Abstract This test was made to determine water hardness of mineralized water, Viva!

Specifically, magnesium and calcium amounts were investigated through complexometric titration of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid or EDTA with eriochrome black T as metal indicator. Before this sample analysis, standardization of EDTA was done first with CaCO3 as the primary standard. pH of solution was controlled to 10 by a buffer of NH3-NH4 and was titrated from wine red to clear blue color. Results gathered were *bla bla bla.* proving that *bla bla bla.* It can then be concluded, let alone for this experiment, that this larger/smaller amount than the theoretical data labeled in the mineral water bottle are those that form sparingly soluble once reacted with soap or other basic components containing hydroxide ions. The difference *blab la bla,* proving that still the water sample is hard.

Introduction Magnesium and calcium contents found in water can decline cleansing properties of soap and can clog pipes which can cause major problems at home. What happens is that potassium and sodium ions in soaps are replaced by these contents to form sparingly soluble products. This capacity of water was termed as water hardness, which is actually a measure of the quality of water for industrial and domestic use. It is therefore important to note the presence of such trouble-causing cations which, for this experiment, was determined quantitatively using complexometric titration of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid or EDTA. Water sample used was from the commercial mineralized water, Viva! with eriochrome black T or EBT as the indicator. EDTA here was used to also demonstrate complexation reaction for this experiment. The bond involved was from the metal cations and the EDTA, forming complex compounds. EDTA is known to be a hexadentate ligand, a complex anion that donates six pairs of electron group. This property was utilized to arrive at a sharper endpoint, since it made the cations react more completely upon titration. Formulas used in this experiment are as follows: *insert formulae here* *below, insert the legend for each symbol used in the formulae.* Conclusion Calculated ppm CaCO3 for water sample was *insert data here.* As defined in the laboratory manual table for water hardness, this value is considered as *soft or hard.* Comparing this to the ppm CaCO3 labeled to Viva which is 192.6 ppm, experimental result is *greater/smaller* than theoretical result. It can then be concluded that the real hardness of the sample contains inconsistencies, a *small/large* inconsistency that is, which can affect reliability of labels that are put in mineralized water bottles such as in Viva!

Sources: [1] D.A. Skoog, D.M. West, F.J. Holler, S.R. Crouch and S-C Chen. Complexation and Precipitation Titrations: Taking Advantage of Complexing and Precipitating Agents, in Introduction to Analytical Chemistry, 8th ed. Cengage Learning Asia Pte Ltd, 2012, pp. 367-403. [2] Determination of Water Hardness By Complexometric Titration Class Notes. (Retrieved: 05/08/2013) [Online.] Available: http://homepages.ius.edu/DSPURLOC/c121/week13.htm. [3] Experiment. EDTA Titration of Ca2+ in an unknown water sample. (Retrieved: 05/08/2013) [Online.] Available: http://faculty.sdmiramar.edu/faculty/sdccd/fgarces/zCourse/All_Year/Ch251/a_LecLab/03_InLab/E_Exp t/03_TitrationEDTA_Ca/EDTATitrCa.pdf