Is the traditional method for calculating molar heat of dissolution accurate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PVnRT81
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Heat
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the accuracy of the traditional method for calculating the molar heat of dissolution of a solute in water. Participants explore the implications of including the mass of the solute in the heat transfer calculations and the reasoning behind differing approaches to this problem.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a method for calculating molar heat of dissolution using the heat absorbed by water, questioning the necessity of including the mass of the solute.
  • Another participant argues that the instructor's method is closer to the correct approach, suggesting that the specific heat capacity (cp) assumption may not hold true.
  • A participant emphasizes that the solute does not lose heat during dissolution, asserting that heat produced must warm both the solute and the solvent.
  • Another participant expresses curiosity about why some sources do not include the mass of the solute, suggesting that it may be negligible compared to the solvent's mass.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the inclusion of the solute's mass in heat calculations. There is no consensus on the correct method, with multiple viewpoints presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the assumption of constant specific heat capacity may not be valid, and the relevance of the solute's mass may vary depending on the specific scenario.

PVnRT81
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Suppose I have a solute of mass "x" grams. I dissolve this in "y" mL of water. The temperature of the water increases by "z" degrees Celsius.

I calculate the molar heat of dissolution of the solute by measuring, using q=mwatercΔt, the heat absorbed by water (in kJ), and then dividing by the moles of solute.

The above mentioned method is found in many reference textbooks as well as various sources across the web.

However, my science instructor insists that this method is wrong, and to calculate the heat transferred, you should include the mass of the solute as well.

Thus, when measuring the heat absorbed it should look like this:

q=msolute + solventcΔt

I find this quite unintuitive; I don't agree with my instructor on this matter. Am I right or wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Wrong.

Imagine that after dissolution finished you are adding another, identical amount of heat, this time without dissolving anything. What mass would you use now to calculate Δt?

(To be exact your instructor is in a way also wrong, but (s)he is much closer to the correct answer. Their solution assumes cp didn't change, which is not exactly true.)
 
Borek said:
Wrong.

Imagine that after dissolution finished you are adding another, identical amount of heat, this time without dissolving anything. What mass would you use now to calculate Δt?

(To be exact your instructor is in a way also wrong, but (s)he is much closer to the correct answer. Their solution assumes cp didn't change, which is not exactly true.)

I would use the mass that is gaining heat - which is the total mass in this case. But in the original scenario, the solute is losing heat, and the solvent is gaining heat... so, wouldn't it make more sense to use the mass of water only because the solute itself is not gaining heat?
 
Last edited:
Solute is not losing heat! Heat is produced by the dissolution, and it has to heat up both water and the solute. Otherwise after the dissolution you will have a hot solvent and cold solute - which is apparently not the case.
 
Borek said:
Solute is not losing heat! Heat is produced by the dissolution, and it has to heat up both water and the solute. Otherwise after the dissolution you will have a hot solvent and cold solute - which is apparently not the case.

Ah! That clears it up... however, I am still curious as to why some websites/textbooks choose not to include the mass of the solute.
 
Sometimes it is negligible (much smaller than the mass of the solvent).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K