Nitrates and Nitrites with FeSO4 + CH3COOH

  • Thread starter Thread starter Knightycloud
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the identification of nitrites (NO2-) using FeSO4 and acetic acid (CH3COOH), questioning whether this method is valid compared to the established brown ring test for nitrates (NO3-) with sulfuric acid (H2SO4). Participants express skepticism about the effectiveness of acetic acid for detecting nitrites, with one noting that literature suggests it is not a recognized method. The consensus leans towards the conclusion that acetic acid is insufficient for NO2- detection, as it lacks the necessary strength compared to sulfuric acid. Overall, the discussion highlights uncertainty and a lack of established methods for identifying nitrites with acetic acid. The final takeaway is that acetic acid does not effectively identify nitrites.
Knightycloud
Messages
86
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I know that NO3- can be separately identify using newly made FeSO4 + H2SO4 using the brown ring test.
The problem is can we identify NO2- using newly made FeSO4 + CH3COOH? Replacing H2SO4 with CH3COOH?

Homework Equations


NO2-(aq) + FeSO4(aq) + CH3COOH(aq)\Rightarrow [A Brown Circle]?
or is this equation invalid?

The Attempt at a Solution


Nothing being attempted! :(
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
NO2- or NO3-, you are inconsistent.

If NO3- try to find out what is the reaction involved.
 
Last edited:
Its NO2- is the problem. I've never learn such a reaction using Acetic acid to identify NO2- and a paper says you can't but I got it from a friend who says that using Acetic acid can identify NO2-.
 
I find it rather unlikely. While NO2- can interfere, test in general requires concentrated sulfuric acid, I doubt acetic acid is strong enough.
 
Yeah, I believe it too. So may I have the final conclusion as Acetic acid does nothing regarding detection of NO2-? I've never heard such a test too!
 
That's what I expect, but I have learned long to not assume everything I expect is true.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top