Determining final concentrations of a Reaction given an equilibrium K

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the final concentrations of SO2, O2, and SO3 in the reaction 2SO2 (g) + O2 (g) ⇌ 2SO3 (g) with an initial concentration of SO3 at 0.500 M and Kc of 0.15. The user initially flipped the reaction to find the reverse Kc, resulting in 6.6667, and set up a RICE table to solve for the changes in concentrations using an "x" variable. However, there was confusion regarding the setup of the equilibrium expression, as the user was unsure about their cubic equation. After some input from other users, it was clarified that the cubic equation was indeed correct, and the issue stemmed from an error in the provided answer sheet. The final conclusion confirmed the calculations were accurate, leading to the correct value of x as 0.24566.
BrettJimison
Messages
81
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement



Rxn: 2SO2 (g) + O2 (g) \Leftrightarrow 2SO3 (g)

If the initial concentration of SO3 is .500 M (moles/liter) @1500K, what are the final concentrations of [SO2], [O2] and [SO3]. Kc = .15

Stop when you get to the cubic equation

Homework Equations



RICE table

Kc= [SO3]2/ [O2][SO2]2 This is equilibrium quotient for forward reaction. I will flip it to get reverse reaction Kc equation



The Attempt at a Solution



This is the Kc given for the forward reaction. If I flip the reaction around I invert the Kc and it becomes = 6.6667 (for the reverse reaction)

I then used a "rice" table with the initial concentration of SO3 and "x" variable for the SO2 and O2[

Plugging these values in I get the kc equation:

6.6667= [2x]2[x]/[.500-2x]

I'm not getting the correct cubic equation when expanding this quotient. I'm sure of my math, so I was wondering if I'm setting up the quotient wrong? - Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't need to reverse the reaction (you flipped and calculated the inverse of the Kc, which effectively cancels out).

What is the "correct" answer you are expecting to get? At first sight I don't see anything wrong with your work.
 
Looks OK to me too. Maybe the problem is this is a fairly complete conversion so don't round down too much your x as this could introduce considerable error in your (0.5 - 2x) when you back calculate to check?

(I get x = 0.24566)
 
Thanks for the input Borek and epenguin.
If turns out there was an error on the answer sheet I was given.
My cubic equation was correct after all.
 
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