DOCSLIB.ORG

Consideration of Long and Middle Range Interaction on the Calculation of Activities for Binary Polymer Solutions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Consideration of Long and Middle Range Interaction on the Calculation of Activities for Binary Polymer Solutions Macromolecular Research, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp 320-328 (2008) Consideration of Long and Middle Range Interaction on the Calculation of Activities for Binary Polymer Solutions Seung Seok Lee, Young Chan Bae*, and Yang Kook Sun Division of Chemical Engineering and Molecular Thermodynamics Laboratory, Hanyang University, Seoul 133-791, Korea Jae Jun Kim College of Architecture, Hanyang University, Seoul 133-791, Korea Received October 29, 2007; Revised December 26, 2007; Accepted January 2, 2008 Abstract: We established a thermodynamic framework of group contribution method based on modified double lat- tice (MDL) model. The proposed model included the long-range interaction contribution caused by the Coulomb electrostatic forces, the middle-range interaction contribution from the indirect effects of the charge interactions and the short-range interaction from modified double lattice model. The group contribution method explained the com- binatorial energy contribution responsible for the revised Flory-Huggins entropy of mixing, the van der Waals energy contribution from dispersion, the polar force, and the specific energy contribution from hydrogen bonding. We showed the solvent activities of various polymer solution systems in comparison with theoretical predictions based on experimental data. The proposed model gave a very good agreement with the experimental data. Keywords: modified double lattice model, group contribution method, charge interaction, long range interaction, mid- dle range interaction. Introduction et al.,9 Kontogeogis et al.,10 and Bogdanic and Fredenslund.11 Those methods are based on the UNIFAC correlation For engineering purposes, it is often necessary to make which is often successful for estimating phase equlibria in estimate of activity for mixtures where only fragmentary mixtures containing ordinary (nonpolymer) liquids. data, or no data at all, are available. For vapor-liquid equi- The fundamental basis for existing group-contribution libria, such estimates can be made using a group-contribu- methods for polymer solutions is the lattice theory of Flory12 tion method.1 and Huggins.13 To pursue a formal exact solution to the lat- Since activity coefficients calculation using group-contri- tice model using advanced statistical and mathematical butions was suggested by Langmuir,2 the most widely used methods, Freed and coworkers14,15 developed a lattice-clus- and best known of group-contribution method is the UNI- ter theory for polymer-solvent system. This theory provides FAC.3 The acronym UNIFAC denotes the UNIQUAC4 an exact mathematical solution for the Flory-Huggins functional group activity coefficient. The UNIFAC correla- model. tion is based on a semi-empirical model for liquid polymer Hu et al.16 proposed a new theory called the double lat- solutions called UNIQUAC (universal quasi-chemical activity tice model based on Freed’s lattice-cluster theory and Bae coefficient). When compared with the experimental data, et al.17 reported a modified double-lattice model and pro- however, the UNIFAC equation shows deviations too large vided an exact mathematical form for the secondary lattice to satisfactorily explain the polymer solutions. of the double lattice. Hu et al.18 presented the group contri- Oishi and Prausnitz5 modified the UNIFAC model by pro- bution method including a revised Flory-Huggins entropy viding a free volume contribution suggested by Prigogine- and a series expression for excess internal energy as well Flory-Patterson theory for polymer solutions to consider the as a double lattice model to account for specific interac- compressibility and change in density upon isothermal mixing. tions. Later, many modifications of UNIFAC model are reported Debye and Hückel19 presented the theory of inter-ionic by Holten-Andersen and Fredenslund,6,7 Chen et al.,8 Elbro attraction in aqueous