1. What is the molarity of a solution of H2SO4 is 42.7cm3 is required to exactly titrate 27.5cm3 of 0.1!

"aOH
here is #hat i $ot%
H2SO4 & 2"aOH ''( "a2SO4 & 2H2O)l*
!ole ratio of H2SO4 to "aOH + 1%2
therefore moles "aOH + 0.1 x 27.5
+ 1.775 mol
therefore moles of H2SO4 needed + 1.775,2
+ -.3-75 moles
conc + mol,.ol
! "a2SO4 + -.3-75,42.7
+0.1/!
The answer is correct (should really be 0.20 M, to 2 sig fig, as only 2 sig fig in qestion).
HOW!", your wor#ing is incorrect, as you ha$e %ade two %ista#es that cancel one another out. &n deter%ining the nu%ber of %oles of 'aOH, you ha$e
%ulti(lied concentration, in %ol)*, by $olu%e in %*. +s a result, you ha$e an incorrect calculation, as n('aOH) , 0.0-.//0 %ol. 1ou should either include
a -02(34) factor to correct $olu%e into *, ie5
therefore %oles 'aOH , 0..- 6 2/.0 6 -02(34)
, -..//0 6 -02(34) %ol
or you should wor# in %illi%oles (%%ol), ie5
therefore %oles 'aOH , 0..- 6 2/.0
, -..//0 %%ol
The reason that you ha$e the correct answer is that in the last ste(, you ha$e di$ided by $olu%e, again in %*, and so the two -02(34) factors that you
ha$e %issed would ha$e cancelled.
quote5
2. Ho# many cm3 of 0.4-! H2SO4 is required to neutralise 2.0cm3 of 0.1! "aOH0
H2SO4 & 2"aOH 12 "a2SO4 & 2H2O)l*
!ole ratio of H2SO4 to "aOH is 1%2
concentration + moles,.olume
conc. x .ol )H2SO4* + 23conc. x .ol. )"aOH*4
0.4-. + 2)0.1 x 2*
.ol)H2SO4* + 2)0.1 x 2*,0.4-
+ .1 cm3
This one is wrong, the correct answer is -/ c%4 (to 2 sig fig). The %ista#e lies in the state%ent that
7conc. 6 $ol (H28O9) , 2:conc. 6 $ol. ('aOH);7.
1ou ha$e said that n(H28O9) 5 n('aOH) , - 5 2
<(on cross %ulti(lying, this gi$es 2 = n(H28O9) , n('aOH)
and thus your state%ent should read 2 = conc. 6 $ol (H28O9) , :conc. 6 $ol. ('aOH);.
1ou are also wor#ing in %* instead of * again.
quote5
3. 5o #hat .olume must 400cm3 of 0.1! "aOH 6e diluted to yield a 0.50 solution
conc + mol,.ol
0.1+ mols,400
+ 244 mol
0.5 + 244,.ol
.ol + 4--cm3
This is the correct answer, although you again ha$e used %* instead of *, and thus ha$e che%ical a%ount in %%ol instead of %ol. 'ote that this question
could be done quic#er using the dilution for%ula.
& ha$e (osted so%e a((roaches to %ole calculations in another recent thread, if you want to go ha$e a loo#.
Ho(e this hel(s.
>uic#>uote

quote5
?alculate the %ass of solid required of 200 %* of 0.-00 %ol)* sodiu% carbonate solution
& inter(ret this to %ean calculate the %ass of sodiu% carbonate solid required to (re(are 200 %* of 0.-00 %ol)* solution...
n('a2?O4) , ?! , 0.-00 = 200 =-02(34) , 0.020 %ol
'ow, assu%ing we are using anhydrous sodiu% carbonate ('a2?O4), M , -00.@@ g)%ol, then
%('a2?O4) , nM , 0.020 = -00.@@ , 2..9@/0 , 2..0 g (4 sig fig)
&f we use hydrated sodiu% carbonate, 'a2?O4.-0H2O, M , 2A..-0 g)%ol, then
%('a2?O4.-0H2O) , nM , 0.020 = 2A..-0 , /.-04/0 , /.-0 g (4 sig fig)
+s for the question using o6alic acid dihydrate, &Bll lea$e you to try it, but the answer & get is 0.@9. g (4 sig fig).
Oh, and &B% glad you li#e %y %ethod for %ole calculations.
& ha$e another question5
0.312 $ of oxylaic acid )H272O4.2H2O* #as dissol.ed in #ater and the solution made u8 to 250.0 m9. 7alculate the concentration of the
solution. Co & include the 2H2O in the %ole calculationDDD & can ne$er re%e%ber and then & get confused and its a big %ess of %essiness
1ou %ust include the water of crystallisation in the calculation of the %oles, as it is (resent as (art of the %ass. That is, the 0.4-.2 g of o6alic acid
dihydrate is the %ass of the o6alic acid (resent, and the %ass of the water of crysatllisation (resent in the crystal lattice. Thus,
n(H2?2O9) , n(H2?2O9.2H2O) , % ) M , 0.4-.2 ) (2 = -.00A E 2 = -2.0- E 9 = -..00 E 2 = 2 = -.00A E 2 = -..00)
, whate$er (& donBt ha$e a calculator on hand, sorry)
8o, :H2?2O9; , n ) ! , whate$er ) (200.0 = -02(34)) , answer %ol)* (9 sig fig)
Originally posted by Elliot III
:;.e only 6een tau$ht the <dod$y method< for titration. 7ould someone 8lease ex8lain to me the other method0 5han=s>
8te( -5 Write a balanced equation for the reaction ta#ing (lace.
