Density of Nitrogen
Nature 46, 512 (1892) [from
Scientific Papers , vol IV (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Press,
1903)]
I am much puzzled by some recent results as to the
density of nitrogen, and shall be obliged if any of your chemical readers can
offer suggestions as to the cause. According to two methods of preparation I
obtain quite distinct values. The relative difference, amounting to about
1/1000 part, is small in itself, but it lies entirely outside the errors of
experiment, and can only be attributed to a variation in the character of the
gas.
In the first method the oxygen of atmospheric air is removed in the ordinary
way by metallic copper, itself reduced by hydrogen from the oxide. The air,
freed from CO2 by
potash,
gives up its oxygen to copper heated in hard glass over a large Bunsen, and
then passes over about a foot of red-hot copper in a furnace. This
tube was used merely as an indicator, and the copper in it remained bright
throughout. The gas then passed through a wash-bottle containing sulphuric
acid, thence again through the furnace over copper oxide, and finally
over sulphuric acid, potash and phosphoric anhydride.
In the second method of perparation, suggested to me by
Prof. Ramsay, everything remained unchanged,
except that the first tube of hot copper was replaced by a wash-bottle
containing liquid ammonia, through which air was allowed to bubble.
The ammonia method is very convenient, but the nitrogen obtained by means of
it was 1/1000 part lighter than the nitrogen of the first method. The
question is, to what is the discrepancy due?
The first nitrogen would be too heavy, if it contained residual oxygen. But
on this hypothesis, something like 1 per cent. would be required. I could
detect none whatever by means of alkaline pyrogallate. It may be remarked
that the density of the nitrogen agrees closely with that recently obtained by
Leduc using the same method of preparation.
On the other hand, can the ammonia-made nitrogen be too light from the
presence of impurity? There are not many gases lighter than nitrogen, and the
absence of hydrogen, ammonia, and water seems to be fully secured. On the
whole it seemed the more probable supposition that the impurity was hydrogen,
which in this degree of dilution escaped the action of the copper oxide. But
a special experiment seems to preclude this explanation.
Into nitrogen prepared by the first method, but before its passage into the
furnace tubes, one or two thousandths by volumes of hydrogen were introduced.
To effect this in a uniform manner the gas was made to bubble through a small
hydrogen generator, which would be set in action under its own electro-motive
force by closing an external contact. The rate of hydrogen production was
determined by a suitable galvanometer enclosed in the circuit. But the
introduction of hydrogen had not the smallest effect upon the density, showing
that the copper oxide was capable of performing the part desired of it.
Is it possible that the difference is independent of impurity, the nitrogen
itself being to some extent in a different (dissociated) state?
I ought to have mentioned that during the fillings of the globe, the rate of
passage of gas was very uniform, and about 2/3 litre per hour.