Ch 17 EOC 17.18(b) question and error in solutions manual

[Zellmer, Robert]

Someone asked me the following about 17.18(b), a common-ion (CI) problem.
It's followed by my answer.

"I just had a question regarding one of the EOC problems for chapter 17, specifically
18b. The question asks to calculate the percent ionization of 0.125M Lactic acid solution
in a solution containing 0.0075M Sodium Lactate. When setting up the Acid-Disassociation
constant equation, I noticed that the answer key ignores the x's in (0.0075+x) and (0.125-x).
This makes the equation =
(0.0075)(x)/(0.125) = 1.4*10^-4, instead of (0.0075+x)(x)/(0.125-x) = 1.4*10^-4.

Wouldn't it be incorrect to omit the x's in this equation? By taking the acid disassociation
constant divided by the concentration of Lactic acid or Lactate, you get a value well above
the general rule you described of <1.0*10^-3. "

The following was my response:

Before I go into the stuff below about the question, the process I gave to check whether
ignoring "x" is okay by taking the Ka and dividing it by the original conc. of acid. If that
ration is less than about 10^-3 it will okay to ignore "x" in the resulting expression for Ka
obtained from the ICE table.  Strictly speaking, this was for when you start with only weak
acid, not a common-ion (CI) problem.

  Ka
-------- <  ~ 10^-3                     Okay to ignore "x" in the re
[HA]o

(You can do the same thing for weak bases, Kb/[base]o < 10^-3).

How about for a CI problem?

Lets start by looking at something simpler,  just 0.125 M lactic acid (HL for short).  If you
set up the ICE table for 0.125 M HL you get,

              x^2
Ka = ----------------- = 1.4 x 10^-4
          (0.125 - x)

You can ignore the "x" in the denominator in this case

              x^2
Ka = ----------------- = 1.4 x 10^-4
           (0.125)

and get only a 3.3% error.  Note, in this case Ka/[HL]_o = 1.4 x 10^-3/0.125 = 1.12 x 10^-3
(which is close to what I have above) and ignoring "x" with respect to the 0.125 M is okay.

For the CI problem you have

            HL  <==>  H^+  +  L^-
         0.125            0       0.0075

           y (0.0075 + y)
Ka = ---------------------- = 1.4 x 10^-4
              (0.125 - y)

Since you're starting with one of the products this rxn won't go as far to the right as
it did with just the lactic acid.  That means this "y" will be smaller than the "x" above
with just 0.125 M HL (lactic acid).  That means ignoring "y" with respect to 0.125 is
a better approx. than above when ignoring the "x" w/rsp to 0.125 when you start with
only the lactic acid.  Thus, you really only need to worry about the 0.0075.  Ignoring
the "y" in both the numerator and denominator gives the following for "y",

y = 2.33 x 10^-3 M

The % error with respect to the 0.125 is only 1.87%, less than 3.3% from above
when starting with only 0.125 M HL (lactic acid).  However, the % error w/rsp to the
0.0075 is 31%.  That means you really shouldn't ignore the "y" w/rsp to the 0.0075,
as is done in the solutions manual.  You can solve a quadratic or do the following,
just ignore it w/rsp to the 0.125 but not the 0.0075.

           y (0.0075 + y)
Ka = ---------------------- = 1.4 x 10^-4
               (0.125)

This is still going to be a quadratic equation but one that's easier to set up.

You could also solve it by using the method of successive approximations
as I did in class.  Doing this I get the following for 'y',

y = 1.85 x 10^-3

This is a better value for the [H+] that comes from this CI problem.  It gives
the following for % ionization,

% ionization = (1.85 x 10^-3)/0.125 * 100 = 1.48 %

This is a better answer compared to 1.87% ionization you get by ignoring
the "y" w/rsp to both 0.125 and 0.0075 as was done in the solutions manual.
The 1.87% is about a 27% error.

Dr. Zellmer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/cbc-chem1220/attachments/20211014/97749158/attachment-0001.html>