electrolyte solutions. This theory first made it possible to calculate the ion activity coefficients at *Corresponding Author. E-mail: [email protected] infinite dilution. In order to apply the Debye-Hückel theory 320 Calculation of Activities of Polymer Solutions Using Group Contribution Method Based on Modified Double Lattice Model to higher electrolyte concentrations, Stokes and Robinson20 polymer solutions. In this study, we calculate the excess proposed the concept of ionic hydration, and derived a two Gibbs energy as the sum of three contributions: parameter equation. Later several variations of the ionic 21 22 E E E E hydration theory are reported: Glueckauf, Robinson et al. G = GLR ++GMR GSR (1) and Stokes and Robinson.23 These theories are used for cal- E culation of the activity of water in concentrated aqueous GLR represents the long-range (LR) interaction contribu- electrolyte solutions. tion caused by the Coulomb electrostatic forces, and mainly 28 E In the early 1970s, the integral techniques based on the describes the direct effects of charge interactions. GMR Ornstein-Zernicke equation have been used to solve the represents the indirect effects of charge interactions. In primitive model of electrolyte solutions. Blum24 used the order to distinguish the indirect effects from the non-charge method proposed by Baxter25 for hard-sphere solutions and short-range interactions of the non-electrolyte solution, and square-well potentials, and obtained a solution for the mean because some of the charge interactions (such as the charge- spherical approximation (MSA). Planche and Renon26 gen- dipole interactions and charge-induced dipole interactions) eralized the model of Baxter by using the formalism of are proportional to r-2 and r-4, we shall refer to this term as Blum, taking into account short-range forces between mole- the middle-range (MR) interaction contribution. (r is a dis- 32,34 E cules in order to get a non-primitive representation of elec- tance with two particles). GSR expresses the contribution trolyte solutions. Pitzer27,28 developed general equations for of the non-charge interactions, which is identical to the the thermodynamic properties of aqueous electrolytes based short-range (SR) interactions in non-electrolyte solutions. on the as Debye-Hückel theory. However, if the Pitzer This model has two ways of usage according to the classi- parameters are applied to the high concentration range (for fication of non-electrolyte and electrolyte: example 10-20 M) very large deviations are obtained in 1. In case of non-electrolyte, only short range interaction most cases. is considered. In last decades, numerous authors have modified the 2. In case of electrolyte, short, mid, and long range are existing gE model and EOS (Equation of State) model for considered. non-electrolyte systems. Mock et al.29 applied the NRTL Long-Range Interaction Contribution. The long-range model to electrolyte systems. Their model provides a con- electrostatic interaction explained interaction between ion- sistent thermodynamic framework for the representation of ion. It gives rise to the Debye-Hückel limiting law, which the phase equilibrium of mixed solvent electrolyte systems. states that the logarithm to the ionic activity coefficient at However, different parameters are required to calculate the high dilution is proportional to the square-root of the ionic VLE at different temperatures. Sander et al.30 proposed an strength. In all the models presented in the literature, this extended UNIQUAC model for mixed-solvent/electrolyte contribution has been described by some or other form of systems. Macedo et al.31 used a modified Debye-Hückel the Debye-Hückel theory. E term derived from the McMillan-Mayer solution theory to In this study, GLR is calculated in terms of the Debye- replace the Debye-Hückel term in the Sander model. Hückel theory as modified by Fowler and Guggenheim34: E The most widely used and best known of the g model for ion 32,33 E –1 2 2 the electrolyte solution is LIQUAC. It consists of a Debye- GLR = –()3D ∑ sizi e τ()ka (2) Hückel term to account for long-range electrostatic interac- i = 1 tions, the UNIQUAC equation for the description of short- where si is the number of i ions in the system, D is the sol- range interactions among all particles, and a middle-range vent dielectric constant, a is the distance of closest approach contribution to include all indirect effects of the charge between two ions and τ (x) is defined as interactions. 