What Is the Percent Yield of Al2O3 in This Reaction?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the percent yield of Al2O3 from the reaction of aluminum and oxygen. The balanced equation for the reaction is 4Al + 3O2 → 2Al2O3. The percent yield is calculated using the formula: (actual yield / theoretical yield) x 100, resulting in a yield of 67%. Participants emphasize the importance of identifying the limiting reagent and correcting conversion factors, noting that the molar mass of aluminum is 27 g/mol, not 108 g for 1 mole. Accurate stoichiometric calculations are crucial for determining the correct theoretical yield.
priscilla89
Messages
18
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



If the reaction of 2.5 g of Al with 2.5 g of O2 produced 3.5 g of Al2O3, what is the percent yield of Al2)3? Be sure to write and balance equation.

Homework Equations



Percent Yield = (actual yield / theoretical yield ) x 100

The Attempt at a Solution



4Al + 302 ---> 2Al2O3

2.5 g Al x (1 mol Al / 108 g) x (2 mol Al2O3 / 4 mol Al) = .0115 mol Al2O3

.0115 mol Al2O3 (204 g Al2O3 / 1 mol Al2O3) = 2.36 Al2O3

Percent Yield = (2.36 / 3.50) X 100 = 67 %
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Two things:

1: Don't forget to verify which reagent (Al or O2) is the limiting reagent.
2: Your conversion factors are wrong. For instance - there aren't 108g of Al in 1 mol of Al.
 
108g is a mass of 4 moles of Al, not of 1 mole. 4 is a stoichiometric coefficient, and it is already - correctly - present in your

priscilla89 said:
(2 mol Al2O3 / 4 mol Al)

conversion coefficient.

--
methods
 
p21bass said:
Two things:

1: Don't forget to verify which reagent (Al or O2) is the limiting reagent.
2: Your conversion factors are wrong. For instance - there aren't 108g of Al in 1 mol of Al.

Okay, then it would be

2.5 g Al x (1 mol Al / 27 g) x (2 mol Al2O3 / 4 mol Al)
 
Much better now.
 
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