Chemistry: Using Formation Constant to calculate an end concentration

AI Thread Summary
A 50.0 mL sample of 2.0 x 10^-4 M CuNO3 is mixed with 50.0 mL of 4.0 M NaCN, leading to the formation of the complex ion Cu(CN)3 with a formation constant of 1.0 x 10^9. The initial concentrations after dilution are calculated to be 1.0 x 10^-4 M for copper and 2 M for cyanide, allowing the assumption that all copper is complexed due to the excess of cyanide. The participant calculated the concentration of the copper cyanide complex to be 1.28E7, but was corrected that such a concentration is unrealistic given stoichiometric limits. Ultimately, the expected concentration of copper(I) ions at equilibrium is stated to be 1.3E-14, highlighting the importance of verifying assumptions in equilibrium calculations.
Hemolymph
Messages
30
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



50.0 mL sample of 2.0 10–4 M CuNO3 is added to 50.0 mL of 4.0 M NaCN. The formation constant of the complex ion Cu(CN)3 is 1.0 10^9. What is the copper(I) ion concentration in this system at
equilibrium?



The Attempt at a Solution


I did a dilution and got the new concentrations of Cu and CN to be 1x10^-4M for copper
and 2M for CN
Then Cu+3CN→Cu(CN)_3
I (1.0x10^-4)(2)
C
E

Not sure how to proceed
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have a huge excess of cyanide - so you can safely assume its concentration doesn't change (after dilution).

For the same reason - and taking into account quite large formation constant - you can safely assume all copper is complexed.

That gives you approximate, but quite reasonable values for two concentrations. There is only one unknown now.

After you are done, you should check if the assumptions hold.
 
Borek said:
You have a huge excess of cyanide - so you can safely assume its concentration doesn't change (after dilution).

For the same reason - and taking into account quite large formation constant - you can safely assume all copper is complexed.

That gives you approximate, but quite reasonable values for two concentrations. There is only one unknown now.

After you are done, you should check if the assumptions hold.

Ok, so I did that
I got the Concentration of of copper cyanide to be 1.28E7
then did the reverse rxn
CuCN_3_→3CN+Cu
(1.28E7) 3x x

the new K value i got to be 1/1E9=1E-9
so (27x^4/(1.28E7))=1E-9
i got x to be .0147

The answer booklet says 1.3E-14
 
Hemolymph said:
Ok, so I did that
I got the Concentration of of copper cyanide to be 1.28E7

You misunderstood. If all of copper was complexed, concentration of the complex is limited by the stoichiometry.

Whenever you see concentration higher than 10M you can be almost sure something is already wrong.
 
Ah ok thanks
 
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