Calculating Density of Hydrogen Gas at 20°C & 1655psi

  • Thread starter Thread starter Agent M27
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Density Gas
AI Thread Summary
The density of hydrogen gas at 20°C and 1655 psi was calculated using the formula d = P(Mm)/RT. The initial calculation converted 1655 psi to 55.31 ATM and used 293 K for temperature, resulting in a density of 4.64 g/L. However, the expected value from the textbook was 9.43 g/L, prompting a review of the pressure conversion. It was discovered that an incorrect conversion factor for inches of mercury was used instead of psi. The error was acknowledged, and the thread concluded with gratitude for the assistance received.
Agent M27
Messages
169
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


What is the density (g/L) of hydrogen gas at 20*c & pressure of 1655psi?


Homework Equations



d= P(Mm)/RT

Mm= molar mass

The Attempt at a Solution



I started by converting 1655 psi to 55.31 ATM. I then converted my temperature to 293 kelvins. When I plug these figures into the above equation:d= 55.31ATM(2.016g)/(.08206)(293) and I arrive at an answer of 4.64 g/L. My books gives a value of 9.43g/L which appears to be about twice as much, but I cannot figure out where I made the wrong turn. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Joe
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Recheck your psi to atm conversion.
 
Ah HA! I used the conversion factor for in Hg, not psi. Thanks a bunch, sorry for the frivolous thread.

Joe
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
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