-2
$\begingroup$

I am conducting an experiment where I will be changing concentration (0.2 mol/dm3, 0.4 mol/dm3, 0.6 mol/dm3, 0.8 mol/dm3, 1.0 mol/dm3) and seeing how that affects the rate of reaction for a reaction between HCl and CaCO3.

Is it possible to mathematically calculate the theoretical rate of reaction for each variation in concentration?

Given that rate of reaction can be defined by the rate of disappearance, the experimental rate of reaction can be calculated by taking the mass loss and dividing by the time.

I don't know if the same can be done for calculating the theoretical value. I know the theoretical mass loss can be calculated by calculating the theoretical yield. However that assumes that it all reacts, and so if I divide it by the same time as before it wouldn't really be accurate right?

So I'm wondering if it's even possible to calculate the theoretical rate of reaction for each concentration of HCl. If not, is there available data online for the ROR of different concentrations of HCl?

Thank you.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ As it involves dynamic turbulent heterogenous reaction, involving three different phases, it is not possible, but from prior empirical and applicable data. There are just too many unknown variables and hard-to-model processes. $\endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    Commented Mar 17 at 12:34
  • $\begingroup$ I see thank you $\endgroup$
    – risa
    Commented Mar 17 at 14:10

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

It is always possible to postulate a kinetic rate law and test it. The chemical reaction in this case is $$ \ce{CaCO3(s) + 2H+(aq) -> Ca^{2+}(aq) + H2O(l) + CO2(g)} \tag{1} $$ and the statement of mass conservation is \begin{equation} \frac{\mathrm{d}c_\ce{H+}}{\mathrm{d}t} = -2r_\ce{H+} \tag{2} \end{equation} Eq. (2) assumes that there are no spatial variations of the concentration along the volume, which is ensured with a sufficiently high stirring rate. The only thing you have to do, is propose a function for $r_\ce{H^+}$.

What you can always do is apply finite differences with Eq. (2), so that \begin{equation} r_\ce{H+} \approx -\frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{\Delta c_\ce{H+}}{\Delta t}\right) \tag{3} \end{equation} which is what you stated in the post that you are going to do.


Fusi et al. have studied this particular reaction. Since this is a heterogeneous system, the reaction takes place at the solid/aqueous interface between the calcium carbonate and hydrogen ions. The authors wrote the RHS of Eq. (2) in the next form $$ r = kS^*(c^* - c_0^*)^\gamma \tag{4} $$ If you take a look at the results, they obtained an excellent agreement with experimental data. Thus, the mathematical model of the authors postulate that:

  • The kinetics are directly proportional to the surface available of reaction. This surface changes with time, and is a function of a particular geometry shape of the solid, which must be decided.
  • It is proportional to the concentration difference between the hydrogen ions $c^*$ and some threshold concentration $c_0^*$ for which the reaction stops, at a certain power $\gamma$.

As a result, the mathematical model has three unknowns: the rate constant $k^*$, the threshold concentration $c_0^*$, and the power $\gamma$.

You can do exactly the same, propose a function and see the goodness in the fit.


References

The paper can be downloaded for free in here:

  • Fusi, L. & Monti, Alessandro & Primicerio, Mario. (2012). Determining calcium carbonate neutralization kinetics from experimental laboratory data. Journal of Mathematical Chemistry. 50. 10.1007/s10910-012-0045-3.
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ S would be a complicated function of reaction progress and also of reaction rate, as evolving CO2 causes negative feedback for the reaction rate by making the surface of particles less available. $\endgroup$
    – Poutnik
    Commented Mar 18 at 6:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Poutnik I had to study this topic, and nucleation/growth mechanisms for solid particles in solutions have a heavy mathematical framework based in probability. This can only be applied for models that take into account some coordinate, which was not used by the authors. In that work, a simplified approach was taken which I will add to this post later. However, I have never thought of the implications of generated gas at the surface, and the hindrance of the rate of reaction. I think it is a question that I would have trouble in answering... $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 18 at 13:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In a hurry I would say that the model considers that carbon dioxide diffuses super fast from the surface and enters the air, but that won't convince anyone. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 18 at 13:03

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.