What Is the Cell Potential When Pb Electrode Mass Changes?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the cell potential of a galvanic cell involving lead (Pb) and nickel (Ni) electrodes when the mass of the Pb electrode changes. Participants explore the implications of the mass change on the concentrations of the reactants and products, as well as the application of the Nernst equation under standard conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the initial setup of the galvanic cell and the relevant half-reactions, noting the standard conditions imply 1 M concentrations for both Ni2+ and Pb2+.
  • Another participant questions how to incorporate the change in mass of the Pb electrode into the calculations.
  • Some participants suggest using stoichiometry to relate mass to moles and concentrations, but express confusion over the correct application of these concepts.
  • There is a discussion about the interpretation of the mass of Pb, with one participant clarifying that the final mass of Pb does not represent the mass deposited during the reaction.
  • Participants express uncertainty about how the concentration of the cathode changes and how to properly set up the ICE table for the reaction.
  • One participant attempts to calculate the concentration change using the final mass of Pb but questions the validity of their approach when the results do not match expected outcomes.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the mass of lead deposited is what affects the solution composition, not the mass of lead already present in the electrode.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need to account for the mass of Pb deposited from the solution, but there is disagreement on how to correctly apply stoichiometry and the Nernst equation in this context. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct approach to calculate the cell potential.

Contextual Notes

Participants express limitations in their understanding of how to relate mass changes to concentration changes, and there are unresolved questions about the application of the Nernst equation and the proper setup of the ICE table.

davev
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Consider the following half reactions at 298 K
Ni2+ + 2 e- → Ni Eo = -0.231 V
Pb2+ + 2 e- → Pb Eo = -0.133 V​
A galvanic cell based on these half reactions is set up under standard conditions where each solution is 1.00 L and each electrode weighs exactly 100.0 g. What will the potential of the cell be when the mass of the Pb electrode is 137.08 g?

Answer: 0.0934 V

Homework Equations


Ecell = Eocell - (RT/nF) * ln(Q)
R = 8.314
n = 2
Q = [products]x/[reactants]y and in this case x and y are both 1
Eocell = 0.098 V

Pb2+ + Ni → Pb + Ni2+
Pb2+ is the cathode (reduction); Ni2+ is the anode (oxidation).

The Attempt at a Solution


I need some guidance on how to deal with the mass in grams.

Originally, as I was given the volume, I was going to use molar mass to get moles of Ni and PB, then divide by the volume given to get the concentration of each. Instead of using the 100 grams of Pb, I used 137.08 grams to find the concentration -- keeping the concentration found using 100 grams of Ni as is. This was wrong when I plugged my numbers into the Nernst equation.

My second thought was to set up an ICE table; however, the original concentration using 100 grams at the cathode (if using the molar mass to find moles and using volume to find concentration is correct) is less than the new concentration using 137.08 grams, so I don't see how an ICE table would work, because the cathode concentration should always decrease.

Any help would be great!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
davev said:
A galvanic cell based on these half reactions is set up under standard conditions

What does the "standard conditions" tell you about initial concentrations of Ni2+ and Pb2+?
 
Borek said:
What does the "standard conditions" tell you about initial concentrations of Ni2+ and Pb2+?

That the concentration of both anode and cathode is 1 M. How would I incorporate the change in mass of the cathode electrode though?
 
Simple stoichiometry - moles, masses, reaction equations, these things.
 
Borek said:
Simple stoichiometry - moles, masses, reaction equations, these things.

I'm confused, because I don't think I get the right answer by doing this:

137.08 g Pb * (1 mol Pb/207.2 g Pb) * (1 mol Pb2+/1 mol Pb) = 0.66158 moles of Pb2+. I'm assuming that is also 0.66158 M of Pb2+ as there is 1 L of solution for both anode and cathode.

1 - x = 0.66158
x = 0.33842; this is how much the concentration of both would change.

Then lnQ = (1.33842/0.66158). Multiply this by (8.314*298)/(2*96485). Finally 0.098 - 0.009046564 = 0.0889 V, which is not the correct answer. What am I doing wrong?
 
davev said:
137.08 g Pb

That's the final mass, not the mass deposited.
 
Borek said:
That's the final mass, not the mass deposited.

Isn't that what I did? I used that as the end product in my ICE table. To find change (i.e., x), 1 - x = 0.66158. The value of x would be the final concentration of Ni2+.
 
davev said:
Isn't that what I did?

No, that's not what you did.
 
Borek said:
No, that's not what you did.

Okay — could you explain what I have to do more clearly, because I don't have any other ideas on how to approach this problem.
 
  • #10
Borek said:
No, that's not what you did.

I figured it out, but I'm somewhat confused. lnQ = [1.3708/1] is the right way to approach this problem. However, why doesn't the cathode concentration change at all?

Edit: Sorry, this is wrong. It's closer than I've come before to the actual answer, but it's wrong. I'm assuming the cathode definitely does have to change.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
You are interested only in the mass of lead that was deposited, not in the lead that was there (in the electrode) from the very beginning. Whatever was deposited, came from the solution. Whatever was there - just was there, and its presence doesn't count against changes in the solution composition.

davev said:
lnQ = [1.3708/1]

And how on Earth do you expect me to guess what these random numbers means?
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
8K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
9K
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K