Calling kinetics experts: rate law from conductivity isnt possible?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the challenges of deriving a rate law from conductivity measurements in the aqueous alkaline hydrolysis of primary halogenoalkanes. The reaction is known to be first order in both the reactant (RX) and hydroxide ion (OH-). While the conductivity of OH- decreases exponentially and that of the product (X-) increases, attempts to analyze the overall conductivity change do not yield a recognizable integrated rate law plot, complicating the extraction of a rate constant. Initial rates analysis suggests a linear relationship between initial conductivity change and final conductivity, but the slope does not align with expected values based on the decay of OH-. This discrepancy raises questions about the applicability of conductivity data for studying reaction kinetics in ion-exchange scenarios. Some participants argue that while conductivity can be used, it requires fitting to the correct equations, indicating a need for a more nuanced approach to data interpretation.
Miffymycat
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Calling kinetics experts: rate law from conductivity isn't possible!?

Consider the usual primary halogenoalkane aqueous alkaline hydrolysis reaction

RX + OH- --> ROH + X-

We know the rate law is first order in RX and OH-. We could separately represent the drop in OH- conductivity as an exponential decay with a constant half-life (ΛoOH-e-kt) and the rise of X- conductivity as the inverse function of this (0.5ΛoOH-(1-e-kt), taking the conductivity of X- as 0.5x that of OH-.

In practice, using excess RX, the measured (or modeled) solution conductivity during hydrolysis is obviously the sum of the ion conductivities at any point in time. The mixture conductivity drop-off appears to be an exponential-type decay, but attempts to curve fit (albeit only in Excel) show it is not, nor does it fit a recognisable integrated rate law plot. One can therefore not obtain a rate constant or order from this progress curve, which is frustrating - unless I'm mistaken! {Its not the case for aqueous hydrolysis as this produces ions from neutral molecules rather than an exchange of ions and the graphs work fine}.

Furthermore, taking an initial rates approach and plotting initial (ΔΛ/t) vs Λfinal (over several initial concentrations, rather than a single Λ vs t curve as above) gives a straight line, but whose slope does not appear to be a simple multiple of the calculated k for OH- decay on its own. The stoichiometry is 1:1, so the rate of [OH-] decline = rate of [X-] growth, and I imagined the slope would therefore be k x ratio of ion conductivities ... but it's not. Its a smaller number.

Any thoughts please?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Perhaps I am missing something, but

Ae^{-x} + \frac A 2 (1-e^{-x}) = \frac A 2 (1 + e^{-x})

doesn't look like something that can be fit to just e-x.
 
Agreed, and seems to support the idea that conductivity data from "ion-exchanges" can't be used to investigate reaction kinetics.

Any ideas on the significance of the slope for the linear plot?
 
Miffymycat said:
Agreed, and seems to support the idea that conductivity data from "ion-exchanges" can't be used to investigate reaction kinetics.

I never said that. You can use the conductivity, you just have to fit it to the right equation.
 
It seems like a simple enough question: what is the solubility of epsom salt in water at 20°C? A graph or table showing how it varies with temperature would be a bonus. But upon searching the internet I have been unable to determine this with confidence. Wikipedia gives the value of 113g/100ml. But other sources disagree and I can't find a definitive source for the information. I even asked chatgpt but it couldn't be sure either. I thought, naively, that this would be easy to look up without...
I was introduced to the Octet Rule recently and make me wonder, why does 8 valence electrons or a full p orbital always make an element inert? What is so special with a full p orbital? Like take Calcium for an example, its outer orbital is filled but its only the s orbital thats filled so its still reactive not so much as the Alkaline metals but still pretty reactive. Can someone explain it to me? Thanks!!
Back
Top