2 –3 x In this study, we propose a group-contribution model that τ()x = 3x ln()1 + x – x + ---- (3) 2 can be used to describe solvent activities of polymer solu- tions and phase diagram of perfluorinated SPE/water system. where x = κa and κ is the inverse of the shielding length The proposed model is based on a modified double lattice commonly called Debye length which is a characteristic dis- model, long range interaction and middle range interaction tance of interaction. wherein the Helmholtz function of mixing includes the The expression for the long-range interaction contribution revised Flory-Huggins entropy contribution, the van der Waals to the activity coefficients of solvent, s, follows the appro- energy contribution, and the specific energy contribution. priate derivations of eq. (2). We assume the partial molar volume of the solvent s in the solution is approximated as Model Development the molar volume of the pure solvent. Various types of interactions are taken into account for γ LR 2AMs 12⁄ 1 ()12⁄ ln s = -------------3 1 + bI –21------------------12⁄ – ln + bI (4) describing the activities of electrolyte and non-electrolyte b 1 + bI Macromol.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Solutes and Solution
    Solutes and Solution The first rule of solubility is “likes dissolve likes” Polar or ionic substances are soluble in polar solvents Non-polar substances are soluble in non- polar solvents Solutes and Solution There must be a reason why a substance is soluble in a solvent: either the solution process lowers the overall enthalpy of the system (Hrxn < 0) Or the solution process increases the overall entropy of the system (Srxn > 0) Entropy is a measure of the amount of disorder in a system—entropy must increase for any spontaneous change 1 Solutes and Solution The forces that drive the dissolution of a solute usually involve both enthalpy and entropy terms Hsoln < 0 for most species The creation of a solution takes a more ordered system (solid phase or pure liquid phase) and makes more disordered system (solute molecules are more randomly distributed throughout the solution) Saturation and Equilibrium If we have enough solute available, a solution can become saturated—the point when no more solute may be accepted into the solvent Saturation indicates an equilibrium between the pure solute and solvent and the solution solute + solvent solution KC 2 Saturation and Equilibrium solute + solvent solution KC The magnitude of KC indicates how soluble a solute is in that particular solvent If KC is large, the solute is very soluble If KC is small, the solute is only slightly soluble Saturation and Equilibrium Examples: + - NaCl(s) + H2O(l) Na (aq) + Cl (aq) KC = 37.3 A saturated solution of NaCl has a [Na+] = 6.11 M and [Cl-] =
    [Show full text]
  • Parametrisation in Electrostatic DPD Dynamics and Applications
    Parametrisation in electrostatic DPD Dynamics and Applications E. Mayoraly and E. Nahmad-Acharz February 19, 2016 y Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Nucleares, Carretera M´exico-Toluca S/N, La Marquesa Ocoyoacac, Edo. de M´exicoC.P. 52750, M´exico z Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Aut´onomade M´exico, Apartado Postal 70-543, 04510 M´exico DF, Mexico abstract A brief overview of mesoscopic modelling via dissipative particle dynamics is presented, with emphasis on the appropriate parametrisation and how to cal- culate the relevant parameters for given realistic systems. The dependence on concentration and temperature of the interaction parameters is also considered, as well as some applications. 1 Introduction In a colloidal dispersion, the stability is governed by the balance between Van der Waals attractive forces and electrostatic repulsive forces, together with steric mechanisms. Being able to model their interplay is of utmost importance to predict the conditions for colloidal stability, which in turn is of major interest in basic research and for industrial applications. Complex fluids are composed typically at least of one or more solvents, poly- meric or non-polymeric surfactants, and crystalline substrates onto which these surfactants adsorb. Neutral polymer adsorption has been extensively studied us- ing mean-field approximations and assuming an adsorbed polymer configuration of loops and tails [1,2,3,4]. Different mechanisms of adsorption affecting the arXiv:1602.05935v1 [physics.chem-ph] 18 Feb 2016 global
