Why is it generally preferable to use absorbance as a measure of absorption rather than % Transmittance?also explain.....
Options- A)
Because %T is dependant on the power of the incident radiation
- B)
Because absorbance is proportional to the concentration of the analyte, whereas %T is not.
C)Because %T cannot be measured as accurately as absorbance
- D)
None of these are correct
The correct answer is option B.
Because absorbance is directly proportional to the concentration of the analyte, whereas %T is not.
Absorbance is denoted as
A = Ɛ.b.c
where Ɛ = molar absorptivity
b= path length
c= concentration
thus there is a direct relation between A & c if Ɛ and b are constant.
whereas,
A = log10 1 /%T i.e. Ɛ.b.c = log10 1 /%T
thus the relation between conc, and %T is not direct and hence use of %T is not preferrable.
Because absorbance is directly proportional to the concentration of the analyte, whereas %T is not.
Absorbance is denoted as
A = Ɛ.b.c
where Ɛ = molar absorptivity
b= path length
c= concentration
thus there is a direct relation between A & c if Ɛ and b are constant.
whereas,
A = log10 1 /%T i.e. Ɛ.b.c = log10 1 /%T
thus the relation between conc, and %T is not direct and hence use of %T is not preferrable.