Calculate the molar heat of combustion of anthracene

Click For Summary
To calculate the molar heat of combustion of anthracene, a 2.56g sample was burned in a calorimeter containing 1.50 L of water, resulting in a temperature change from 20.5°C to 34.3°C. The relevant equations for this calculation are n=m/M and Q=mcΔt. The user confirmed their procedure was correct and sought clarification on significant figures, noting that their final answer should reflect three significant figures. Additionally, they successfully figured out how to convert their final answer from kJ to J. The discussion highlights the importance of clear presentation in problem-solving and adherence to significant figure rules.
Specter

Homework Statement


A 2.56g sample of anthracene, C14H10, was burned to heat an aluminum calorimeter (mass=945 g). The calorimeter contained 1.50 L of water with an initial temperature of 20.5 C and a final temperature of 34.3 C.

a) Calculate the molar heat of combustion of anthracene.

Homework Equations


n=m/M
Q=mcΔt

The Attempt at a Solution



My work:

https://i.imgur.com/WYNiBRD.png

WYNiBRD.png


https://i.imgur.com/LNjq3CG.png

LNjq3CG.png


Did I do the steps correctly? Did I include the correct sig figs? How would I convert my final answer to J/mol instead of kJ/mol? Thanks! If you need me to type out the work instead of using pictures I can!
 

Attachments

  • WYNiBRD.png
    WYNiBRD.png
    8.6 KB · Views: 5,632
  • LNjq3CG.png
    LNjq3CG.png
    19.8 KB · Views: 6,014
Physics news on Phys.org
Your procedure looks correct (I haven't checked the arithmetic). Your given data are all to 3 sig figs, so your answer should be given to 3 sig figs. (You were right to use more sig figs in the intermediate calculations, but your final answer should be to 3 s.f.)
After getting so much right, you can't convert kJ to J?
PS Thanks for offering to type it out; many people don't and post illegible scribble, but your pictures are very clear and legible.
 
  • Like
Likes Specter
Specter said:
If you need me to type out the work instead of using pictures I can!

That's preferable (check the forum rules) - not only it usually makes things easier to follow, it also makes it possible to quote the solution and mark places were something is wrong.
 
mjc123 said:
Your procedure looks correct (I haven't checked the arithmetic). Your given data are all to 3 sig figs, so your answer should be given to 3 sig figs. (You were right to use more sig figs in the intermediate calculations, but your final answer should be to 3 s.f.)
After getting so much right, you can't convert kJ to J?
PS Thanks for offering to type it out; many people don't and post illegible scribble, but your pictures are very clear and legible.
Thanks! I ended up figuring out how to convert kJ to J... It was very easy :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K