    [Show full text]
  • Molarity Versus Molality Concentration of Solutions SCIENTIFIC
    Molarity versus Molality Concentration of Solutions SCIENTIFIC Introduction Simple visual models using rubber stoppers and water in a cylinder help to distinguish between molar and molal concentrations of a solute. Concepts • Solutions • Concentration Materials Graduated cylinder, 1-L, 2 Water, 2-L Rubber stoppers, large, 12 Safety Precautions Watch for spills. Wear chemical splash goggles and always follow safe laboratory procedures when performing demonstrations. Procedure 1. Tell the students that the rubber stoppers represent “moles” of solute. 2. Make a “6 Molar” solution by placing six of the stoppers in a 1-L graduated cylinder and adding just enough water to bring the total volume to 1 liter. 3. Now make a “6 molal” solution by adding six stoppers to a liter of water in the other cylinder. 4. Remind students that a kilogram of water is about equal to a liter of water because the density is about 1 g/mL at room temperature. 5. Set the two cylinders side by side for comparison. Disposal The water may be flushed down the drain. Discussion Molarity, moles of solute per liter of solution, and molality, moles of solute per kilogram of solvent, are concentration expressions that students often confuse. The differences may be slight with dilute aqueous solutions. Consider, for example, a dilute solution of sodium hydroxide. A 0.1 Molar solution consists of 4 g of sodium hydroxide dissolved in approximately 998 g of water, while a 0.1 molal solution consists of 4 g of sodium hydroxide dissolved in 1000 g of water. The amount of water in both solutions is virtually the same.
    [Show full text]
  • THE SOLUBILITY of GASES in LIQUIDS Introductory Information C
    THE SOLUBILITY OF GASES IN LIQUIDS Introductory Information C. L. Young, R. Battino, and H. L. Clever INTRODUCTION The Solubility Data Project aims to make a comprehensive search of the literature for data on the solubility of gases, liquids and solids in liquids. Data of suitable accuracy are compiled into data sheets set out in a uniform format. The data for each system are evaluated and where data of sufficient accuracy are available values are recommended and in some cases a smoothing equation is given to represent the variation of solubility with pressure and/or temperature. A text giving an evaluation and recommended values and the compiled data sheets are published on consecutive pages. The following paper by E. Wilhelm gives a rigorous thermodynamic treatment on the solubility of gases in liquids. DEFINITION OF GAS SOLUBILITY The distinction between vapor-liquid equilibria and the solubility of gases in liquids is arbitrary. It is generally accepted that the equilibrium set up at 300K between a typical gas such as argon and a liquid such as water is gas-liquid solubility whereas the equilibrium set up between hexane and cyclohexane at 350K is an example of vapor-liquid equilibrium. However, the distinction between gas-liquid solubility and vapor-liquid equilibrium is often not so clear. The equilibria set up between methane and propane above the critical temperature of methane and below the criti­ cal temperature of propane may be classed as vapor-liquid equilibrium or as gas-liquid solubility depending on the particular range of pressure considered and the particular worker concerned.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Solubility of Liquids in Liquids
