Calculating Maximum Ammonia Mass from Nitrogen and Hydrogen Reaction

  • Thread starter Thread starter alexparker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chemistry
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the maximum mass of ammonia produced from the reaction of nitrogen and hydrogen. The reaction formula indicates that one mole of nitrogen reacts with three moles of hydrogen to produce two moles of ammonia. The user initially questioned the presence of the factor of two in the calculation, which is derived from the stoichiometric ratio of the reaction. After some deliberation, the user clarified that the factor relates to this ratio, confirming their understanding. The final calculated mass of ammonia is 8.33 grams.
alexparker
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
The Question is
Ammonia is formed by the reaction of nitrogen and
hydrogen:
N2(g) + 3H2(g) → 2NH3(g)
Calculate the maximum mass of ammonia that
could be produced when 6.00 L of nitrogen gas at
SLC reacts with excess hydrogen gas.

The Answer is
n(N2) = = mol
n(NH3) = 2 × n(N2)
m(NH3) = n × M = = 8.33 g

i don't know why the 2 in the step 2 of the answer is there. I really need to know as i don't understand why it is there, and i cannot ask my teacher as i am on holidays.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dont worry everyone i just worked it out, its to do with the ratio
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Calculate Delta G & Delta H of N2+3H2=>2NH3
Replies
1
Views
4K
Chemistry Calculating Mass Percentage of N2H4 in Hydrogen/Nitrogen Mixtures
Replies
1
Views
2K
Uncovering the Chemistry Behind Ammonia Production
Replies
6
Views
2K
2NH3->N2+3H2. Rate=k[NH3]/[H2], what is the mechanism?
Replies
1
Views
13K
Ammonia and Oxygen Reaction: How Many Moles of NO?
Replies
3
Views
10K
A problem in Redox Titrations (Kjeldhal's Method)
Replies
6
Views
2K
Endothermic vs Exothermic Reactions in Ammonia Production
Replies
2
Views
4K
Enthalpy of Formation of Ammonia: Why is it Positive?
Replies
10
Views
3K
Chemistry Solving Al + BaNO3 Reactions for N2 Volume
Replies
3
Views
16K
Rate of Ammonia Prod. in N2+3H2 Reaction
Replies
1
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top