IBDP

Internal Assessment
－Investigation on the relationship between the salt
concentration of water and its electrical conductivity
Student Name: Clare Chen 陈婧怡

Student No: 20168102

Due Date: 5.19

Teacher：Sabrina

1 INTRODUCTION
This topic of exploration came to my mind when I was watching a movie called
Monkey Shines, an old movie talked about how an intelligent monkey help its
owner to take revenge. The plot itself was nothing special, but I noticed a scene
that the monkey killed a person with the electricity conducted in the water. This
was ridiculous and I knew for sure that the conductivity of neither water or human
body could kill someone, but this plot buried a small idea in my mind for
exploration.
So far, I am interested in exploring the solutions’ conductivity and I chose a most
common solution to investigate which is salt water, and one factor I noticed that
will probably affect the conductivity is concentration. Thus, this research question
is building up which is to investigate the relationship between the salt
concentration of water and its electrical conductivity. And I decided to carrying
out this experiment by recording how conductivity varies with the concentration
as well as looking for theoretical proof.

2 EXPLORATION
Aim: To investigate into the relationship between the salt concentration of water
and its electrical conductivity.
2.1 Background research
This experiment is about conductivity of solutions, the research question is to
investigate into the relationship between the salt concentration of water and its
electrical conductivity.
According to the background research, the conductivity of salt water related to the
temperature of the solution and the concentration. However, in this experiment, due
to the conductivity probe, conductivity is temperature dependent. Since the
conductivity probe has the ability to standardize the temperature as well as the
ability of temperature compensation by referencing standard temperatures.
First, electrical conductivity is a measure of a solution’s ability to conduct
electricity [1]. And the SI unit of this physical quantity is Siemens per meter
(S/m), in most cases, the common unit is µS/cm which is lower than those in S/m
by a factor of 106. In this experiment, the electrical conductivity is measured by
the conductivity probe.
Second, concentration refers to the amount of substance dissolved in a given
amount of water [2]. The concentration of the salt water will be obtained by the
mass of salt and the mass of salt water. The formula is:

msalt
C= × 100%
mtotal

Third, the causal relationship of the salt concentration of water and its electrical
conductivity theoretically may be a proportional relationship that the conductivity
increases in the same proportion as the concentration increases.
Figure1: the theoretical casual relationship of the salt concentration of water and its electrical
conductivity.
The main reason why adding salt to water can increase its conductivity is that as
salt (sodium chloride) is an electrolyte which means it can produce an electrical
conducted solution while it is dissolved in a polar solvent like water. and when this
dissolves in water in order to form salt water, it changes into sodium ions and
chloride ions, each of which can conducts electricity. As ions in water can pass
electricity so that the more Na+ and Cl-, the more electricity can be carried and the
higher conductivity. [3]

2.2 Variables
Independent Variable: the salt concentration of water
The salt concentration is result from the mass of salt added into the water and
its initial value is 0.90g and the final value is 6.30g which has the interval of
0.90g for each. And the mass if salt is measured by the electronic balance.
Dependent Variable: Electrical conductivity of salt water with different
concentration.
The conductivity is measure by the conductivity probe. By putting the probe
directly into the salt water and observed the data shown on the computer to get
the experiment values.
Controlled Variables:
1. The temperature of salt water
Though the probe can compensate the water temperature, in order to
obtain quicker and more accurate result, the temperature still should be
controlled. If the temperature does not remain constant, the data tested by
the tube can vary significantly at the beginning of every trail and may take
very long time to stop and may lead to more possibility in collecting
inaccurate results and thus the conductivity will be not that accurate, so as
to the final average result. The temperature can be controlled by doing all
the experiment under room temperature (as short as the time interval as
possible and in the same room).
 2. The mass of the salt water with different concentrations
Same total mass of salt water can contribute to a relatively more precise
result since if it doesn’t remain same, different mass of salt and water
under same portion may still lead to differences in conductivity. Thus, the
primary conductivity and the average one will also have errors. This can
be controlled simply by preparing same mass of the salt water every time.
2.3 Apparatus
• salt
• beakers
• water
• 100mL graduated cylinder
• glass rod
• Electronic balance
• a computer with Logger pro
• a conductivity probe (brand: Vernier, Order Code: CON-BTA)