    INTRODUCTION TO THE SOLUBILITY OF LIQUIDS IN LIQUIDS The Solubility Data Series is made up of volumes of comprehensive and critically evaluated solubility data on chemical systems in clearly defined areas. Data of suitable precision are presented on data sheets in a uniform format, preceded for each system by a critical evaluation if more than one set of data is available. In those systems where data from different sources agree sufficiently, recommended values are pro­ posed. In other cases, values may be described as "tentative", "doubtful" or "rejected". This volume is primarily concerned with liquid-liquid systems, but related gas-liquid and solid-liquid systems are included when it is logical and convenient to do so. Solubilities at elevated and low 'temperatures and at elevated pressures may be included, as it is considered inappropriate to establish artificial limits on the data presented. For some systems the two components are miscible in all proportions at certain temperatures or pressures, and data on miscibility gap regions and upper and lower critical solution temperatures are included where appropriate and if available. TERMINOLOGY In this volume a mixture (1,2) or a solution (1,2) refers to a single liquid phase containing components 1 and 2, with no distinction being made between solvent and solute. The solubility of a substance 1 is the relative proportion of 1 in a mixture which is saturated with respect to component 1 at a specified temperature and pressure. (The term "saturated" implies the existence of equilibrium with respect to the processes of mass transfer between phases) • QUANTITIES USED AS MEASURES OF SOLUBILITY Mole fraction of component 1, Xl or x(l): ml/Ml nl/~ni = r(m.IM.) '/.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrophobic Forces Between Protein Molecules in Aqueous Solutions of Concentrated Electrolyte
    LBNL-47348 Pre print !ERNEST ORLANDO LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY Hydrophobic Forces Between Protein Molecules in Aqueous Solutions of Concentrated Electrolyte R.A. Curtis, C. Steinbrecher, M. Heinemann, H.W. Blanch, and J .M. Prausnitz Chemical Sciences Division January 2001 Submitted to Biophysical]ournal - r \ ' ,,- ' -· ' .. ' ~. ' . .. "... i ' - (_ '·~ -,.__,_ .J :.r? r Clz r I ~ --.1 w ~ CD DISCLAIMER This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor the Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or the Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof or the Regents of the University of California. LBNL-47348 Hydrophobic Forces Between Protein Molecules in Aqueous Solutions of Concentrated Electrolyte R. A. Curtis, C. Steinbrecher. M. Heinemann, H. W. Blanch and J. M. Prausnitz Department of Chemical Engineering University of California and Chemical Sciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory University of California Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Δtb = M × Kb, Δtf = M × Kf
    8.1HW Colligative Properties.doc Colligative Properties of Solvents Use the Equations given in your notes to solve the Colligative Property Questions. ΔTb = m × Kb, ΔTf = m × Kf Freezing Boiling K K Solvent Formula Point f b Point (°C) (°C/m) (°C/m) (°C) Water H2O 0.000 100.000 1.858 0.521 Acetic acid HC2H3O2 16.60 118.5 3.59 3.08 Benzene C6H6 5.455 80.2 5.065 2.61 Camphor C10H16O 179.5 ... 40 ... Carbon disulfide CS2 ... 46.3 ... 2.40 Cyclohexane C6H12 6.55 80.74 20.0 2.79 Ethanol C2H5OH ... 78.3 ... 1.07 1. Which solvent’s freezing point is depressed the most by the addition of a solute? This is determined by the Freezing Point Depression constant, Kf. The substance with the highest value for Kf will be affected the most. This would be Camphor with a constant of 40. 2. Which solvent’s freezing point is depressed the least by the addition of a solute? By the same logic as above, the substance with the lowest value for Kf will be affected the least. This is water. Certainly the case could be made that Carbon disulfide and Ethanol are affected the least as they do not have a constant. 3. Which solvent’s boiling point is elevated the least by the addition of a solute? Water 4. Which solvent’s boiling point is elevated the most by the addition of a solute? Acetic Acid 5. How does Kf relate to Kb? Kf > Kb (fill in the blank) The freezing point constant is always greater.
