Finding pH using acidity/basicity constants

  • Thread starter Thread starter uq_civediv
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constants Ph
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the discrepancy in pH calculations for a 0.004 M HCOONa solution using two different methods. The first method, based on the dissociation of formic acid (HCOOH), yields a pH of 8.366, while the second method, treating HCOO^- as a base reacting with water, results in a pH of 7.719. The difference arises because the first approach neglects the effect of water's presence on the equilibrium, while the second method accounts for it. Participants suggest that the first method could be modified to include water's influence without resorting to complex analytical techniques. The conversation highlights the importance of considering all equilibria in pH calculations.
uq_civediv
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
technically it is not homework, more like struggling with textbook material, but something tells me it would end up here anyway so here it is :

there's something about the method that gives me different results using different paths so I'm going to show both of them and see if you can spot the error in my thinking

let's say i want to find the pH of the solution of, say, 0.004 M HCOONa, given that for HCOOH K_a = 1.8\times10^{-4}

For the reaction
HCOOH \rightleftharpoons H^+ + HCOO^- the constant is K_a = \frac{[H^+][HCOO^-]}{[HCOOH]}

standard procedure of writing the initial and final concentrations

<br /> \begin{array}{| c|c|c |} \ [HCOOH]&amp;[H^+]&amp;[HCOO^-]\\<br /> \hline<br /> \0&amp;10^{-7}&amp;0.004\\<br /> \hline <br /> x&amp;10^{-7}-x&amp;0.004-x\\<br /> \hline<br /> \end{array}<br /> which gives K_a = \frac{(10^{-7}-x) (0.004-x)}{x} = 1.8 \times 10^{-4}

solving for x gives x = 9.569 \times 10^{-8} so [H^+] = 10^{-7} - x = 4.32 \times 10^{-9} and pH = 8.366 which sounds OK for HCOONa solution

the textbook, however, insists on treating the HCOO^- as the conjugate base of HCOOH and using the following reaction

HCOO^- + H_2 O \rightleftharpoons HCOOH + OH^- and its basicity constant K_b = \frac{[HCOOH][OH^-]}{[HCOO^-]}

(noting that K_a \times K_b = \frac{[H^+][HCOO^-]}{[HCOOH]} \times \frac{[HCOOH][OH^-]}{HCOO^-]} = [H^+] [OH^-] = K_w so K_b = \frac{10^{-14}}{1.8 \times 10^{-4}} = 5.56 \times 10^{-11}

and once again the concentrations<br /> \begin{array}{| c|c|c |} \ [HCOO^-]&amp;[HCOOH]&amp;[OH^-]\\<br /> \hline<br /> \0.004&amp;0&amp;10^{-7}\\<br /> \hline <br /> 0.004-x&amp;x&amp;10^{-7}+x\\<br /> \hline<br /> \end{array}<br /> from which K_b = \frac{x (10^{-7}+x)}{0.004-x} = 5.56 \times 10^{-11}

here the x is found as x = 4.240 \times 10^{-7}, therefore [OH^-] = 10^{-7} + x = 5.24 \times 10^{-7} so pOH = 6.281 and pH = 14 - pOH = 7.719

as you notice the two results (8.366 and 7.719) are too different to call them equivalent

so

any ideas ?-- o, and why does my LaTeX appear on white background ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Good question, I like it.

Looks to me like your first approach ignores presence of water. When you remove H+ water dissociation equilibrium shifts right - which you don't take into account. In Kb approach base reacts with water - so its presence is taken into account automatically.
 
hmm...

i suppose so

i wonder if there's an easy way for modifying the first approach without going into the purely analytical "(1) charge balance, (2) material balance, (3) expressions for equilibrium constants"
 
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