent, what you then get is the impurities as a percentage of the parent.
- Generally the related substances are there at low level, with a commensurately poor (relative) precision. In most cases, the number will be the same within experimental error whether or not you fudge for the water content.
- Not all compounds are hydrates, so the definition based on area percent is more general
- Finally, they had to define it *some* way.
If what you're trying to do is to make a borderline failure into a pass by fudging for water content, I suspect you're outta luck.
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.