    [Show full text]
  • Topic720 Composition: Mole Fraction: Molality: Concentration a Solution Comprises at Least Two Different Chemical Substances
    Topic720 Composition: Mole Fraction: Molality: Concentration A solution comprises at least two different chemical substances where at least one substance is in vast molar excess. The term ‘solution’ is used to describe both solids and liquids. Nevertheless the term ‘solution’ in the absence of the word ‘solid’ refers to a liquid. Chemists are particularly expert at identifying the number and chemical formulae of chemical substances present in a given closed system. Here we explore how the chemical composition of a given system is expressed. We consider a simple system prepared using water()l and urea(s) at ambient temperature and pressure. We designate water as chemical substance 1 and urea as chemical substance j, so that the closed system contains an aqueous solution. The amounts of the two substances are given by n1 = = ()wM11 and nj ()wMjj where w1 and wj are masses; M1 and Mj are the molar masses of the two chemical substances. In these terms, n1 and nj are extensive variables. = ⋅ + ⋅ Mass of solution, w n1 M1 n j M j (a) = ⋅ Mass of solvent, w1 n1 M1 (b) = -1 For water, M1 0.018 kg mol . However in reviewing the properties of solutions, chemists prefer intensive composition variables. Mole Fraction The mole fractions of the two substances x1 and xj are given by the following two equations: =+ =+ xnnn111()j xnnnjj()1 j (c) += Here x1 x j 10. In general terms for a system comprising i - chemical substances, the mole fraction of substance k is given by equation (d). ji= = xnkk/ ∑ n j (d) j=1 ji= = Hence ∑ x j 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Mol of Solute Molality ( ) = Kg Solvent M
    Molality • Molality (m) is the number of moles of solute per kilogram of solvent. mol of solute Molality (m ) = kg solvent Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 11 | 51 Sample Problem Calculate the molality of a solution of 13.5g of KF dissolved in 250. g of water. mol of solute m = kg solvent 1 m ol KF ()13.5g 58.1 = 0.250 kg = 0.929 m Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 11 | 52 Mole Fraction • Mole fraction (χ) is the ratio of the number of moles of a substance over the total number of moles of substances in solution. number of moles of i χ = i total number of moles ni = nT Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 11 | 53 Sample Problem -Conversions between units- • ex) What is the molality of a 0.200 M aluminum nitrate solution (d = 1.012g/mL)? – Work with 1 liter of solution. mass = 1012 g – mass Al(NO3)3 = 0.200 mol × 213.01 g/mol = 42.6 g ; – mass water = 1012 g -43 g = 969 g 0.200mol Molality==0.206 mol / kg 0.969kg Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 11 | 54 Sample Problem Calculate the mole fraction of 10.0g of NaCl dissolved in 100. g of water. mol of NaCl χ=NaCl mol of NaCl + mol H2 O 1 mol NaCl ()10.0g 58.5g NaCl = 1 m ol NaCl 1 m ol H2 O ()10.0g+ () 100.g H2 O 58.5g NaCl 18.0g H2 O = 0.0299 Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company.
    [Show full text]
  • Study of Interfacial Tension Between an Organic Solvent and Aqueous Electrolyte Solutions Using Electrostatic Dissipative Particle Dynamics Simulations
    1 Study of Interfacial Tension between an Organic Solvent and Aqueous Electrolyte Solutions Using Electrostatic Dissipative Particle Dynamics Simulations. E. Mayoral (1), E. Nahmad-Achar(2) 1 Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Nucleares, Carretera México-Toluca s/n, La Marquesa Ocoyoacac, Estado de México CP 52750, México. Email address: [email protected] 2 Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Apartado Postal 70-543, 04510 México D.F. Email address: [email protected] ABSTRACT The study of the modification of interfacial properties between an organic solvent and aqueous electrolyte solutions is presented by using electrostatic Dissipative Particle Dynamics (DPD) simulations. In this article the parametrization for the DPD repulsive parameters aij for the electrolyte