something strange. i made an electrochemistry experiment in which i have measured the potential of cell: Ag, AgCl | (1M)KCl ║ [Fe(CN)6] 3-, [Fe(CN)6] 4- | Pt

with different concentrations of Fe+2/Fe+3 . from the results i have found the faraday constant: 96181 Coulon /mol
very close to the published value (99.7% accuracy).

the intercept of the graph of E (v) against ln(Fe+2/Fe+3) is:

intercept:    0.198985714  V    

(the intercept is also the standard potential for the cell)

yet, when i tried to find the standard potential of

Fe3+ +e- -> Fe2+

i got the result of +0.423 V which is almost half of the published value (+0.77 V)

E_cathode =E^° + E_anode  

E_cathode=0.198985+0.224= +0.423 V 

how can it be that the faraday constant is almost accurate and in the same time the result of the standard potential is far from the real one.? i'm sure i don't have any calculation mistakes, if it's necessary i can describe the method of work here.



What you are measuring is not the potential $Fe^{2+}/Fe^{3+}$. It is the potentiel of the couple $[Fe(CN)_6]^{4-}/[Fe(CN)_6]^{3-}$ which is equal to +0.36 V in the table.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ which table are you using? $\endgroup$ – Ytfu Gjuf Jan 12 at 13:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is more suited as a comment Maurice $\endgroup$ – Haha Hahaha Jan 12 at 13:16
  • $\begingroup$ My table is "Chemistry Data Book" , by J G Stark and H G Wallace, p. 70, edited by John Murray, 50 Albermale St, London W1X 4BD, 1994, ISBN 0-7195-3951-X. It has been reprinted every two years since. $\endgroup$ – Maurice Jan 12 at 13:53
  • $\begingroup$ thanks! but still the faraday constant is more accurate by 14% than the standard potential, even though i used the standard potential for obtaining it. $\endgroup$ – Ytfu Gjuf Jan 12 at 15:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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