Are My Equilibrium Calculations for Fe + SCN Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Whalstib
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Equilibrium
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the equilibrium calculations for the reaction between iron (Fe) and thiocyanate (SCN) to form iron thiocyanate (Fe(SCN)). The equilibrium constant (Keq) is calculated using the formula Keq = [Fe(SCN)]/[Fe][SCN], with a reported value of K = 2.704 x 10^4. The user encountered discrepancies in their calculations, particularly with an implausible concentration of 605 moles for [Fe(SCN)], leading to confusion about the application of Beer's Law (A = kc) and the equilibrium expression. The correct approach involves recognizing that the concentration of SCN at equilibrium is [SCNi - x], where x is the amount converted to Fe(SCN).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of chemical equilibrium concepts, particularly equilibrium constants.
  • Familiarity with Beer's Law and its application in spectrophotometry.
  • Basic knowledge of linear regression analysis and data plotting in Excel.
  • Experience with stoichiometry and concentration calculations in chemical reactions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation and application of the equilibrium constant expression for reactions.
  • Study the principles of Beer's Law and its implications for concentration measurements.
  • Learn how to perform linear regression analysis in Excel for data interpretation.
  • Explore the concept of limiting reactants and their impact on equilibrium calculations.
USEFUL FOR

Chemistry students, laboratory technicians, and educators involved in chemical kinetics and equilibrium studies will benefit from this discussion, particularly those working with spectrophotometric methods in analytical chemistry.

Whalstib
Messages
119
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi,

I've run into a problem and fear I'm just approaching from the wrong angle.

From Ebbing Experiments in General Chemistry 9e 14B if you have it to reference..

It's the classic Fe + SCN > Fe(SCN)

In our experiment we are using SCN as the limiting reactant and overwhelming amts of Fe so that the initial [SCN] should equal the final [Fe(SCN)] at equalibrium. We are using a spectophotometer to measure absorbance at 450nm

Homework Equations


Our Keq is obtained by: [Fe(SCN)]/[Fe] [SCN] resulting in m=∑xy/∑x^2 ; K = 2.704 10^4
Our fist 5 series we varied [SCN] keeping [Fe] constant.

6-10 we varied [SCN] and keeping [Fe] to a different constant.

11-15 we varied [SCN] and keeping [Fe] to yet a different constant.

The Attempt at a Solution



So we have 3 constant [Fe].

Since the Keq = [Fe(SCN)]/[Fe] [SCN] and [Fe(SCN)] =[ SCN] the results should be 1/[Fe]...right?

[Fe] in 5-10 = 3.57E-4 ... inv= 2.8E-3 so K = 2.8E-3
[Fe] in 5-10 = 7.14E-4 ... inv= 1.4E-3 so K = 1.4E-3

Using Beer's Law A=kc I have from for example #5 A=.216 (@450nm) K = 2.8E-3
Solving for c [Fe(SCN)]? gives me 605 moles!

Subsequent equations yield equally baffling results (to me baffling!)Via plotting data from the first 5 experiments in Excel and crunching number in a linear regression analysis formula:

Since m=∑xy/∑x^2; K = 2.704 10^4 so my k values are reasonable but the 605 moles is not! ...(is it?)

What am I not seeing here?

Perhaps I'm not grasping what the "c" in A=kc is for as I already know the Keq for [FE(SCN)] and in fact ALL my concentrations...and A's and K's...

Thanks
Whalstib
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Whalstib said:

Homework Statement


Hi,

I've run into a problem and fear I'm just approaching from the wrong angle.

From Ebbing Experiments in General Chemistry 9e 14B if you have it to reference..

It's the classic Fe + SCN > Fe(SCN)

In our experiment we are using SCN as the limiting reactant and overwhelming amts of Fe so that the initial [SCN] should equal the final [Fe(SCN)] at equalibrium. We are using a spectophotometer to measure absorbance at 450nm




Homework Equations


Our Keq is obtained by: [Fe(SCN)]/[Fe] [SCN] resulting in m=∑xy/∑x^2 ; K = 2.704 10^4



Our fist 5 series we varied [SCN] keeping [Fe] constant.

6-10 we varied [SCN] and keeping [Fe] to a different constant.

11-15 we varied [SCN] and keeping [Fe] to yet a different constant.




The Attempt at a Solution



So we have 3 constant [Fe].

Since the Keq = [Fe(SCN)]/[Fe] [SCN] and [Fe(SCN)] =[ SCN] the results should be 1/[Fe]...right?

No. Given the initial concentration of thiocyanate is equal to [SCNi], let x equal to the amount of [SCN] converted to [Fe(SCN)]. The concentration of thiocyanate in the equilibrium expression is therefore [SCNi-x] and the concentration of [Fe(SCN)] you measure is simply 'x'. Substitute these values into your equilibrium equation and solve for x.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
13K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K