components is calculated considering the dependence of the Flory-Huggins χ parameter on the concentration and the kind of electrolyte added, by means of the activity coefficients. In turn, experimental data was used to obtain the activity coefficients of the electrolytes as a function of their concentration in order to estimate the χ parameters and then the aij coefficients. We validate this parametrization through the study of the interfacial tension in a mixture of n-dodecane and water, varying the concentration of different inorganic salts (NaCl, KBr, Na2SO4 and UO2Cl2). The case of HCl in the mixture n-dodecane/water was also analyzed and the results presented. Our simulations reproduce the experimental data in good agreement with previous work, showing that the use of activity coefficients to obtain the repulsive DPD parameters aij as a function of concentration is a good alternative for these kinds of systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 11 – Colloids – Larger Particles but Still Uniform (Milk, Fog)
    Solutions • Homogeneous mixtures: – Solutions – ions or molecules (small particles) Chapter 11 – Colloids – larger particles but still uniform (milk, fog) Solutions and Their Properties 1 The Solution Process The Solution Process • During dissolution, some forces are • Solvent-solvent interactions broken and new forces are created • Solute-solute interactions • Solvent-solute interactions ∆∆∆ ∆∆∆ ∆∆∆ ∆∆∆ Hsoln = H1 + H2 + H3 Figure 12.2 3 4 The Solution Process Hot and Cold Packs • Generally, • Hot packs – dissolving solid releases • if the solute is more strongly attracted heat ∆∆∆ to the solvent attraction (than to itself – – CaCl 2 (s) Hsoln = -81.3 kJ/mol ∆∆∆ weak IMF), then dissolution is – MgSO 4 (s) Hsoln = -91.2 kJ/mol ∆∆∆ favorable; exothermic ( Hsoln < 0) • Cold packs – dissolving solid absorbs • if the solute is more strongly attracted heat ∆∆∆ to itself (than to the solvent – strong – NH 4NO 3 (s) Hsoln = +25.7 kJ/mol IMF), then dissolution is not favorable; ∆∆∆ endothermic ( Hsoln > 0) Ways of Expressing Concentration Concentration Units • Variety of units • Molarity – Most commonly used is M (molarity) – Molarity = moles solute / liter solution = mol/L – Also ppm, mole fraction, molality, and Normality – Depends on temperature; density of liquids o changes with temperature (d H2O at 20 C = 3 • Qualitative terms relating to solubility 0.9982 g/cm ) – insoluble, slightly soluble, soluble, very soluble – Molarity: – <0.1 g/100g >2 g/100 g – Ex: 5.0 g NaCl in water that gives a volume of 251mL • Other comparative terms: – Ans:
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 26 Solutions I Tutorial 1) How Many Grams of Mgso4·9H2O Are Needed to Prepare 125 Ml of 0.200 M Magnesium Sulfate?
    www.apchemsolutions.com Lecture 26 Solutions I Tutorial 1) How many grams of MgSO4·9H2O are needed to prepare 125 mL of 0.200 M magnesium sulfate? 1L 0.200 mol MgSO42⋅ 9H O 282.56 g MgSO42⋅ 9H O 125 mL× × × =7.06 g MgSO42⋅ 9H O 1000 mL 1L 1mol MgSO42⋅ 9H O 2) 251 mL of 0.45 M HCl is added to 455 mL of distilled water. What is the molarity of the final solution? (Hint: find moles of HCl and total volume of the final solution) 1L 0.45mol HCl 251mL Solution× × =0.11mol HCl 1000mL 1L Solution 251 mL + 455 mL = 706 mL 0.11mol HCl Molarity = =0.16 M HCl 0.706L 3) A 5.75 g sample of KOH is dissolved in 425 mL of water. Find the molality of the solution. 1mol KOH 0.102 mol KOH 5.75g KOH × = 0.102 mol KOH molality = =0.240 m 56.11g KOH 0.425 kg water 4) Find the molality of a 5.25 M LiBr solution that has a density of 1.25 g/mL. 5.25 mol LiBr 86.84 g LiBr 1 L solution× × = 456 g LiBr 1 L solution 1mol LiBr 1000 mL 1.25 g solution 1L solution× × = 1250 g solution 1L 1 mL solution mass solvent = mass solution - mass solute mass solvent = 1250g solution - 456g LiBr = 794 g solvent moles solute 5.25 mol LiBr molality = = = 6.61 m kg solvent 0.794 kg solvent © 2009, 2008 AP Chem Solutions. All rights reserved. 1 www.apchemsolutions.com 5) Find the mole fraction of glucose, C6H12O6, in a 2.1 m solution of glucose and water.
    [Show full text]