When do you use q=mc(Tf-Ti) versus q=c(Tf-Ti) in thermochemistry calculations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter genevievelily
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Thermochemistry
Click For Summary
In thermochemistry, the equation q=mc(Tf-Ti) is used when calculating heat transfer involving specific heat capacity, which is dependent on the mass of the substance. In contrast, q=c(Tf-Ti) utilizes heat capacity, an extensive property that does not require mass to be specified. The specific heat capacity (Cs) is an intensive property, meaning it remains constant regardless of the amount of material, while heat capacity (C) varies with mass. The relationship between the two is defined by nCs = C, where n represents the mass in grams or moles. Understanding when to use each equation is crucial for accurate thermochemical calculations.
genevievelily
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I am currently studying intro to thermochemistry. I noticed in some problem solutions the equation q=mc(Tf-Ti) but in other the equation is q=c(Tf-Ti). How come sometimes the mass is not used in the equation? When do you know which one to use?

Thanks!
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
In one case you are using the Heat Capacity which has units of J/K, in the other case they are using the Specific Heat Capacity which has units of J/(gK) or J/(molK). The latter is an intensive property of a system, meaning you don't have to worry about how much material you have, whereas the former can change depending on how much material you are working with. To intuitively understand this a little better just consider that 1g of water will have a much greater change in temperature when absorbing 1 J of energy whereas 1000g of water may hardly change temperature at all.

The relation between them is nCs = C, where I will define n to be the relevant mass unit (either moles or grams), Cs = specific heat capacity, and C = heat capacity.
 
The second one is "per unit mass", where the "unit mass" has to be in units consistent with the rest of the equation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
13K
Replies
3
Views
3K