Figure2: set up the apparatus

2.4 Methodology
There are following procedures that should be carried out in this experiment.
1. The first step to do is to connect the conductivity probe with the computer
and make sure the green light is on. Also there should be sofware
Loggerpro in the computer.
2. After that, weight 0.90g salt on the electrical balance (use a beaker to hold
the salt), and use a graduated cylinder of 50mL to obtain 30mL water
sampler and then pour the water sample into a 50mL beaker.
3. Pour the salt into the beaker and use glass rod to stir the solution
continuously until it is transparent to make sure the salt dissolves
completely in the water. This is carried out under room temperature in order
to control the temperature of salt water.
 4. Then, put the conductivity probe into the solution and make sure that the
electrode surface in the electric cell is completely submerged in the
solution.
5. Press “on” button in Logger pro on the computer to begin collecting the
data, and use the probe to stir the solution to wait until the data is stabilize
while testing the conductivity and lastly repeat this process for three times.
6. Repeat the same process from procedure 1 to procedure 5 for three times
and repeat all the procedures above (1 to 5) by changing the mass of salt of
1.8g, 2.7g, 3.6g, 4.5g, 5.4g and 6.3g.
2.5 Safety Awareness
n Remember to blot the electrode cell of the probe every time after testing
in order to avoid water droplets diluting the sample to be tested. [4]
n Remember not to submerge the probe completely into the solution,
since the top part isn’t waterproof at all.
n After finishing the experiment, remember to clean the conductivity
probe by distilled water and blot it entirely dry so that it can be stored
under appropriate conditions.
n Use as little water as possible in order to save the water.

3 ANALYSIS
3.1 Raw data
Table 1 shows the mass of the salt used in each trial and the salt water’s
conductivity, in this table, there’s no casual relationship but just simple data.

RAW DATA OF THE EXPERIMENT

mass of salt (g) Conductivity (µS/CM)
∆msalt= ±0.01g ∆𝛋 = ±(2%×𝛋 )µS/CM
Trial 1 0.90g 30885
0.90g 31036
0.90g 30868
Trial 2 1.80g 30864
1.80g 31064
1.80g 31080
Trial 3 2.70g 31084
2.70g 31104
2.70g 31063
Trial 4 3.60g 31169
3.60g 31096
3.60g 31205
Trial 5 4.50g 31175
4.50g 31290
4.50g 31215
 Trial 6 5.40g 31324
5.40g 31298
5.40g 31445
Trial 7 6.30g 31648
6.30g 31305
6.30g 31256

The total volume of salt water (vtotal) is constant which is 30.0cm3±0.1cm3

in every trial. And the uncertainty of the mass of salt is directly the
uncertainty of the electrical balance which is 0.01 and the uncertainty of the
conductivity is the official uncertainty for this conductivity probe.
Table 1: Raw data of the the relationship between mass of salt in the salt water and
the conductivity.

Figure 2: Raw data of the relationship between mass of salt in the salt water and the
conductivity.
As the raw data of the relationship between mass of salt in the salt water and
the conductivity has a linear relationship which indicates that the relationship
of the concentration of salt water which is mass of salt over total mass of salt
water and the average conductivity in each trial will also have a linear
relationship. From the background research that “the causal relationship of
the salt concentration of water and its electrical conductivity theoretically
may be a proportional relationship that the conductivity increases in the same
proportion as the concentration increases.”, it’s clear that how to proceed the
raw data. Thus, by calculating the concentration and average conductivity, a
graph of the casual relationship can be obtained.
3.2 Process Data
In order to obtain the concentration of the salt water as well as the average
conductivity of it, table 2 is presented.
Processed data of the experiment
Concentration of the salt water (C) Average Conductivity (µS/CM)
(%) ∆𝛋= ±(2%×𝛋 )µS/CM
Trial 1 3. 00 ±0.04 30930
Trial 2 6. 00 ±0.08 31003
Trial 3 9.0 ±0.1 31084
Trial 4 12. 0 ± 0.1 31157
Trial 5 15. 0 ± 0.2 31227
Trial 6 18. 0 ± 0.2 31356
Trial 7 21. 0 ± 0.2 31403
Table 2: process data of the salt concentration of water and its electrical conductivity.

