Squaring the equilibrium constant

[animasian]

---

Members don't see this ad.

For the following question in Exam Krackers 1001 Chemistry, the correct answer was listed as D. I understand why the new equilibrium constant would be 530 squared, since the equilibrium equation goes from [COCl2]/[CO][Cl2] to [COCl2]^2/[CO]^2[Cl2]^2.

What I don't understand is why on earth we would actually go about calculating the equilibrium constant this way. Both equations model the same reaction, except the second one has unnecessary coefficients added in, so shouldn't we use the first equation to calculate the equilibrium constant?

It doesn't make sense to me that, by penciling in some coefficients, we would magically change the nature of the reaction so that the equilibrium constant is squared. That's like me painting my chem model kit, and then all of a sudden seeing molecules around me change to match the colors I painted.

 

[orangetea]

So there are certain rules that you should just memorize. They go as follows:

1. If you double the rxn--> Keq is squared
2. If you half the rxn--> sqrt(Keq)
3. If the rxn is reversed --> 1/Keq

😉

 

[Teleologist]

So there are certain rules that you should just memorize. They go as follows:

1. If you double the rxn--> Keq is squared
2. If you half the rxn--> sqrt(Keq)
3. If the rxn is reversed --> 1/Keq

😉

What the hell is doubling a reaction? Do you mean running the same reaction in two separate flasks?

 

[Cawolf]

It means using twice the reactant material.