Chemistry Citric acid polyprotic acid equilibria

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the equilibria of citric acid and the calculation of pH based on its polyprotic nature. The first equilibrium yields a hydrogen ion concentration of 0.01165 M, while the second equilibrium adds a negligible amount of 1.8 * 10^-5 M, leading to a pH of approximately 1.96. Participants debate whether adding the concentrations from both equilibria improves accuracy, with one user calculating a pH of 1.93 and questioning the method. It is noted that for practical purposes, differences in pH calculations below 0.1 units are often considered negligible due to other potential sources of error. The conversation highlights the variability in calculated pH values based on different assumptions and Ka values used in the calculations.
i_love_science
Messages
80
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Citric acid (H3C6H5O7) is a triprotic acid with Ka1 = 8.4*10^-4, Ka2 = 1.8*10^-5, and Ka3 = 4.0*10^-6. Calculate the pH of 0.15 M citric acid.
Relevant Equations
polyprotic acid equations (below)
Using the first equilibrium, H3A <-> H2A- + H+, the [H+] is solved to be 0.01165 M ~ 1.1 * 10^-2 M.

Using the second equilibrium, H2A- <-> HA2- + H+, the additional change in H+ is found to be 1.8 * 10^-5 M. The solution says that this second equilibrium is negligible, because 1.1 * 10^-2 M + 1.8 * 10^-5 M ~ 1.1 * 10^-2.

The question asks to find the pH though, not specifically the concentration [H+]. I don't understand why it would not be better to add 0.01165 M + 1.8 * 10^-5 M = 0.011668 M, and continue with this type of calculation with the third equilibrium as well? Would it make the answer more precise? I got pH 1.93 using this method, but the solution gives 1.96.

Could anyone explain why, or whether my reasoning is right? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is always a matter of deciding "which answer is already good enough".

For most practical applications if the difference between two ways of calculating pH is below 0.1 pH unit it doesn't matter, as there are other sources of error, typically larger (or at least comparable). But it is not like it is an approach set in stone, there is a lot of personal choice in whether the difference of 0.05, 0.1 or 0.2 can be considered to be negligible.

I have no idea how you calculated the value of 0.01165, assuming a monoprotic acid with Ka=8.4e-4 I got pH of 1.97 ([H+ = 0.01081M). I would understand the value of 0.01122 as that's what you can get from approximated calculations, but 0.01165 seems like some kind of error to me.

Using pH calculator and your set of Ka values (they are often listed as slightly different, that's one of these error sources I mentioned earlier) I got an 'exact' pH of 1.97 using all three Ka for calculations, and NO difference between pH values (slight difference in calculated H+ concentration was too low) no matter whether I did calculations using one, two or three Ka values/dissociation steps.
 
  • Like
Likes i_love_science
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