What Is the Percent of CaCl2 in the Mix?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lorka150
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
To determine the percent of CaCl2 in the mix, the reaction equation CaCl2 + 2AgNO3 → 2AgCl + Ca(NO2)2 is used. From 0.4462 g of AgCl produced, the moles of AgCl are calculated as 0.003113 mol. The correct approach involves using stoichiometry to relate the moles of AgCl back to the moles of CaCl2, rather than subtracting masses of different compounds. The calculations suggest that the percent of CaCl2 in the mix is slightly over 50%. Accurate stoichiometric ratios are essential for solving this problem correctly.
lorka150
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
the equation is CaCl2 + 2AgNO3 --> AgCl Ca(NO2)2
my mix is CaCl2 and other stuff that does not react with AgNO3.
0.2918 g of mix gives 0.4462g of AgCl, what is the percent of CaCl2 in the mix?
Molar masses are CaCL2 110.98g/mol and AgCl 143.32 g/mol.
--------------------------------
I am not sure if this is how to do it, however...
moles of the AgCl is 0.4462/143.32 = 0.003113 mol

moles of CaCl2 is 0.4462-0.2918 = 0.1544 grams of CaCl2, then 0.1544/110.98 = 0.001391 mols of CaCl2


i don't know if that's right so far, or where to go from there. i know i need to use the ratios somewhere but ack!
please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the equation is CaCl2 + 2AgNO3 --> AgCl Ca(NO2)2

Is this plus the calcium nitrite or a raised dot meaning its part of one unit?
(AgCl Ca(NO2)2)?
 
sorry, there should be a plus.

CaCl2 + 2AgNO3 --> AgCl + Ca(NO2)2

thanks for pointing it out!
 
Assuming you have correctly calculated that

0.2918 g of mix

contains

0.1544 grams of CaCl2

answer should be slightly over 50%...

Trick is, 0.1544 is wrong. No idea what you are trying to find subtracting masses of different compounds. This is simple stoichiometric problem, easily solved using ratios (or dimensional analysis).
 
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