April 28, 2024, 08:18:07 AM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting


Topic: Hydrocarbon combustion  (Read 6811 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Big-Daddy

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Mole Snacks: +28/-94
Hydrocarbon combustion
« on: May 02, 2014, 06:29:59 PM »
10cm3 of a gaseous hydrocarbon was mixed with excess oxygen and ignited. The gas volumes were measured at room temperature and pressure before and after the conversion and it was found that the total gas volume had contracted by 20 cm3. Given that combustion was complete, what was the formula of the hydrocarbon?

The answer is C4H4. But how on earth was it calculated? Without knowing the volume of oxygen reacted how can this possibly be reached ...

Offline Corribus

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3484
  • Mole Snacks: +530/-23
  • Gender: Male
  • A lover of spectroscopy and chocolate.
Re: Hydrocarbon combustion
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2014, 07:06:21 PM »
Interesting problem. I kind of got halfway but I'm out of time. Still maybe this will help.

First, find a generic balanced equation for combustion of a hydrocarbon in the form  CxHy + αO2 :rarrow: βCO2 + γH2O

Where the Greek letters are coefficients in terms of x and y. Probably you have already done this.

If the conditions were the same before and after the reaction (when the volumes are measured), you can make some assumptions about the volumes of each participating reactant and product being proportional to molar stoichiometric equivalents, no? (Because at STP, the volume per mole is already known). So, if you consume 10 cm3 of hydrocarbon, then you also consume 10α cm3 of oxygen and produce 10β cm3 of carbon dioxide and 10γ cm3 of water. The total net volume is -20 cm3.

This gives you one equation and two unknowns, but the "x" terms appear to cancel out. I was able to get y = 4.  Haven't figured out how you get x yet.

Maybe you can find a flaw in that reasoning, but it seems to be on the right track. I did it rather quickly though. :)
What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were like a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?  - Richard P. Feynman

Offline Big-Daddy

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Mole Snacks: +28/-94
Re: Hydrocarbon combustion
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2014, 07:32:25 PM »
Ah, so we assume that H2O condenses and doesn't contribute to the volume? Then I can get the right answer y=4 by your method.

I'm starting to suspect it is not possible to find x without knowing the volume of O2 you started with ...

Offline Borek

  • Mr. pH
  • Administrator
  • Deity Member
  • *
  • Posts: 27665
  • Mole Snacks: +1801/-410
  • Gender: Male
  • I am known to be occasionally wrong.
    • Chembuddy
Re: Hydrocarbon combustion
« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2014, 03:08:47 AM »
I'm starting to suspect it is not possible to find x without knowing the volume of O2 you started with ...

Assume 100 mL.

Assume 200 mL.

Are you getting somewhere, or nowhere?
ChemBuddy chemical calculators - stoichiometry, pH, concentration, buffer preparation, titrations.info

Offline Borek

  • Mr. pH
  • Administrator
  • Deity Member
  • *
  • Posts: 27665
  • Mole Snacks: +1801/-410
  • Gender: Male
  • I am known to be occasionally wrong.
    • Chembuddy
Re: Hydrocarbon combustion
« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2014, 03:12:42 AM »
First, find a generic balanced equation for combustion of a hydrocarbon in the form  CxHy + αO2 :rarrow: βCO2 + γH2O

More like

CxHy + (x+y/4)O2 :rarrow: xCO2 + γ/2H2O

(that is, two unknowns only).

I am in a bit of hurry so I could make some mistake, but the general idea should be clear).
ChemBuddy chemical calculators - stoichiometry, pH, concentration, buffer preparation, titrations.info

Offline Corribus

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3484
  • Mole Snacks: +530/-23
  • Gender: Male
  • A lover of spectroscopy and chocolate.
Re: Hydrocarbon combustion
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2014, 09:37:53 AM »
Well yes, that's what I got too. I was keeping it general so as not to just give him the solution. :)
What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were like a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?  - Richard P. Feynman

Offline Big-Daddy

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Mole Snacks: +28/-94
Re: Hydrocarbon combustion
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2014, 10:07:53 AM »
I'm starting to suspect it is not possible to find x without knowing the volume of O2 you started with ...

Assume 100 mL.

Assume 200 mL.

Are you getting somewhere, or nowhere?

Let's say V mL. Then V/10 = x + 1/4y, y we know is 4 so x = V/10 - 1.

Doesn't do any good, we can't eliminate V and there's no way of taking any limits usefully. I'd say we're getting nowhere - problem is, this V is volume of oxygen reacted, and we aren't told that value, only that excess oxygen is present.

We can say that it's unlikely x>4 when y=4, in which case we can cap off V at 50 mL. Still doesn't bring us closer to finding x though

Offline Corribus

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3484
  • Mole Snacks: +530/-23
  • Gender: Male
  • A lover of spectroscopy and chocolate.
Re: Hydrocarbon combustion
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2014, 11:14:56 AM »
No matter what x is, there are the same moles of gas before and after the reaction (x + 2), so it appears the volume does not change as a function of x - only of y. So I agree, I'm not seeing immediately how you determine x without another piece of information. I will continue to think on it, because maybe I have missed something obvious.
What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were like a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?  - Richard P. Feynman

Sponsored Links