8te( 25 Felow each for%ula, write down the infor%ation that you ha$e 3 use this to identify the substance that you WANT to find out about, and the
substance that youB$e GOT enough infor%ation to figure out %oles.
8te( 45 Gigure out %oles of HOT, usually fro% a for%ula li#e n , % ) M, or n , ? = !
8te( 95 Write down n(W+'T) ) n(HOT) , coeff(W+'T) ) coeff(HOT), but using the for%ulae for W+'T and HOT on *H8, and the $alues fro% you balanced
equation on the "H8
8te( 05 Gind n(W+'T) fro% n(HOT) using the equation in ste( 9.
8te( .5 +nswer the question by calculating whate$er you see# fro% n(W+'T) using the sa%e sorts of equations as used in ste( 4.
'OT5 This %ethod will allow you to sol$e all %ole calculations, not Iust the ones in$ol$ed with titrations.
To %a#e this clearer, letBs try an e6a%(le...
20.00 %l of an un#nown (otassiu% hydro6ide solution was (laced into a clean, dry conical flas#, and 2 dro(s of a suitable indicator added. The solution
was then titrated with 0.24/- %ol)* sulfuric acid, and 22.40 %* of solution was required to reach the end (oint. Ceter%ine the concentration of the
(otassiu% hydro6ide solution.
quation5 2JOH (aq) E H28O9 (aq) 333K J28O9 (aq) E 2H2O (l)
Cata5 20.00 %* 22.40 %*
? , D 0.24/- %ol)*
8o... W+'T HOT
%oles(HOT)5 'ow, n(H28O9) , ?! , 0.24/- = 22.40 = -02(34) , 0.2@@-... = -02(34) %ol
qn5 G"OM ><+T&O' n(JOH) ) n(H28O9) , 2 ) -
%oles(W+'T)5 8o, n(JOH) , (2 ) -) = n(H28O9) , 2 = 0.2@@-... = -02(34) , 0.0-00@A... %ol
+nswer5 +nd so, :JOH; , n ) ! , 0.0-00@A... ) (20.00 = -02(34)) , 0.924@4... %ol)*
8o, the concentration of the un#nown JOH solution is 0.924@ %ol)* (9 sig fig).
Originally posted by kalinda
#hy dissol.e the stuff strai$ht into a 6ea=er and not ?ust into the .olumetric flas=
The (roble% with this is if the solid does not readily dissol$e, thereBs not %uch you can do about it in the $olu%etric flas#. Gor e6a%(le, you canBt heat it,
as that would change the internal $olu%e of the $ol flas#, and ruin it.
8ubstances li#e iron(&&) sulfate, for e6a%(le, readily dissol$e at high te%(eratures, but not at low te%(eratures 3 this des(ite being highly soluble. That is,
once you get the% dissol$ed, they stay dissol$ed, but getting the% to dissol$e can be a challenge.
quote5
Originally posted by kalinda
this #ay there is least chance of ha.in$ any of the solution left in the 6ea=er
True, and this is a (otential source of hu%an error, but correct quantitative transfer of a solution should a$oid this (roble%. 8o, one stuff in bea#er
dissol$ed, transfer (through a filter funnel) into the $ol. flas#. Then, rinse the bea#er 4 ti%es, each ti%e (lacing the solution into the $ol. flas#. Then, rinse
the filter funnel 4 ti%es. Fy doing this, all of the che%ical is transferred to the $ol. flas#.
?alculate the %ass of solid required of 200 %* of 0.-00 %ol)* sodiu% carbonate solution
& inter(ret this to %ean calculate the %ass of sodiu% carbonate solid required to (re(are 200 %* of 0.-00 %ol)* solution...
n('a2?O4) , ?! , 0.-00 = 200 =-02(34) , 0.020 %ol
'ow, assu%ing we are using anhydrous sodiu% carbonate ('a2?O4), M , -00.@@ g)%ol, then
%('a2?O4) , nM , 0.020 = -00.@@ , 2..9@/0 , 2..0 g (4 sig fig)
&f we use hydrated sodiu% carbonate, 'a2?O4.-0H2O, M , 2A..-0 g)%ol, then
%('a2?O4.-0H2O) , nM , 0.020 = 2A..-0 , /.-04/0 , /.-0 g (4 sig fig)
+s for the question using o6alic acid dihydrate, &Bll lea$e you to try it, but the answer & get is 0.@9. g (4 sig fig).
Oh, and &B% glad you li#e %y %ethod for %ole calculations.
7H-O7&3H2 @ '''''''' ( 7H5O7
3'
& 3H3O
&1
5hats for com8lete ionisation.
Aor the intermediates you can #or= out yourself.
That should be 4H2O at the start, not 4H2 .
?itric acid (23hydro6y(ro(ane3-,2,43tricarbo6ylic acid), HOO?3?H23?(OH)(?OOH)3?H23?OOH is a tri(rotic acid, and li#e all tri(rotic acids, it ionises in a
ste(wise %anner. ie5
?.HAO/ (aq) E H2O (l) L333K ?.H/O/
3
(aq) E H4O
E
(aq)
?.H/O/
3
(aq) E H2O (l) L333K ?.H.O/
23
(aq) E H4O
E
(aq)
?.H.O/
23
(aq) E H2O (l) L333K ?.H0O/
43
(aq) E H4O
E
(aq)
+ll three equilibria lie to the left, each further left than the one before 3 so, not %any citric acid%olecules undergo the first ioinisation, and $irtually none
the third. &n fact, %any questions treat it as if it were a %ono(rotic acid 3 which is wrong, but you should recognise that it can ha((en, es(ecially in
assess%ents and trials, which %ay be written by (eo(le with not as %uch che%istry #nowledge as would be desirable.