Solving pH of Solution After NaOH Addition

  • Thread starter Thread starter MichaelXY
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Addition Ph
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the pH of a solution after adding 30.0 mL of 0.010 M NaOH to 10.0 mL of 0.010 M H2SO4. The initial calculations show the moles of NaOH and H2SO4, but the final pH calculation is incorrect because it does not account for the neutralization reaction and the total volume of the resulting solution. After mixing, the excess concentration of H2SO4 must be determined by dividing the remaining moles by the total volume of the mixed solution. This adjustment is crucial for accurately calculating the final pH. Understanding the neutralization process and dilution effects is essential for solving such problems correctly.
MichaelXY
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] pH of solution

Homework Statement


What is the pH of a solution in which 30.0mL of 0.010 M NaOH are added to 10.0mL of .010 M H2SO4?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



So first thing I did was write the equation.

2NaOH + H2SO4 ----> Na2SO4 + 2H2O

I never used this equation after this which makes me think I already messed up. I perform the following:

.03L(.010M) = 3*10^-4 mol NaOH
.01L(.010M) = 1*10^-4 mol H2SO4

I then compute concentration of H2SO4 by: 1*10^-4/.01L = .01
pH = -log(.01) = 2.0 pH
I suspect I am missing something here. Any pointers?
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Everything looks good until the last calculation. It's a strong acid mixed with strong base, so the moles of each will neutralize each other until one runs out. You will then be left with an excess acid or base. However, the concentration of this acid or base is now more dilute because you now have added the solutions together, which adds their respective volumes together. Now you can figure out how this affects the last step. The excess H2SO4 concentration is the number of excess moles divided by total volume, not just by its initial volume.
 
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