How Do You Calculate Solubility Product and Solubility in Buffered Solutions?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the solubility product (Ksp) and solubility of cobalt(II) hydroxide and magnesium hydroxide in buffered solutions. For cobalt(II) hydroxide, the Ksp was determined to be 6.3*10^-16, and the solubility at pH 10.43 is 8.6*10^-9. The approach involves using the equilibrium expressions for the dissociation reactions and understanding the relationships between ion concentrations. In the case of magnesium hydroxide, with a pH of 10.52, the Ksp is calculated to be 1.8*10^-11, but the concentration of magnesium ions remains unknown. The discussion emphasizes the importance of stoichiometry and concentration ratios in solving these types of problems.
carle
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hello! Two questions that I would like to get some help with. I'm translating these so I hope I get it right.

1. The solubility of cobalt(II)hydroxide is 5.4*10^-6 moles/dm^3 in water.
i) What is the solubility product?
ii) What is the solubility of cobalt(II)hydroxide if pH is buffered to 10.43?

In i) I've calculated Ks to 6.3*10^-16 which is correct. The answer in ii) is 8.6*10^-9.

2. pH in a saturated magnesium hydroxide solution is 10.52. Calculate the solubility product for magnesium hydroxide.

The answer is 1.8*10^-11.

I've tried to solve them for a long time but I can't get it right. I need some help on how to approach problems like these.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Show how you tried to solve, we will start from there.
 
Borek said:
Show how you tried to solve, we will start from there.

1
i) The reaction will be Co(OH)2 ⇔ Co2+ + 2OH- so Ks = [Co2+][OH-]2 which gives (5.4*10-6)*(2*5,4*10-6)2 = 6,3*10-16.

ii) pH is 10.43 so pOH = 3.57 and [OH-] = 10-3.57. I think that I need to do some kind of schedule between the mole ratios, because I can see that the concentration ratio between Co2+ + 2OH- is 1:2. But I don't know how to proceed.

2

The reaction will be Mg(OH)2 ⇔ Mg2+ +2OH-. We know that pH = 10.52 so [OH-] = 10-3.48. Ks = [Mg2+][OH-]2, but once again I don't know how to proceed with the concentration ratios.
 
Concentration ratios are important only when the salt itself is the only source of all ions. In both questions here it is enough to solve Ksp for the unknown and to plug known concentration in.
 
Borek said:
Concentration ratios are important only when the salt itself is the only source of all ions. In both questions here it is enough to solve Ksp for the unknown and to plug known concentration in.

Hm.. but in 2) [Mg2+ is unknown, how do I calculate that?
 
Exactly as I told you. [Mg2+] is the only unknown. You know [OH-], you take Ksp from tables, plug and chug.

I feel like you are missing what the Ksp is and how it works. If the solution is saturated product of concentrations (taken to correct powers) equals Ksp - so if you know Ksp and you are given concentrations of all ions but one, you can calculate concentration of this one ion - always. When you deal with solubility you are not given concentrations, but you know from the dissolution stoichiometry how they related to each other, so you can calculate them all. But these are two different cases.
 
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