Sample Calculation:(Use trail 1 as an example)

a) Concentration of salt water and uncertainty of concentration of salt water
Since water has density of 1g/cm3, the mass of salt water is equal to the volume.
Thus, the mass of the salt water(mtotal) is 30.0g±0.1g, as the uncertainty of
100mL graduated cylinder is ±0.1g

msalt 0.90g
C= × 100% = × 100% = 3.00%
mtotal 30.0g

⎡⎛ Δmsalt Δmtotal ⎞ msalt ⎤

ΔC = ± ⎢⎜ + ⎟ × × 100% ⎥
⎣⎝ msalt mtotal ⎠ mtotal ⎦
⎡⎛ 0.01g 0.1g ⎞ 0.90g ⎤
= ± ⎢⎜ + ⎟ × × 100% ⎥
⎣⎝ 0.90g 30.0g ⎠ 30.0g ⎦
= ±0.0433%
= ±0.04%
∴C = 3.00% ± 0.04%

b) Average conductivity and it uncertainty. (The uncertainty of this average

uncertainty is directly the uncertainty of the conductivity.)
κ1 +κ 2 +κ 3
κ average =
3
30885.3841+ 31036.9058 + 30868.9101
=
3
= 30930.4 µScm −1

Δκ average = ±2% × κ average

 κ average = 30930 µScm −1 ± 2%

3.3 Graph Interpretation

Figure 3: the relationship between the salt concentration of water and its electrical
conductivity.
Interpreting the Graph:
• Slope:

maverage = 30930 µScm −1 ± 2%

mbestfit = 27.00 µScm −1 / %
mmin = 20.22 µScm −1 / %
mmax = 32.70 µScm −1 / %
mmax − mmin
Δm = = 6.24 µScm −1 / %
2
m = 27 µScm −1 / % ± 6 µScm −1 / %

• Random error:
Δκ 2% × κ
%Δκ = × 100% = × 100% = 2%
κ κ
• Discrepancy:
Since there’s no theoretical value, the discrepancy may be interpreted as the
uncertainty of the best-fit line.
Thus,
Δm 6 µScm −1 / %
%error = × 100% = × 100% = 22%
m 27 µScm −1 / %

• Y-Intercept:
 bbestfit = 3.084 × 10 4 µScm −1 ,
bmin = 3.078 × 10 4 µScm −1 ,
bmax = 3.093 × 10 4 µScm −1 ,
bmax − bmin
Δb = ±
2
3.093 × 10 4 µScm −1 − 3.078 × 10 4 µScm −1
=±
2
= ±75 µScm −1

b = 3.08 × 10 4 µScm −1 ± 75 µScm −1

The y-intercepts are shown above respectively and the theoretical value of this
graph is proportional, thus the y-intercept is supposed to be zero. However, it’s
clear that in the previous data, there is non-zero intercepts which refer that there
are systematic errors which lead to the deviation of the data.

4. CONCLUSION
The relationship between the salt concentration of water and its electrical
conductivity is linearized which has been shown in the graph. The deriving function
is:

κ = 27C + 3.08 × 10 4 µScm −1

Though the y-intercept is not zero and the relationship is not proportional, the
linearized function indicates that the trend of the experimental data can generally
match the theoretical one. The theoretical relationship is that “there is a nearly linear
relationship between conductivity and concentration of a specific ion or salt” According
o this, the gradient ought to be 1 in the theoretical value indicates that the ratio of
the conductivity and the concentration should be 1:1, however its 27.00 in the best
fit line in the graph above indicates that the conductivity increases much more than
the amount of concentration increases. Quantitatively, the experiment shows a
percentage uncertainty of 2% and a percentage discrepancy (error) of 22%
according to the varying of slope. Therefore, the systematic error is more
significant than the random error, since the y-intercept can also reveal the
significant systematic error.

