Entropy/enthelpy/gibbs for vaporization of water

  • Thread starter Thread starter Puchinita5
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vaporization Water
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating thermodynamic properties for the vaporization of water at 95 degrees Celsius and 1 atm pressure. Participants express confusion regarding the feasibility of vaporization at this temperature, as water typically boils at 100 degrees Celsius. Clarification is provided that water can evaporate at temperatures below its boiling point, and the calculations involve multiple steps to account for changes in temperature and phase. The importance of path independence in thermodynamic calculations is emphasized, suggesting that understanding this concept may resolve the confusion. Overall, the discussion seeks to clarify the reasoning behind the steps taken in the solution and the underlying principles of thermodynamics.
Puchinita5
Messages
178
Reaction score
0
This is a question from a quiz in my physical chemistry class

For 1 mole of H20, calculate \Delta{S_{sys}}, \Delta{S_{surr}},
\Delta{S_{univ}}, and \Delta{G_{sys}} for the following transition at 1 atm pressure and 95 degrees Celcius

H20 (l) ---------> H20 (g) Right now, what I'm confused about is...liquid water doesn't turn into a gas at 95 degrees at 1 atm (it's 100 degrees no?), so why would this reaction occur at all?

Is it perhaps just poorly worded? Maybe he meant to say that it STARTS at 95 degrees but will be heated to 100 degrees?

Homework Statement


Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Oh, and looking at the solution to this, there are three steps, 1 from 95-100, the transition, and one from 100 to 95! I would never have thought to have those steps because I thought T was constant.

Is it just a poorly worded question, or does this reaction actually happen at 95 degrees and I'm just totally missing the concept?
 
Puchinita5 said:
Right now, what I'm confused about is...liquid water doesn't turn into a gas at 95 degrees at 1 atm (it's 100 degrees no?),

100 deg C is a boiling point, but water evaporates at lower temperatures as well.
 
Puchinita5 said:
Oh, and looking at the solution to this, there are three steps, 1 from 95-100, the transition, and one from 100 to 95! I would never have thought to have those steps because I thought T was constant.

Is it just a poorly worded question, or does this reaction actually happen at 95 degrees and I'm just totally missing the concept?
I think the question means the process at 95 Celsius. But since you are (supposedly) not given the evaporation contribution at 95 Celsius you must calculate a different path from the initial state (liquid water at 95 Celsius) to the final state (gaseous water at 95 Celsius). This actually only makes sense if the values you are supposed to calculate are path-independent, and I strongly suggest you try to understand if and possibly why they are. Just our of curiosity: what are the results?
 
Here is the solution...I just don't understand why all these things were done. If you could explain the whole "path" thing because that is a concept I definitely don't really get and might be why I don't understand this solution.

There are some missing parts to the solution where I couldn't read what the professor wrote. But for the most part this is all of it...

These were given also:
\Delta{H_{fH20(l)}}=-285.8 kJ/mol
\Delta{H_{fH20(g)}}=-241.8 kJ/mol
C_{pm}H20(l)=75.29 J/Kmol
C_{pm}H20(g)=33.58 J/Kmol

The solution was given in three steps:
1)
\Delta{H1}=Cp\Delta{T}=75.29 J/Kmol*(373K-368K)=376.5J

\Delta{S1}=Cp*ln(T2/T1)=75.29 J/Kmol*ln(373K/368K)=1.02J

2)

\Delta{H2}=\Delta{H_{fH20(g)_{373}}} - \Delta{H_{fH20(l)_{373}}}=?

\Delta{H_{f(373)}}=Cp(373-298)+ \Delta{H_{f(298)}}=?

\Delta{H2}= -24.8 kJ+285.8 kJ=44,000J

\Delta{S2}=\Delta{H2}/373 =44,000J/373=117.96 J/K

3)

\Delta{H3}=33.58 J/K*(368-373)=-168 J

\Delta{S3}=33.58 J/K*ln(368/373)= -.453 J

\Delta{HTotal}=44.208 J

\Delta{STotal}=118.5 J

\Delta{GTotal}=600 J

\Delta{S_{surr}}=-\Delta{HTotal}/368=-120.13

\Delta{S_{univ}}=-1.63 J/K


Yea, so if you can just provide me with some rational on why these steps are taken, I would appreciate it! I'm really just trying to understand.
 
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