Weight percent and concentration problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the final concentrations of ammonium hydroxide and hydrogen peroxide after mixing specific volumes of each with water. The initial concentrations are given as 29wt% for ammonium hydroxide and 31wt% for hydrogen peroxide, with their respective densities provided. After mixing, the total volume of the solution is 31.72L, leading to a final molarity of approximately 7.51x10^-4 mol/L for ammonium hydroxide and 5x10^-3 mol/L for hydrogen peroxide. Participants emphasize the importance of using the total volume for dilution calculations and suggest assuming the density of the final solution is similar to that of pure water due to the low concentrations. The conversation highlights the complexities of concentration calculations in mixed solutions.
shiyao85
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
the question is at below.

320ml of 29wt% of ammonium hydroxide
1210ml of 31wt% of hydrogen peroxide
30190ml of water

mixed together.

What is the concentration of ammonium hydroxide and hydrogen peroxide now?
Is there any reaction occurs between them?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hi shiyao85! Welcome to PF! :wink:

Show us what you've tried, and where you're stuck, and then we'll know how to help! :smile:
 
Conversion of weight percent to molarity
*Cw=(10×Mw×M)/ρ

Where Cw is weight percent
Mw is molar mass
M is molarity
ρ is density of the solution

Assumption: -No reaction between ammonium hydroxide and hydrogen peroxide

-Hydrogen peroxide
Density = 1.44g/mL
Cw = 31wt%
Mw = 34g/mol
From *
M1=0.131mol/L
V1 = 1210ml = 1.21L

-Ammonium hydroxide
Density = 0.9g/mL
Cw = 29wt%
Mw = 35g/mol
From *
M2 = 0.0745mol/L
V2 = 320ml = 0.32L

After mixing:
Total volume of the solution is 31.72L.
Formula for dilution
MiVi = MfVf

For ammonium peroxide
MiVi = MfVf
(0.0745mol/L) X 0.32L = Mf X 31.72L
Final molarity of NH4OH in the solution is 7.51X10^-4 mol/L.

For hydrogen peroxide,
MiVi = MfVf
(0.131mol/L) X 1.21L = Mf X 31.72L
Final molarity of H2O2 in the solution is 5X10^-3 mol/L.
Remarks:
*http://www.chembuddy.com/?left=concentration&right=percentage-to-molarity
Density of the substances from internet
http://actrav.itcilo.org/actrav-english/telearn/osh/ic/1336216.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_peroxide

I was stuck in the part of final volume. Not sure one which the number i should use. Is it total volume of the solution? or just the volume of the chemical and water?
OPs..
 
Sum masses of all solutions and assume density to be that of pure water (mass is conserved after all, which can't be said about volume). You won't find anything better and the final solution seems to be quite diluted.

--
 
Borek said:
Sum masses of all solutions and assume density to be that of pure water (mass is conserved after all, which can't be said about volume). You won't find anything better and the final solution seems to be quite diluted.

--
ChemBuddy chemical calculators - buffer calculator, stoichiometry calculator
www.ph-meter.info - ph meter, ph electrode


So have to convert the total volume to mass rite? assume the density to be 1 for all the solute also rite? because all of them are quite dilute..
 
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