5. EVALUATION
5.1 Systematic Error
In this experiment, systematic error which is 22% is the one that is relatively
more influential on the result and the deviation of data. And there are
following reasons that may relate to the systematic error.
1. First, there may be problem in read at the bottom of a meniscus of the
solution, thus the general data set is not accurate. According the final
 result, it’s possible that the readings are all looking up to the meniscus
which lead to smaller mass of the water and smaller total amount of salt
water but larger concentration.
2. Moreover, the accuracy of some apparatus is very rough including the
beakers, thus the reading of the water and the salt water may be
inaccurate and may be always larger than the theoretical one.
5.2 Random Error
According to the graph interpretation, the random error is 2% which is
relatively small, but there are still features that may lead to the random
error.
1. First, in some trials, the data may be recorded before the recording of
conductivity is totally stabilized. And thus, the data will vary upon the
best-fit line.
2. Moreover, in the last few experiments, the water may accumulate
inside the electrolyte cell, and thus lead to the deviation of data in trials
including the fifth one which is slightly lower than the best-fit line.
3. In addition to that, during the process of pouring water from cylinders
to beakers as well as pouring salt to another place, there may have
residual solution and the residue on the original apparatus which could
possibly lead to imprecise of data collection.
Above are some possible reasons for the presence of anomalous points on
the graph.

6 IMPROVEMENT and EXTENSION

There are following improvements for the systematic errors and random errors.
As for systematic errors:
1. Reading of the graduated cylinder should be just at the meniscus.
2. And looking for more accurate apparatus which has smaller uncertainty is a
resolution as well.
For random errors:
1. For instance, blotting the probe and put it side to dry completely may avoid
the occurrence these deviated points, though this may lower the efficiency of
carrying out the experiment.
2. Also, be more patient to wait towards the changed data stop be varied is also
a necessary resolution.
3. What’s more, using less apparatus for transferring solutions can help avoiding
the residue.
Generally, despite those resolutions for systematic errors and random errors, the
deviation of whole data recorded is one of the most significant problems, since
according to the theoretical value, the causal relationship should be proportional
to each other. However, the y-intercept of this experiment is far from zero which
is 3.08×10* . This may be led by inappropriate range of data collecting. In most
 research conducted by experts, the salt concentration of water varies around 0.1%
to 10% which could provide a closer y-intercept to zero. However in this
experiment, the range is from 3% to 21% which is definitely larger than the
professional one. Moreover, the condition of the salt concentration of water is 0
was not collected but according to the research, pure water cannot conduct
electricity at all. Thus, lowering the range of data collection may contribute to a
more accurate result. A new range or a larger range can contribute to a more
accurate result. The range of concentration of salt water tested can be moved to
0.1% to 10% or even more. Thus, the result and graphs carry out will match the
theoretical one more. Also, more repetition in the data collected is necessary, with
more trials, a more accurate average conductivity can be obtained. As for the
concentration, more trials can minimize the effect of the residue during
transferring the water from cylinder into beaker. Moreover, the interval of the
concentration between each trial can decrease from 3% into 0.5% which will
definitely lead to more accurate result and will be closer to theoretical one.
This experiment can be used to testify the availability of drinking water in the real
world, since there are many other impurities in the water which could possibly do
harm to human body and these impurities can be analyzed by the conductivity of
water. Scientists now use this method to testify sea water or tidal estuaries.

Reference

[1] http://aquariustech.com.au/pdfs/tech-bulletins/Electrol_Condct_Thery.pdf Accessed 2017.5.19

[2] http://sciencing.com/conductivity-vs-concentration-6603418.html Accessed 2017.5.19
[3] http://www.horiba.com/application/material-property-characterization/water-analysis/water-quality-
electrochemistry-instrumentation/the-story-of-ph-and-water-quality/the-basis-of-conductivity/ions-in-
water-and-conductivity/ Accessed 2017.5.19
[4] http://www.vernier.com/manuals/con-bta/ Accessed 2017.5.19