April 30, 2024, 09:51:45 PM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting


Topic: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back  (Read 8226 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Licensed Criminal

  • New Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
  • Mole Snacks: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« on: May 05, 2007, 10:54:42 AM »
Get it? It's a pun on the movie 'Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back'.

Yes?




...No?  :-\ Damn. I spent ages thinking of that...

Err... anyway, I'm in need of your infinite wisdom. I've got a question on calculating empirical formulae, and I need to know that what I'm doing is correct. It goes like this...

'Work out the empirical formula of the compound with the following percentage compositions by mass:

27.4% Sodium, 1.2% hydrogen, 14.3% carbon, and 57.1% oxygen.'

I got the answer Na+(COH)-, which is probably incorrect. Could you show me the stages involved in finding the answer to this question, with info on the ratios?

Offline enahs

  • 16-92-15-68 32-7-53-92-16
  • Retired Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2179
  • Mole Snacks: +206/-44
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2007, 12:38:31 PM »
Yes, it is incorrect.

Step 1, assume you have a 100g sample of the compound.
This now means you know you have 1.2g H, 14.3g C, 27.4 g Na and 57.1g O.
Determine how many moles that relates to for each compound, and then determine the molar ration of each.

Do not try and bother making it be a legitimate structure, this is the empirical formula. That means it is the smallest integer number ratio of the compounds, not what the actual compound is.

Offline refid

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 102
  • Mole Snacks: +4/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2007, 12:21:33 AM »
H 1.2g / 1.01(g/mol)  =1.188
C 14.3g  / 12.01(g/mol) =1.191
Na 27.4g  / 22.99(g/mol) = 1.192
O 57.1g  / 16(g/mol)      = 3.569

Smallest ratio H 1.188

H 1.188/1.188=1.0
C 1.191/1.188=1.0
Na 1.192/1.188=1.0
O 3.569/1.188=3.0

Na+ [CO3H]-
This what I got..Na+ [CO3H]-  did i do something wrong?

Offline Licensed Criminal

  • New Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
  • Mole Snacks: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2007, 07:47:10 AM »
Thanks enahs and refid! I tried it again last night, and got the following answer (which is the same as refid's):



Is it correct, then...?

Offline enahs

  • 16-92-15-68 32-7-53-92-16
  • Retired Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2179
  • Mole Snacks: +206/-44
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2007, 11:33:13 AM »
Correct and Correct.

Offline sjb

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3652
  • Mole Snacks: +222/-42
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2007, 10:09:32 AM »
The only thing I'd query is how you can tell *from the empirical formula* that it's ionized...

S

Offline hmx9123

  • Retired Staff
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Mole Snacks: +59/-18
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2007, 04:27:38 AM »
Possibly through the experience of dealing with baking soda? :) (NaHCO3)

Offline sjb

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3652
  • Mole Snacks: +222/-42
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2007, 05:10:34 AM »
Possibly through the experience of dealing with baking soda? :) (NaHCO3)

I don't deny that Na+HCO3- is the correct formula, but that requires further knowledge.

How about if the maths worked out to give an empirical formula of C4H12N3O6SiP?

Would P(CH3)4+ Si(NO2)3- be an acceptable answer? (hypothetical compound, not sure if it exists ;) )

S

Offline enahs

  • 16-92-15-68 32-7-53-92-16
  • Retired Staff
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2179
  • Mole Snacks: +206/-44
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Empirical Formula Strikes Back
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2007, 06:06:11 PM »
Would P(CH3)4+ Si(NO2)3- be an acceptable answer? (hypothetical compound, not sure if it exists ;) )


The answer is, many times you can not from the empirical formula. The empirical formula is just one of many tools we use to elucidate the structure of molecules.

Sponsored Links